New Jan6th additional defendants; Francis Connor, & Antonio Ferrigno -

Brooklyn Trifecta of MAGA -Fuhgedaboutit swirling the drain of deep stupid commence. Why is it that no one & I mean NO ONE notice the cryptocurrency of a defendant previously charged? Rats get Bats.

As per usual you can find an Open Source via the Department of Justice Capitol Violence Database;

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

However the timeliness of the USAO-DC updating the aforementioned database, is largely hit or miss —kind of like their haphazard threshold of when Pretrial Detention is warranted. And whenever possible I do try to source as much open source links for various Criminal Cases because PACER can be pretty expensive.

Background as to Defendant Anton LUNYK

On May 11, 2021 Defendant Lunyk was arrested via a criminal complaint.

• 18 U.S.C. §1752(a)(1) Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building

• 18 U.S.C. §1752(a)(2) Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building

• 40 U.S.C. §5104(e)(2)(D)Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct in : a Capitol Building

• 40 U.S.C. 5104(e)(2)(G) Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in : a Capitol Building

Case Documents: 

May 11, 2021 Lunyk Complaint & Lunyk Statement of Facts

June 17, 2021 Luynk Information

and of course Defendant Lunyk took Instagram to post and humble brag about storming the Capitol and subsequently posted a live stream from a Senate Conference room. The FBI received multiple tips and subsequently multiple witnesses confirmed the identity of Defendant Lunyk and his Instagram account (which is now deleted)

You had me at $MARA, $RIOT, $BTBT, $HVBTF

Incidentally I am kind of surprised that no one else found his Stockwits profile. I took the liberty of archiving, found here and here. What I found rather interesting was his activity before/after January 6th. Although to be fair Defendant Lunyk created his account on or about December 20, 2020. Nonetheless I found some of his post, likes and watch list kind intriguing given he seemed quasi versed in cryptocurrency. For example his January 1, 2021 Post (archived) but it’s his January 15, 2021 post (also archived) that caught my cryptocurrency eye.

Because the following statement is my opinion, or more precisely an educated guess, and you are certainly entitled to disagree with me. Notwithstanding I remain relatively steadfast in my assessment that cryptocurrency undoubtedly funded some of the January 6th Domestic Terrorist attack on our Capitol.

As the saying goes “follow the money and follow the facts” —sooner, hopefully than later, the investigators will be able to find a few financial nexuses. Based upon the preponderance of socioeconomic data and a large body of preliminary research —when blended together, that amalgamation of data suggests more than 65% of the Defendants have serious financial issues. Specifically employment issues, substantial debt issues, an off kilter debt to income ratio and frankly many of the Domestic Terrorist, I mean defendants couldn’t rub two nickels together.

So naturally the follow up questions should be, generally speaking;

• how/who funded the travel related cost —such as; airfare, rental car(s), train tickets, bus-fare, tolls (last time I drove from the DC area to NY or NJ I think I paid >$56 in tolls alone), and parking etc?

• who or what entity funded the rental of various AirBnBs, Hotel & Motel rooms?

• who or what organization paid for the tactical gear, zello headsets, zip ties,

Defendants Francis Connor & Antonio Ferrigno, Jr

Based on the search warrant executed for Defendant Lunky, investigators were able to identify both defendants Francis Connor & Antonio Ferrigno. Who have been charged with the following (and no their charging documents have yet to be uploaded to https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases -see DCC-ECF for Complaint and Statement of Facts ¹

• 18 U.S.C. §1752(a)(1) Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds

• 18 U.S.C. §1752(a)(2) Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds

• 40 U.S.C. §5104(e)(2)(D) Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building

• 40 U.S.C. §5104(e)(2)(G) Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building

Shocked I tell you. Shocked that the USAO-DC and/or the “acting” U.S. Attorney for DC failed to charge all three defendants; Anton LUNYK, Francis CONNOR & Antonio FERRIGNO , Jr with Conspiracy…

18 U.S.C. §372 Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States, which reads in part:

“If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States… one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both...the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.”

or 18 U.S.C. §372 Conspiracy to impede or injure officer - which also reads in part:

If two or more persons…conspire to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any person … from discharging any duties thereof, or to induce by like means any officer of the United States to leave the place, where his duties as an officer are required to be performed, or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties…each of such persons shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six years, or both.

Statement of Facts -Affidavit as to FERRIGNO & CONNOR

…because 3 makes a conspiracy, based on the plain reading of the aforementioned statutes…

FERRIGNO and CONNOR appear to have traveled to Washington, D.C., from New York City on or about January 6, 2021, and participated in the rioting at the Capitol, along with another charged defendant Anton Lunyk…

Law enforcement subsequently identified FERRIGNO and CONNOR, based on a review of records from Lunyk’s Instagram account that were obtained through a search warrant. For FERRIGNO, the Instagram records included a user ID of 144326588 and Username aferrigno13 as “Antonio Ferrigno”

Defendant FERRIGNO various social media accounts

Guess who else had a StockTwit Profile? Defendant Antonio Ferrigno @Aferrigno13 - based on a preliminary datasrape it appears Defendant FERRIGNO deleted his @Aferrigno13 account (archived) BUT his primary StockTwits account is @StonkAF aka Antonio F (also archived) and was very active post Jan6th.

