If there were 3, 4, 5, or however many undercover FBI agents or informants planted among the Oathkeepers all along — as Persons One, Two, Three, Ten, Fifteen, etc., are claimed to be in the Revolver article — why would it take prosecutors approximately five months and five efforts to get all the factual allegations properly set forth in the indictment? If they had all that first-hand information from the undercover agents and informants as early as Jan 7, why are they still naming new defendants in early June? Shouldn’t they have known all these facts back in January?... Having written between 500 and 600 indictments, I’ll say this: You call someone an “unindicted co-conspirator” in an indictment when 1) you’re not sure of their true identity; 2) they are not yet under arrest, you’re not certain where they are, and you think they might flee if they see their name in an indictment; 3) they are cooperating; 4) you have charged them in a different case with other defendants for tactical reasons — you can’t name them in two cases for the same conduct; 5) you are not sure as to that specific person that you will have sufficient admissible evidence to convict them at trial when you go to the grand jury; 6) the person is not an actual conspirator because they didn’t know what crime was being conspired about by the others — they only knew something illegal might be happening soon.