Senator Mike Lee of Utah is putting the spotlight on former Congresswoman Liz Cheney, raising serious questions about what she knew regarding FBI informants among the January 6 protesters. During the highly orchestrated January 6 Committee hearings, Cheney wasted no time smearing anyone who dared to question the FBI’s potential involvement. Now, with a Justice Department Inspector General report confirming that the FBI had 26 informants present that day, Lee’s critiques are hitting a nerve. The report raises eyebrows and underscores what many suspected all along—that the FBI’s role in the events of January 6 may have been more significant than initially disclosed.
The report from Inspector General Michael Horowitz dropped a bombshell. While the FBI officially sent only three agents to the protest, an additional 23 informants reportedly decided to show up of their own accord. That’s right—two dozen FBI informants independently found their way to the Capitol on one of the most politically charged days in recent history. The official explanation strains credibility, leaving many to wonder if this was really a spontaneous coincidence or something more orchestrated. Adding to the intrigue, none of these informants faced charges for their involvement, unlike countless other Americans—many of whom were non-violent and simply walked through the Capitol building—who were hit with hefty legal consequences.
Senator Lee wasted no time calling out the inconsistencies. He pointed to the long-standing suspicion among Americans that FBI operatives played a role in the events on January 6. Instead of addressing those concerns, Cheney used her platform on the committee to ridicule anyone daring to ask questions, branding them as conspiracy theorists. Lee now wonders whether Cheney, as a key member of the committee, had prior knowledge of the Inspector General’s findings. If she did, her aggressive dismissal of these inquiries takes on a much darker tone, suggesting an effort to bury the truth rather than reveal it.
Lee didn’t hold back in criticizing Cheney’s handling of the January 6 narrative, accusing her and the committee of presenting a carefully edited version of events. According to Lee, the committee’s real scandal isn’t in what it showed to the public, but in what it deliberately withheld. By controlling the footage and cherry-picking what the public saw, Cheney and her colleagues avoided inconvenient truths about FBI involvement. For Lee, the committee’s actions were less about uncovering facts and more about performing political theater designed to push a specific agenda while ignoring broader questions about accountability.
Adding a peculiar twist, Cheney’s name has surfaced among those Democrats suggest should receive a blanket pardon from President Biden to protect against potential “retribution” under a Republican administration. The irony, of course, is that Cheney hasn’t been accused of any crimes—unless, as Lee hints, there’s something hidden beneath the surface, such as evidence tampering linked to the January 6 investigation. While Cheney basks in praise from her Democratic allies for her role in the committee, Lee’s pointed questions highlight a growing conservative sentiment: when Americans demand answers, the political establishment seems more interested in sweeping uncomfortable truths under the rug than providing transparency.