His Twitter Account @Aferrigno13 is current “locked” and it appears no one else has identified this Twitter account and therefore wasn’t archived, until now. This link will take you to a Twitter advance search where you can read other Twitter user’s interactions with the (now) locked account. Note how cryptocurrency centric Defendant AFERRIGNO’s Twitter account is/was.

For CONNOR, Lunyk’s Instagram records included a user ID of 364765536 and username “francisconnor”. Law enforcement subsequently obtained additional Instagram records for UID 364765536 and username “francisconnor” and the records provided a registered email address: fconnor1986@gmail.com. Google LLC provided records for fconnor1986@gmail.com, and the records showed that the registered user is Francis Connor with recovery email address ftconnor1@verizone.net and telephone number ending in -6980

The Cryptocurrency Trifeta… Stocktwits receipts…

Defendant Francis Connor also has a Stocktwits account @FrancisConnor and naturally I took the liberty of archiving his account too, found here and if you take the time to drill down on Defendant CONNOR’s Stocktwits account you can then see that all three defendants followed each other on that platform👇🏻

Your digital footprints not exactly exculpatory…

The Defendants really should consider cutting a plea agreement with the Government because the preliminary evidence gather by judicially authorized search warrants, coupled with the geofencing and further exacerbated by the Defendants own text/messages to each other. Even at this early stage, the evidence of guilt is overwhelming

Images 5 and 6 are screenshots from the CCTV footage of Senate Wing Door captured on January 6, 2021, at around 3:08 p.m., with a red circle around FERRIGNO and a blue circle around CONNOR.

Images 7 and 8 are screenshots from the CCTV footage of House Wing Door captured on January 6, 2021, at around 3:12 p.m. FERRIGNO and CONNOR appear to be walking with defendant Lunyk.

Lunyk’s Instagram account further contained messages between CONNOR and Lunyk. As explained above, records reveal that Intagram user “francisconnor” is suspect CONNOR. ..sent “francisconnor” the photo seen in Image 1 above. Instagram user “francisconnor” replied stating, “I was in the Capitol building.” Image 9 below is a screenshot of these Instagram\

Pages upon Pages. Screenshots upon Screenshots.

If Defendants Francis Connor & Antonio Ferrigno Jr really thought that “their boi” Anton LUNYK wouldn’t implicate them because “bros before….<insert noun or pronoun>” Then Connor and Ferrigno are in for a very rude awakening. As the saying goes “the first to cut a deal, gets the best deal” and LUNYK has had months to perhaps engage in a “queen for the day” proffer session, whereas Connor & Ferrigno are newly charged.

I am genuinely perplexed why the USAO-DC didn’t charge the three defendants;

• Francis Connor,

• Antonio Ferrigno Jr and

• Anton LUNYK

…with Conspiracy. In each of the Affidavit/Statement of Facts all three traveled together (IN THE SAME CAR), all three have stocktwit accounts and regularly interacted before/after Jan6th on that platform. All three sent multiple texts and messages to each other, while inside the Capitol. So why not charge them with conspiracy? I am also confused why the Mainstream media (and possibly investigators) failed to see the StockTwit nexus. I mean it’s there and I archived it for posterity, because I can be a PITA. And perhaps prosecutors will present evidence to the Grand Jury and then the conspiracy charge will materialize but given the current “acting” US Attorney for DC’s conduct —he and his office no longer have the benefit of doubt. Or any goodwill. No that’s been completely eviscerated by the past 90 days and numerous fubars. Not the least of which Ryan Marshall and John Pierce.

At this point - looking at the broader picture and the numerous prosecutorial mistakes after mistakes and coupled with the haphazard threshold for Pretrial Detention the “acting” US Attorney for DC should be relieved of his post. Because he and the USAO-DC have made too many mistakes and their conduct truly shakes the foundation of that Office’s ability to prosecute these cases -

Because this isn’t about an opinion or feelings —this is about the cold hard facts and consequences of how the USAO-DC has conducted itself after Sherwin’s departure…I have tried to be less critical but all of that was annihilated in the past 95 days and seeing so many unconscionable mistakes. And I meant every word (including those that I misspelled) in this article👇🏻

5th Superseding Indictment Caldwell et al. New defendant -USAO-DC it’s SEDITION TIME. Average daily arrest (Jan-March) 6.35 down to 1.35 (March-Aug)

So enough -Acting US Attorney Phillips do your goddamn job or get out of the way

because your conduct, lack of leadership and repeated mistakes are overtly signaling that you do not believe January 6, 2021 was a domestic terror attack and the majority of Defendants are (not) Domestic Terrorist. So I say get out of the way and let someone else lead the USAO-DC or expect the criticism to intensify. You are sending a message to Donald Trump’s Domestic Terrorist, that Jan6th wasn’t a big deal and beating hundreds of law enforcement officers doesn’t warrant Detention. DO. YOUR. GODDAMN. JOB. Capire?

1. Statement of Facts as to Defendants Connor & Ferrigno https://www.scribd.com/document/522874341/USA-v-Connor-Ferrigno-Aug-31st-Statement-of-Facts or you can pay for the filing https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04518735708