NEW DOCUMENTS IN MICHIGAN FEDNAPPING SHOW DIRECTOR WRAY PROBABLY LIED TO CONGRESS
FBI Entrapment, Political Weaponization, and Secret Databases? All To Vilify Trump in the 2020 Election? Three Paths to Truth and Justice.
The Michigan Governor kidnapping case has emerged as one of the most alarming examples of federal overreach in modern history. Once praised as a major FBI success in stopping a violent domestic terror plot, the case has since been exposed as a government-orchestrated entrapment operation designed to inflate the domestic terrorism threat and influence the 2020 presidential election. By manufacturing militia groups, infiltrating right-wing networks, placing informants in leadership roles, and coercing individuals into conspiracies they would have never engaged in otherwise, the FBI engaged in COINTELPRO-style tactics that violate constitutional rights.
The FBI’s Manufactured Case
The so-called Whitmer kidnapping plot was entirely orchestrated by the FBI and its paid informants. The defense and independent investigations have uncovered massive misconduct.
At least 12 informants and multiple undercover agents were embedded in the group, with FBI handlers instructing informants to push the targets toward violence.
Informants transported the defendants to Whitmer’s house without informing them of the purpose of the trip, then used that as evidence of their “intention”.
FBI handlers ignored evidence that the defendants were reluctant to participate and instructed informants to pressure them into engaging further.
FBI lead agents involved in the case were later fired for misconduct, including perjury and domestic abuse.
The prosecution actively suppressed evidence that would have exposed the FBI’s role in manufacturing the plot, violating the defendants’ constitutional rights.
The FBI created, controlled, and escalated the entire plot using 12 informants and multiple undercover agents.
FBI informants introduced the targets to one another, funded meetings, provided weapons, and suggested violent actions.
The government paid informants thousands of dollars (one informant, Dan Chappel, received nearly $60,000 in cash and perks).
FBI informants pushed for kidnapping, violence, and weapons procurement, despite targets refusing or showing reluctance.
At least one FBI agent instructed an informant to suggest assassinating another governor (Ralph Northam), which further indicates entrapment.
FBI agents and informants were the ones driving discussions on explosive devices and plans.
Some defendants were only loosely connected to the group but were roped into the charges to inflate the “domestic terror” narrative.
FBI informants consumed drugs and alcohol with suspects and recorded their impaired conversations to create incriminating evidence.
Evidence was planted (e.g., an informant planted explosive materials in a suspect’s truck so it could be “discovered”).
The prosecution suppressed exculpatory evidence, including statements showing the defendants were not planning violence and the trial judge helped suppress key evidence, limiting the defense’s ability to argue entrapment.
FBI agents involved in the case were later discredited. Special Agent Richard Trask was fired for domestic violence. Special Agent Jayson Chambers tried to profit from the case through a private intelligence firm. Special Agent Henrik Impola was accused of perjury in an unrelated case.
The FBI created fake “Three Percenter” and militia groups, establishing them on Facebook to lure targets in. FBI informants posed as leaders of these groups, essentially running them. FBI informants recruited individuals, arranged meetups, and framed lawful militia training as criminal activity, placing their informants as leaders and directing activities to build a manufactured case. Every major meeting and training event in the case was organized and paid for by the FBI.
Newly Released Documents. The FBI’s Secret Database and the Targeting of Barry Croft
One of the most damning revelations in the Michigan case is that the FBI had Barry Croft flagged in a secret database as early as May 2019—more than a year before any alleged kidnapping plot existed. This database was used to track and preemptively investigate individuals based on their political affiliations, not criminal activity. Informants used the database to identify and make first contact with Croft, before steering him toward FBI-orchestrated militia activities. The FBI classified Croft as a “Baltimore target” in “Operation Bronze Griffin,” an internal initiative focused on surveilling anti-government activists.
This contradicts Director Wray’s repeated statements that the FBI does not monitor citizens based on their ideology or preemptively investigate individuals without evidence of criminal behavior. This raises the question: How many other Americans have been placed on this secret FBI list and targeted for politically motivated investigations? Shockingly the document also reveals that Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) Nils Kessler authorized informant Robeson to engage in “Otherwise Illegal Activity” (OIA). This authorization allowed Robeson to transport weapons and explosives—potentially escalating the seriousness of the alleged plot. Another federal prosecutor in Wisconsin refused to grant similar authority to Robeson, raising concerns about oversight and ethical boundaries. This indicates that different prosecutors had differing assessments of Robeson’s reliability and potential for misconduct. As far as I can tell, despite the new administration, Nils Kessler is still employed by the Department of Justice (DOJ). He serves as an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) in the Western District of Michigan. Ironically, he has been appointed as the Civil Rights Coordinator on Criminal Matters, focusing on enforcing federal civil rights laws. Assistant U.S. Attorney Nils Kessler signed off on Robeson committing crimes while working as an informant. The FBI used Robeson to create and escalate the case, effectively entrapping individuals who might not have otherwise engaged in criminal activity.
Ultimately the document showed Robeson played a central role in organizing and facilitating meetings between the defendants. He was tasked with recruiting individuals into the alleged “plot” and keeping the group on track with the FBI’s objectives. He controlled logistics—arranging transportation, training sessions, and surveillance operations—all under FBI direction. Robeson was later charged with crimes himself, but was given leniency compared to the actual defendants, reinforcing concerns that he was operating as an FBI asset. His criminal background and previous legal troubles make his use as a CHS highly questionable, raising concerns about the informant vetting process. The FBI allowed Robeson to engage in illegal activity, further pushing the defendants toward criminality.
The FBI needed a federal case—meaning the plot had to involve interstate activities, explosives, or weapons. Allowing Robeson to move weapons and facilitate militia meetings built this case. Without his direct involvement, it is unlikely the alleged conspiracy would have developed as it did. This fits a pattern of FBI entrapment operations, where the government manufactures a crime to later “solve” it.
The document reveals that key evidence regarding Robeson’s role and activities was suppressed in court and Defense teams were denied access to full informant records, limiting their ability to argue entrapment.
Prosecutors selectively presented evidence, ensuring the jury would not see the extent of FBI involvement. This document provides further proof that the FBI not only manipulated this case but actively fueled it by giving criminals legal protection while they manufactured the crime itself.
The Political Timing: An October Surprise to Damage Trump
The most damning revelation in these documents is that the arrests and indictment were deliberately timed to impact the 2020 election. The timing of the arrests in October 2020—just weeks before the presidential election—suggests a politically motivated operation. Governor Whitmer immediately blamed Trump, claiming his rhetoric encouraged domestic extremism. The Biden campaign used the case in campaign speeches to frame Trump supporters as dangerous extremists. Governor Whitmer, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris immediately linked the case to Donald Trump, using it as evidence that “right-wing extremism” was fueled by his rhetoric. The media ran with the FBI’s framing, portraying the case as proof of the growing domestic terrorism threat.
The mainstream media ran wall-to-wall coverage, failing to scrutinize the FBI’s role. The FBI deliberately concealed its informant-driven plot until after the election. The case was not about stopping domestic terrorism—it was about manufacturing a narrative to influence voters. The Buzzfeed News investigation (which later exposed FBI entrapment) was ignored by mainstream media until after the election.
Independent investigators are directly accusing the FBI and Department of Justice of election interference. The arrests occurred on October 7, 2020, just weeks before the November 3rd election. The FBI admitted that, as late as September 2020, the group still had no concrete plan. Despite this, the government rushed the arrests in early October, ensuring the case would dominate headlines right before the election. The evidence asserts that the timing was intentional, and that the FBI deliberately escalated the case for political gain.
FBI Director Wray’s False Testimony: How the Michigan Kidnapping Case Exposes a Secret Political Surveillance Program
The Michigan Governor kidnapping case has already been revealed as a manufactured entrapment plot, orchestrated by the FBI to create the appearance of a domestic terrorism threat. However, newly uncovered evidence now suggests that the FBI’s involvement goes even deeper—potentially implicating Director Christopher Wray in misleading Congress about the Bureau’s pre-crime surveillance practices.
At the heart of this scandal is a secret FBI database used to pre-select individuals for investigation based on their political beliefs, affiliations, and online activity, contradicting Wray’s sworn testimony before Congress. Congress needs to launch a full investigation into Wray’s potential perjury, the FBI’s unconstitutional targeting of American citizens, and the broader misconduct surrounding this case. During congressional oversight hearings, FBI Director Christopher Wray explicitly denied that the FBI engages in ideological targeting or pre-crime surveillance.
Wray’s Statements to Congress:
“The FBI does not investigate people for their beliefs. We follow evidence of criminal activity.”
“We do not maintain a database of individuals based on their political ideology or affiliations.”
“Our investigations are predicated on facts, not speech.”
Yet, the Michigan case proves otherwise:
Barry Croft was identified in an FBI database before committing any crime. FBI informants were directed to Croft based on this database, proving that ideological profiling was used. The FBI not only investigated Croft based on his beliefs but actively manipulated him into a government-created plot. If Wray knowingly misled Congress, this would constitute perjury—a federal offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (False Statements to Congress). The House Oversight Committee should subpoena Wray’s communications, internal FBI records on Operation Bronze Griffin, and all related documentation on pre-crime surveillance programs.
