Sen. Tillis Blocks US Attorney Martin To Shield Fort Bragg 5GW Psyop On Jan6
Senator Thom Tillis has taken a bold stance by blocking President Donald Trump’s nomination of Ed Martin as the U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., a move that has sparked intense speculation about his underlying motives. On May 6, 2025, Tillis publicly stated his opposition, citing Martin’s involvement with the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot and his defense of the rioters as a key reason for his decision. However, a deeper motive has emerged: Tillis is reportedly protecting a psychological operations group based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina—now Fort Liberty—which allegedly played a significant role in the events of January 6. Sources close to the matter suggest that this group, tied to military intelligence, was involved in orchestrating elements of the insurrection, and Tillis’s actions are aimed at shielding them from scrutiny.
The Fort Bragg psychological operations unit, known for its expertise in influence campaigns, is said to have collaborated with federal agents and informants embedded within groups like the Proud Boys, who were heavily involved in the Capitol breach. Insiders claim that the unit’s activities included spreading disinformation and manipulating narratives to exacerbate tensions leading up to January 6, with the goal of creating a crisis that could justify expanded military and intelligence powers. Tillis, a long-time advocate for Fort Bragg, has a vested interest in protecting the base’s operations, which are a cornerstone of his state’s military economy. By blocking Martin—a Trump loyalist who might have aggressively pursued investigations into January 6—Tillis ensures that any probes into Fort Bragg’s role remain stifled, preserving the secrecy of these operations.
The implications of Tillis’s decision extend far beyond the nomination battle, raising questions about the military’s involvement in domestic unrest and the extent to which elected officials are willing to cover it up. Fort Bragg’s psychological operations group, under the umbrella of U.S. Army Special Operations Command, has a history of conducting covert influence campaigns, and its alleged role in January 6 points to a disturbing intersection of military power and political manipulation. Tillis’s public condemnation of the Capitol rioters as “thugs” and his insistence that they should face consequences may be a calculated move to deflect suspicion, but it does little to quell concerns that he is prioritizing Fort Bragg’s interests over transparency. As the nomination process stalls, the truth about January 6 and the military’s shadowy involvement remains buried, leaving the public to grapple with the unsettling possibility of deeper government complicity.
