Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pipe-bomb suspect Brian Cole has Level 1 autism spectrum disorder, OCD — new facts that recast case against him
The Blaze ^ | January 02, 2026 | Joseph M. Hanneman

Posted on 01/03/2026 7:56:33 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum

Federal magistrate judge rules Cole must be jailed until trial, however — siding with prosecutors on the claim that Cole is too dangerous to release.

Brian J. Cole Jr. denied placing pipe bombs on Capitol Hill in January 2021 for more than two hours under FBI questioning after his arrest in Virginia on Dec. 4. Cole said he did not recognize the person in a gray hoodie shown on video walking with a backpack on Jan. 5.

After two hours of questioning, Cole, 30, told FBI agents that “everything is just blank” and the interview was “a little too much to process,” according to a U.S. Department of Justice memorandum filed in the criminal case.

Agents then leaned on him, stating he could face more criminal charges if he lied to them. Then they left him alone in the interrogation room for 20 minutes.

When they returned, agents asked Cole again if he is the suspect shown on surveillance video. “This time, the defendant paused for approximately fifteen seconds, placed his head face-down on the table and answered, ‘Yes,’” the DOJ stated.

The FBI’s tactics in interrogating a man the defense asserts has autism spectrum disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder will likely become a major bone of contention for defense attorneys. Cole, whose grandmother has said he operates at the level of a 16-year-old, had no lawyer present during four hours of questioning. According to the FBI, Cole signed a waiver of his Miranda rights.

‘Overwhelming evidence’?

In the first real courtroom clash in the pipe-bombs case on Dec. 30, defense attorneys fought back against a DOJ memo claiming there is “overwhelming evidence” that Cole planted “viable” pipe bombs near the Democratic National Committee building and the Capitol Hill Club during a 22-minute span on the night of Jan. 5,...

(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: 20210105; bailbondsman; briancole; brianjcolejr; cole; jamesboasberg; patsy; shaunikerkhoff
Further down in the article:

"A ruling by U.S. District Chief Judge James Boasberg that Superior Court indictments can be accepted in federal district court is on appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit."

There's that name "Boasberg" again.

1 posted on 01/03/2026 7:56:33 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Maybe he can convince the judge he is part Somali


2 posted on 01/03/2026 8:00:48 AM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

During COVID. The left knew which websites to hook these kids on. They like trains etc and we’re home unsupervised all day.


3 posted on 01/03/2026 8:01:23 AM PST by cnsmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cnsmom

They had video of him talking on a cell phone. They could geolocate and identify every MAGA supporter in DC on January 6th, but they couldn’t find or identify him until one of theirs was a suspect.


4 posted on 01/03/2026 8:03:54 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

>> Level 1 autism spectrum disorder, OCD

uh... is that a bad thing?
Asking for a friend.


5 posted on 01/03/2026 8:03:56 AM PST by Nervous Tick (Hope, as a righteous product of properly aligned Faith, IS in fact a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Patsy for the Deep State.


6 posted on 01/03/2026 8:04:10 AM PST by Uncle Miltie (islam v. communism: Which is worse for mankind? Discuss…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“Mental Illness” will be the defense - hope the jury doesn’t buy it, otherwise he’ll end up in an asylum for a few years and then released.


7 posted on 01/03/2026 8:19:14 AM PST by Bon of Babble (You Say You Want a Revolution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

“Patsy for the Deep State.”

Exactly my first thought on reading the article headline. Easily influenced, will follow coaching.


8 posted on 01/03/2026 8:29:10 AM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

True

The FBI was watching as the crowd was moving across the country to DC.

They were already tracking many folks before it even happened!

Airline, bank, cell phone (big one) data, informants, social media (people are narcissistic), and facial recognition.

I would guess, over 95% of those heading to DC were identified, even if they tried to fly under the radar (POV, cash/no ATM, no cell on person...) and were not approached later.