A COINTELPRO Revival: How the FBI Has Resurrected Political Targeting
The FBI’s use of secret political surveillance databases in the Michigan case is strikingly similar to the infamous COINTELPRO program of the 1950s-70s. COINTELPRO was used to target political dissidents, civil rights activists, and anti-war groups. The FBI used informants to infiltrate and manipulate activist groups, just as they did in Michigan. The Bureau justified its operations as necessary for national security—just as it now claims with “domestic extremism.” The Whitmer case shows that COINTELPRO never truly ended—it has simply evolved under new terminology. The FBI’s modern playbook involves preemptive investigations, fabricated threats, and weaponized entrapment operations. This is not just an isolated case. If the FBI was willing to lie to Congress to cover up these practices, it strongly suggests that this is a broader institutional strategy that needs full congressional scrutiny.
The Need for Federal and State-Level Accountability
This case reveals a disturbing new frontier in FBI entrapment, where innocent Americans can be ensnared in fake plots, then used as political pawns. To prevent such abuses in the future and restore faith in our criminal justice system we need a three-pronged approach:
1. A Presidential Pardon for Barry Croft and Adam Fox
President Donald Trump should pardon the federal defendants who were victimized by this politically motivated FBI operation. Their convictions represent a gross miscarriage of justice, and they should not spend another day in prison for a crime manufactured by the government to vilify his candidacy and his supporters.
2. A Michigan State Legislative Investigation
The Michigan House Subcommittee on the Weaponization of State Government, chaired by Rep. Angela Rigas (R-Alto), is tasked with examining instances where state departments and agencies may have misused their authority for political purposes.
Given this mandate, the subcommittee is an appropriate venue to investigate the state's response to the alleged 2020 plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer, especially concerning potential overreach or misuse of power by state entities during the investigation and prosecution phases. The Subcommittee on the Weaponization of State Government is well-suited to investigate the state's actions related to the alleged kidnapping plot. Under Chairwoman Rigas's leadership, the subcommittee can delve into the aforementioned aspects to ensure that state power was exercised appropriately, and that citizens' rights were upheld during this contentious period. The Michigan Subcommittee should launch a full investigation into the FBI’s role in fabricating this case, including:
State Law Enforcement's Role: Investigate the involvement of Michigan's law enforcement agencies in the kidnapping plot investigation to determine if there was any overreach or misuse of authority.
Coordination with Federal Agencies: Assess how state agencies collaborated with federal entities like the FBI and whether this partnership respected legal and ethical boundaries.
Use of Informants: Examine the protocols followed by state agencies regarding the use of informants and if these practices aligned with state laws and ethical standards.
Public Communications: Review statements and actions by state officials during the investigation to ensure they did not unduly influence public perception or judicial proceedings.
Impact of COVID-19 Policies: Explore how the state's pandemic policies may have contributed to public dissent and whether this dissent was appropriately managed without infringing on citizens' rights.
Utilization of Citizen Frustration: The alleged kidnapping plot emerged during a time of heightened tension over COVID-19 restrictions in Michigan. Defense attorneys have argued that the FBI and its informants exploited this public frustration, potentially entrapping individuals who were vocal but not predisposed to commit crimes. This perspective suggests that the charged individuals were influenced by informants capitalizing on their discontent with the governor's policies.
The state’s use of terrorism charges in a case orchestrated by federal informants.
The suppression of exculpatory evidence that could have proven entrapment.
The FBI’s coordination with Michigan prosecutors to push forward this false narrative prior to the election.
The coercion and manipulation of Michigan citizens into a fake plot.
The DOJ allowing very dangerous criminal activity within the State by informants including manufacturing and transporting explosives
3. Congressional Oversight into the FBI’s COINTELPRO 2.0 & The Need for Congressional Hearings
The Judiciary Committee and Oversight Committee should investigate the FBI’s continued use of entrapment tactics against American citizens. The DOJ must release all internal communications related to the Michigan case. The government must declassify and disclose all FBI informant activities in this case.
The Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement is a specialized branch of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Its jurisdiction encompasses oversight of homeland security, criminal justice, federal law and regulatory enforcement. The subcommittee is chaired by Representative Clay Higgins, a senior member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Other Republican members include Representatives Paul Gosar (AZ-09), Andy Biggs (AZ-05), Nancy Mace (SC-01), Scott Perry (PA-10), Lauren Boebert (CO-04), and Brian Jack (GA-03). The subcommittee's oversight responsibilities align directly with the issues presented in the Michigan kidnapping case, particularly concerning the FBI's conduct and surveillance practices. Given its mandate to oversee federal law enforcement agencies, the subcommittee is well-positioned to investigate allegations of entrapment, misuse of surveillance databases, and potential violations of constitutional rights by federal entities. An investigation by this subcommittee could lead to greater transparency and accountability within federal law enforcement, addressing public concerns about overreach and the protection of civil liberties. Chairman Higgins has an opportunity to expose one of the most egregious cases of FBI misconduct in modern history. The House Oversight Committee must hold public hearings. These hearings must be highly publicized and widely covered, ensuring that the American people understand the full scope of the FBI’s unconstitutional activities. Key Areas of Investigation:
Perjury and Misleading Testimony: Subpoena all internal FBI documents and communications related to Operation Bronze Griffin. Determine whether Christopher Wray knowingly misled Congress about the FBI’s use of pre-crime surveillance.
The FBI’s Secret Surveillance Database and Other Illegal lists: Investigate how many Americans have been placed in this system without probable cause. Demand transparency about how these individuals are flagged, monitored, and targeted.
Entrapment and Civil Rights Violations: Examine the FBI’s use of informants to manipulate individuals into fabricated plots. Review whether defendants in the Michigan case were deprived of their right to a fair trial due to FBI evidence suppression. Determine how many manufactured 3% groups were created and if they are still operational
COINTELPRO 2.0 and Political Targeting: Assess whether the FBI’s domestic counterterrorism efforts are being used to target political dissidents rather than actual criminals. Determine whether additional secret operations have been launched against conservative, libertarian, and anti-establishment groups.
Despite clear evidence of FBI entrapment, several individuals remain imprisoned under politically charged federal and state charges.
Federal Defendants:
Barry Croft Jr. – Serving 19 years for conspiracy to kidnap and conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction.
Adam Fox – Serving 16 years for similar charges.
Both were convicted in a retrial after an initial jury acquitted two other defendants and deadlocked on their cases. Their second trial was rigged by judicial decisions that blocked key entrapment evidence and limited the defense’s ability to expose FBI misconduct. These tactics are not unique. The hung jury retrial is often seen in politically charged trials for example 3 trials in the Bundy Ranch case. The prosecution fails to prove their case, changes their approach, and takes another shot at it. (This deserves its own legislative solution to safeguard the rights of the accused.)
State Defendants (Michigan)
Joseph Morrison – Sentenced to 10 years for providing material support for a terrorist act.
Pete Musico – Sentenced to 12 years for similar charges.
Paul Bellar – Sentenced to 7 years for paramilitary training.
These men were convicted under Michigan’s post-9/11 Anti-Terrorism Act, marking the first time the law was used against U.S. citizens in a domestic case. This Charge highlights the inconsistency between State terrorism laws, Federal Terrorism Laws, and the domestic terrorism definitions. Michigan’s Anti-Terrorism Act of 2002 was originally intended for foreign terror threats, not to prosecute frustrated citizens manipulated by federal informants.
The charges were based on firearms training and vague discussions, not actual plans to carry out violence. Prosecutors used the defendants’ political speech as evidence of terrorism, setting a chilling precedent. The FBI’s informants initiated the training events that were later used to convict the defendants, meaning the government created the very “terrorist” activities it prosecuted. The Michigan case shows how domestic terrorism laws can be weaponized against political dissidents, paving the way for broader abuses in the future. The FBI’s lies, secret surveillance databases, and entrapment tactics represent a full-scale constitutional crisis. If Congress does not take action, the FBI will continue to target, manipulate, and prosecute innocent Americans for political gain. Chairman Clay Higgins can lead the charge for transparency, oversight, and reform before this abuse of power spirals further out of control. The Whitmer Case is a Warning to All Americans it's not just a scandal— It exposes the FBI’s ability to create false terror plots, manipulate political narratives, and imprison innocent Americans for manufactured crimes. We must demand a presidential pardon for the federal defendants, a Michigan state investigation, and full congressional oversight of the FBI’s tactics. If this level of government corruption is allowed to stand, no American is safe from entrapment, political persecution, and unjust imprisonment. The Whitmer case represents a new era of COINTELPRO tactics, and the time for action is now.
Legislative Solutions to Prevent Future Abuses
This case demonstrates the urgent need for bipartisan legislative reforms to prevent federal law enforcement from being used as a political weapon. Congress must act to restore trust in federal investigations by implementing strict safeguards against government overreach. Key Reforms to Consider:
Removal of Qualified Immunity for Violations of Constitutional Rights. Any law enforcement official who knowingly violates a citizen’s First or Fourth Amendment rights through politically motivated targeting should be held personally accountable in civil lawsuits.
Stronger Oversight on Informant Use. Require strict approval and transparency on when informants can be inserted into political or ideological groups.
Full Public Disclosure of FBI Domestic Surveillance Programs. Declassify and release all records related to FBI domestic surveillance initiatives, particularly those targeting ideological movements, protest groups, or militia networks.
Severe Penalties for False Testimony by Government Officials. Strengthen perjury laws to ensure that FBI and DOJ officials who mislead Congress face real consequences