By 2021 the FBI already had 640 million unique faces stored.

The obvious danger is that without true (((privacy))), you don’t have true free speech nor a true right to address grievances/petition.

It becomes a mere “privilege” where government gets to decide who, when, how and where people get to express their concerns.

Privacy rights do not exist anymore. And people are OK with that, as long as they can watch a funny short video on YouTube.


9 posted on 01/03/2026 8:31:28 AM PST by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

The old FBI clearly didn’t want to catch him. Since the bombs didn’t go off, they had more important priorities, like rounding up all the “violent protesters” as Garland’s Geheime Staatspolizei ordered.


10 posted on 01/03/2026 8:36:27 AM PST by bigbob (We are all Charlie Kirk now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red6

Good post


11 posted on 01/03/2026 8:44:38 AM PST by Dartoid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
The reason they had such an easy time locating the protestors was that they were using interceptor cell towers and could almost instantly see all calls made in the area and all phones that pinged the interceptors on January 6th. Kash Patel and Pam Bondi should have authority and access to that intercept data. If the portable cell towers were near the Capitol on January 6th, they would have picked up all calls in the area. As in all calls, including Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, their staffs, etc. Start mining that information. Did Nancy Pelosi call Gen. Milley? Inquiring minds want to know.
12 posted on 01/03/2026 8:46:58 AM PST by Wally_Kalbacken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Bigassburger appears to be hunting for his own private latino pool boy to shack up with.


13 posted on 01/03/2026 9:11:33 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (Kilmar the Abrego Kid has kicked Uncle Sam's ass with the help of his Judgette Skanks gang. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

They knew from the start they probably escorted him into position. Everything with the democrats is scripted because they think Americans are stupid.


14 posted on 01/03/2026 10:04:47 AM PST by cnsmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red6

There have never been
“privacy rights.” The 1st amendment bars government from preventing you from assembling or from exercising your right to speak- but it does not protect your speech from being heard. It does not limit the government to prevent it from listening to you, or anyone else, for that matter. It does not enshrine any right to be subversive and in fact is intended to
make it impossible for government to silence you- quite the opposite of granting you privacy.

The founders couldn’t really envision wiretaps yet, so there isn’t, nor should there be, a constitutional right to not be overheard. Privacy is simply not necessary for freedom of speech to be fully realized.

The closest thing to privacy is the idea of a limitation on government’s ability to quarter troops in your home, which has nothing to do with the 1st amendment.
You may find privacy mentioned somewhere but it isn’t a 1st amendment issue.


15 posted on 01/03/2026 1:27:51 PM PST by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: piasa
I would have to disagree.

The implied right to privacy, derived from the idea of no illegal searches of your person and effects, comes from the British searching of people and their homes in the colonial period. It was EXACTLY for that reason.

Amendment IV

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript#toc-amendment-i

What you claim, is the modern-day government self-interpreted version of what the 4th amendment means.

That is why, the government has to have a court order to open your snail mail (old interpretation), BUT can collect all your digital communications at will (new interpretation), store, filter, transfer, and read them.

https://legalclarity.org/can-cops-open-your-mail-without-a-warrant/

You have a duality because George H. Bush who as former CIA director and later President in the infancy of the Internet created policies which were extremely liberal/favorable to the IC regards this emerging new technology.

Basically, anything over IP is seen as in the public sphere.

However, as time went on, EVERYTHING became over IP.

Your newer car likely communicates to the network, as does your power meter, thermostat, watch, maybe your lights and outlets, coffee maker, refrigerator, washer, dryer, doorbell, home security system, Google Home/Alexa, TV and computer of course, and the worst culprit your smart phone.

In 1990, most things were analog. Make a phone call in 1990 and you could still hear the rotor dials going takata-takata-takata, and it would have required a greater effort for law enforcement or the IC to collect. What does this mean?

You have no more privacy.

16 posted on 01/04/2026 8:49:45 AM PST by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson