TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The former FBI director found a hidden room in the Hoover Building containing documents and computer hard drives that James Comey and others concealed. The room was locked, and access was restricted to prevent discovery. The speaker's team is currently investigating the contents of the room. The speaker says people want them to make arrests, but the speaker wants to run a methodical investigation.

A recent arrest in Northern Virginia was described as the result of a major shift in how the FBI operates on this case. The key details: a month to six weeks ago, Bongino and Patel decided to remove the old agents and assign a new team to the case. The new team applied fresh ideas and new technologies, which allowed evidence that had been overlooked to lead to the arrest of a suspect this morning. Authorities stressed that the arrest is just the beginning of understanding how the operation was conducted, who was behind it, whether there were additional conspirators, or if it was a lone actor. The discussion draws a parallel to the Charlie Kirk investigation, noting that the FBI’s old-guard elements resisted changing the approach, such as withholding the suspect’s photo. Bongino and Patel insisted the photo be released to prompt a father to flip, which they say contributed to the arrest. The overall claim is that a different mentality within the FBI is yielding results: numerous arrests and cases solved that had stalled for years, and some cases resolved rapidly, like the “assassin” case in thirty-three hours. Two notable dynamics are described. First, success stories are being produced, contrasting with resistance from some FBI personnel who prefer their prior methods. Second, this has resulted in internal dissatisfaction among some personnel who “grouse” about the changes, though supporters point to real progress. The narrative asserts that Donald Trump instructed Patel and Bongino to “break glass at the FBI,” and that these changes are being implemented, with demonstrations of success. The conversation identifies two groups within the bureau. The “deep state” elements are described as being purged or pressured to reveal what they did over the last six to eight years, including discussions of burn bags and other hidden actions from the Ray and Comey era. Initially, there was concern about why certain people remained in place, but as cases are solved, opposition within the agency has diminished. Resistors are said to have moved outside the building, while inside the FBI, new personnel are adopting a different approach. Additional context highlights one practical change: the FBI’s development of a counter-drone program, described as a major shift in capabilities that aligns with the broader theme of modernization and adaptation within the agency. The speaker notes that this evolving FBI is now seen as capable of applying fresh methods to combat emerging threats, paralleling external events such as Ukraine-Russia drone dynamics.

The speaker believes Thomas Crooks, like the Gretchen Whitmer case, was set up by the FBI. In the Whitmer case, an undercover FBI employee posed as an explosives expert and showed a video of an SUV being blown up, produced by the FBI. The speaker questions how Crooks, a 20-year-old, acquired the skills to build pipe bombs, suggesting he was likely in communication with an FBI informant, undercover agent, or DHS asset, especially given his training at a rifle range used by government employees. The speaker believes the FBI is creating domestic violent extremists, not targeting or arresting them. She is confident the pipe bombs were planted shortly before being found and that Crooks had a federal handler, fitting the profile of a loner who suddenly becomes an expert in explosives and drones.

The conversation centers on a set of claims and observations about January 6 that orbit around Sedition Hunters, Ray Epps, and the so-called “Northwest Scaffold Commander.” The speakers discuss and link multiple pieces of information to argue that the FBI and other agencies were paying close attention to, or coordinating with, covert actor networks on that day. - The discussion opens with a reference to a John Solomon article about Sedition Hunters and claims that the FBI and Justice Department paid Sedition Hunters about $150,000 to gather evidence on January 6 protesters to help the FBI make arrests. They note the figure was reported as over $100,000 in some places and $150,000 in a House hearing, and they say the FBI/DOJ paid Sedition Hunters, the SPLC, the ADL, the Atlantic Council, DFR Lab, and Bellingcat for intelligence. - The main focus shifts to a piece titled Meet Ray Epps (December 2021) by the speakers’ interlocutor, where they argue that the “main star of the show” was not Ray Epps, but a different figure labeled Northwest Scaffold Commander (referred to as Scaffold Commander). They emphasize that Sedition Hunters’ archives identified Scaffold Commander as their number-one suspect, although he was not placed on the FBI’s most-wanted list. - They recount how, on January 8, 2021, the FBI’s most-wanted list listed Ray Epps as a top suspect in the case, with public calls for information and a cash reward. By late June 2021, a Phoenix newspaper identified him as “Reyes,” and on July 1, 2021, the FBI removed Epps from the wanted list with no explanation and no arrest. They contrast this with Scaffold Commander, who was never added to the FBI’s public wanted list for identification by the public, despite being the focal point of Sedition Hunters’ investigations. - The speakers describe Scaffold Commander as an older man with glasses, a nerdy mask, and a blue cap, who allegedly directed the breach from the Northwest scaffold overlooking the Capitol. They claim he used a bullhorn to issue commands for approximately 18 minutes to an hour and a half, from 1:00 PM to about 2:30 PM, urging the crowd with phrases like “Move forward,” “Don’t just stand there,” “Help somebody over the wall,” and “We gotta fill up the capital.” - They juxtapose these observations with the chronology of the breach: the first breach around 12:53 PM, the crowd’s advance toward the Capitol, and the moment rioters entered the building. They argue Scaffold Commander acted as a ringleader and that Ray Epps was directly beneath him in the crowd, effectively functioning as an internal participant who helped draw people toward the front. - A key point they stress is that Scaffold Commander’s high perch and commanding role align with a long-cited CIA manual from 1983, Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare, which describes a small cadre of crowd agitators operating from elevated positions to direct slogans and crowd movement. They quote and reference passages describing an “outside commando element” that stays above the crowd to observe and direct a demonstration, using high observation points to shout instructions and guide the crowd’s actions. - The speakers argue that the FBI has not acknowledged Scaffold Commander, has not included him on any public list, and has not publicly solicited identification for him, despite Sedition Hunters’ focus on him as the pivotal organizer. They suggest that internal FBI records, memos, or emails about Scaffold Commander could be highly revealing, potentially showing whether higher-ups instructed not to pursue him. - They conclude by urging the FBI and related investigators to search their internal records for “Northwest Scaffold Commander” and make any relevant documents public, implying that such records could undermine the official narrative of the event. They also frame the existence of an internal, externally guided command structure as a critical piece of the January 6 story that remains underexplored by authorities.

A recent House report on the January 6th pipe bomber claims the FBI has engaged in a cover-up, halting its investigation in 2021 and refusing to cooperate with Congress. A whistleblower indicated that law enforcement was instructed to stand down just two days after the bombs were discovered at the RNC and DNC. Despite initial investigative efforts, the FBI has not identified the bomber nearly four years later. Conflicting information has emerged regarding whether the FBI received corrupted cell data from major carriers, with a former FBI official suggesting it might contain the bomber's identity. However, the carriers denied providing any corrupted data. The report highlights ongoing concerns about the FBI's handling of the investigation, which remains unresolved.

The speaker discusses the FBI's ongoing investigation into the January 6th Capitol riot and the arrest of Trump supporters who were present. They highlight the FBI's inability to find information about the individuals responsible for planting pipe bombs outside the RNC and DNC headquarters the night before the riot. The speaker then analyzes a recently released video showing the moment one of the bombs was discovered, raising questions about the authorities' lack of concern and the involvement of the Secret Service. They also mention the failure of the media to cover this story and the suspicious actions of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris. The transcript ends with an update revealing that the person who alerted the police about the bomb was a plainclothes officer with the Capitol Police.

FBI agents are seeking tips to identify the suspect who planted bombs near the Democratic National Party headquarters. Videos show the suspect sitting on a park bench before one of the bombs was placed. The frame rate of CCTV cameras is typically around 15 frames per second (FPS). However, the security video released by the FBI of the January 6th pipe bomb suspect shows only 1 FPS, which is highly unlikely for unaltered footage. The DNC has a history of security concerns, including the Watergate scandal, and the use of 1 FPS footage is statistically improbable.

- Kibbe on Liberty hosts Congressman Thomas Massey for part one of a mega episode focusing on the FBI-identified pipe bomber in the January 6 events and the anomalies in the official narrative; Massey argues he does not believe one loner acted alone. - Massey discusses prior coverage and context, noting a Steve Baker interview that documented inconsistencies in the official narrative. He points to fallout from that interview: a Capitol Hill Police official, who was third in command, resigned the day after the interview; another whistleblower contacted Massey about that officer, suggesting misconduct unrelated to the pipe bomb but part of a larger pattern of investigations. - Massey argues that the FBI’s announcement of a suspect came about a week after that interview and after reporting by The Blaze, and suggests the timing is suspicious. He says this coincidence is surprising and potentially a red flag, given that the investigation had been deemed inconclusive or dormant for years. - Massey emphasizes his own context: his staffer on the Hill watched hours of video to identify who found the second pipe bomb; he asserts that the individuals who found the second bomb should be considered suspects, and that the FBI admitted this to him. He recounts efforts with Kevin McCarthy to release video showing how the second pipe bomb was found, noting that those who found it were very lucky to locate it quickly. - He describes other connections and leads: his staffer now works for Kash Patel; Massey has spoken with a counter-surveillance officer who found the pipe bomb and with the officer’s handler, a Capitol Hill Police member who had previously worked for the ATF and later for Metro Police and Capitol Hill Police. He also mentions conversing with the assistant FBI director in charge of the Washington field office, in a transcribed interview with Jim Jordan about why cell phone data wasn’t used to geolocate the suspect (the provider allegedly corrupted data, which the judiciary committee and Barry Loudermilk’s committee disputed). - Massey references a 100-page report from Barry Loudermilk’s committee on the pipe bomb investigation, noting leads the FBI did not follow. He mentions a lead about an individual in Falls Church, Virginia (a former military man now in government service) whose metro card was used on January 5 and January 6; this person’s childhood friend allegedly used the metro card to approach the RNC/Capitol Hill Club area and take photographs near the pipe bomb sites. Massey asserts this person of interest, plus a neighbor who shared a wall with him, could be connected to others the FBI has not fully explored. - He contends that the arrest appears to derail other investigations and interviews that were being planned. He asserts that a “pro-Trump” motive has not been established for the suspect, contrasting the media’s framing with details such as the suspect’s My Little Pony interest and parental political donations. - Massey criticizes the prosecutor in the case, Jocelyn Ballantine, and recounts concerns about her track record (including involvement in the Flynn case, the Proud Boys case, and alleged attempts to obtain confessions implicating Trump). He questions why she remains at the DOJ. - They discuss broader concerns about FBI politicization and surveillance: Massey references reporters and contact with Kash Patel’s team to argue for cleaning house at the FBI, but notes Ballantine remains in place. He describes eight senators discovering they had been spied on, leading to a legislative push: in the last continuing resolution, lawmakers added a half-million-dollar payout and standing to sue the government for surveillance abuses, a provision he characterizes as carving exemptions out of the law; he says this was supported by most lawmakers, who voted for the CR due to Trump concerns. - They debate possible explanations for the pipe bomber case: the possibility that the FBI identified the suspect and cleared him, prompting no arrest due to exonerating information; or the possibility of a false narrative crafted by others to preserve the January 6 prosecution framework; or the involvement of a patsy or rogue actor. - Massey reiterates his three things he said on Twitter: the bomber was a lone wolf (which he disputes); the FBI was unwittingly incompetent for four years (which he says he questions and calls a cover-up); and it was not a Trump supporter. He stresses the need for more transcribed interviews and explanations from the FBI and ongoing oversight to uncover the full truth. - The discussion shifts toward Epstein files coverage and the broader goal of maintaining public pressure for transparency. They indicate a plan to release a separate bonus episode focusing on Epstein files.

"The simple answer, in my opinion, is social media is wildly out of control, and there's too much clickbait in this country." "we gotta get more involved in social media and online platforms because that's where the folks, the assassins of this world get radicalized." "I asked for congress' help in doing so." "we were gonna use every resource we have to find every single person involved, and the investigation's still ongoing." "transparency." "We've produced more documents to congress than my last two predecessors combined by twofold, just to put it in perspective." "And this is how we got Charlie Kurtz alleged assassin so fast." "The Boston Marathon Bomber, which happened in Downtown Boston during the Boston Marathon, took five days and there was a police officer who was killed in that manhunt."

The speaker discusses the FBI's "failed investigation" of the January 6th pipe bomb, alleging the FBI has no leads or suspects, has lost information and evidence, and that the Secret Service deleted all texts from January 6th. The speaker claims Steve D'Antuono said cell phone data that could have been used to find the bomber was corrupted. The speaker states that the FBI does not have video footage of the DNC from January 6th. The speaker asks if confidential human sources were involved in the pipe bomb incident. The other speaker responded they would have to refresh themselves on the information gathered to date. The speaker suggests getting the information public before the election.

There were multiple improbable factors that would have had to align for these bombs to be discovered at the same time on a sidewalk, prompting questions about a broader conspiracy and how such a scenario could unfold. The speakers emphasize that while they want to avoid a conspiracy path, there are many questions still open, including the handling of video footage. Regarding video records, one speaker notes that they want to review January 6 video to see if anyone returned to the locations, but that video apparently does not exist anymore. They do have January 5 video, but have been told that no one preserved January 6. This raises eyebrows as they consider whether the devices were placed by an inexperienced person who was trying to set them down quickly or whether the devices were left to be found. Mrs. Younger’s account is highlighted: she walked out her back door and did not see anything earlier in the morning, but saw the devices later, which would give a reason to believe she would have noticed them if they had been there in the morning. This observation is part of why they want to talk to her. One speaker is blown away by a point: according to the FBI, the FBI’s internal data indicate 39,000 videos showing the hoodie-clad pipe bomber—referred to as the C. Virkel bomber—movements that night, from various camera angles. Washington, DC, Capitol Hill is described as among the most surveilled areas in the world. Yet there is a claim that there is no footage from January 6 of the actual areas a person would have had to travel to place the pipe bombs. The other speaker confirms that there are cameras along some Capitol Police lines that show walking paths, including footage from Capitol Police cameras, but the angles that would show positions behind the RNC and behind the DNC do not exist today, at least not in a way that captures the relevant movements. This absence has limited the investigation into the theory that the devices could have been placed earlier and then moved or re-placed. They are now going back through Capitol Police footage, including from the Fairchild Building near the DNC, which has provided the most evidence so far. The team is reviewing hours from about 8 PM on May 5 to 1 PM on January 6 to determine whether anyone else passed by, whether there was any suspicious activity, and whether the devices were moved again. The investigators are evaluating step-by-step explanations for these anomalies, considering whether the Secret Service dog failed to detect one device or whether Mrs. Younger missed the other, whether the devices were not present at that time, or whether weather and other factors affected detections. They acknowledge that with so many circumstances, some “smoke” might indicate “fire.” They hope the FBI is reviewing cell phone data to determine if the suspected bomber returned or if a co-conspirator was involved in setting timers or re-placing devices. The transcript ends with an acknowledgment of ongoing investigation scope and questions.

The speaker explains that in the three months since Charlie Kirk’s murder, they have largely refrained from commenting publicly on the investigation. They say this is not due to lack of care or affection for Charlie, whom they knew well since his teenage years, but because they feel they don’t know more than others and want to avoid missteps given their personal connections to those involved. They name Candace Owens, Blake Neff, and Erica Kirk as people they know well and respect, and emphasize a desire to honor Charlie’s memory by seeking justice without criticizing others’ motives when people are sincerely pursuing the truth. They recount a three-hour conversation with Theo Vaughan during which the topic of Charlie Kirk’s case arose. They state they told Vaughan they do not trust the FBI, clarifying that this statement was not an accusation that the FBI is involved in Charlie’s assassination, and they did not intend to imply such. They acknowledge they like Dan Bongino and Cash Patel and do not believe they would intentionally cover up a murder, but they argue that the FBI, being at the top of the organization, is part of a large bureaucracy where some parts act independently from leadership. Therefore, liking individuals within the organization does not equate to trusting the FBI as a whole. The speaker asserts that, as a lesson of the 2024 election, many of the nation’s largest systems and institutions have rot and require reform. They contend that January 6 was a setup and that the FBI was key to that setup, stating it remains unclear whether everyone involved has been fired or punished. They insist that no American is under moral obligation to believe everything the government tells them, especially institutions with a documented history of wrongdoing, such as the FBI’s alleged crimes, manufacturing crimes, and distorting justice. They emphasize that the job of the FBI is to find out what happened, tell the public how they arrived at conclusions, and convince the public of the outcomes, rather than hiding behind national security or confidential sources. The speaker concludes by committing to avoid talking about topics they do not understand, to state things only as they know them, and to remain skeptical. They stress a duty to skepticism and to seek truth and justice without being swayed by tone or certainty from government officials. They reiterate love for Charlie and a wish for justice, while urging others to maintain scrutiny toward the investigation.

The DNC pipe bomb was planted on January 6th at 7:52 PM, according to the FBI. They released two clips from different security cameras. The first camera shows the suspect arriving at 7:42 PM, sitting on bench 1, then leaving. Ten minutes later, he returns and sits on bench 2. At 7:52 PM, the second camera captures him planting the bomb next to the bush, but the view is obstructed. The first camera has a clearer shot of both benches, yet the FBI has not released the full footage from it. This raises questions about transparency, especially since there is a $100,000 reward for information leading to the suspect's capture.

After a 4-year investigation, the justice department released a 300-page report on the FBI's failures. Members of Congress will bring in John Durham to review the findings. The investigation confirms what we already knew from a previous inspector general report: the FBI did not uphold their duty to follow the law in certain events and activities related to the crossfire hurricane and intelligence operations.

There are more documents to be declassified that will show how sinister the FBI was in amplifying Hillary Clinton's steel dossier as real and credible, and how they buried the counterintelligence referral memo. According to Speaker 1, he and FBI director Patel will be declassifying these additional documents. Speaker 1 stated that there is no Russia collusion hoax file cabinet at the FBI or CIA, and that they have to look for well-hidden documents by tracing through emails and looking for signs and clues. The Trump administration will continue to shed transparency, light, and truth because this was the greatest political scandal of our lifetime. It derailed the country and President Trump's first four years in office, and Donald Trump is committed to making sure it doesn't happen again.

Speaker 0 describes rapid FBI mobilization following the shooting, stating resources were surged and multiple air assets deployed. Agents, evidence response technicians, hostage rescue technicians, and special operators were cycled in and out of Utah, with evidence transported on FBI planes to prevent delay. By around 5 PM local time on September 11, he and the deputy on the ground walked the entire crime scene, including the suspect’s footprinted area and the area the suspect used. They found evidence such as DNA on items collected, including a screwdriver found on the rooftop, and they went to the wooded area where the firearm was discarded, noting that the firearm had a towel wrapped around it. He emphasizes the importance of his investigative experience and states that with the support of President Trump and the White House, the necessary resources were provided. He adds that the DNA hits from the towel wrapped around the firearm and the screwdriver were positively processed for the suspect in custody. Speaker 1 counterpoints by referencing the Tyler Robinson indictment, asserting that there is nothing about a screwdriver or DNA on a screwdriver. He directs attention to page three, where the indictment states that DNA consistent with Robinson was found on the rifle’s trigger. He notes that after the shooting, Robinson hid the gun, and the indictment indicates DNA consistent with Robinson on the trigger, along with the rifle, ammunition rounds, towel, fired cartridge casing, two of the three unfired cartridges, and the towel being sent for forensic testing. He reiterates that there is nothing about a screwdriver in the indictment and plans to prove this by searching, finding no results for “screwdriver” or “screwdriver” mentions. He states there is nothing about a screwdriver in the entire indictment and invites readers to read it themselves. Speaker 1 questions why Cash Patel would claim there was a screwdriver with DNA, asking if it’s being saved for the trial and why it appears in the indictment.

Speaker 0: "What I'm saying is a reasonable suspicion is that there were agents. There's a video showing a guy with an earpiece pulling people into the building. Alright? Mhmm. You combine that with the evidence of Ray Epps, and it looks like you have a preponderance of evidence suggesting there may have been federal law enforcement involved in making that thing happen." Speaker 1: "I'll get you beyond a reasonable doubt. Two pieces of information. Ray Epps was on FBI's most wanted list one day, and the next day, he was off of the FBI's most wanted list. There are only two ways that happens. You die or your informant." Speaker 1: "Put that aside. Under congressional testimony, Jill Sanborn, who I used to work with, the head of the FBI counterintelligence division in charge of all these investigations, testified under oath when senator Cruz asked her, flat out, were there federal agents involved with January 6? And she said, quote, senator, I can't answer that at this time." Speaker 1: "The reason she said I can't answer that is because of the same stonewalling they gave us during Russergate with Christopher Steelehauper and everybody else. It's the same narrative, and and I'm telling you they were there." Speaker 0: "You're so you're saying that she said I can't answer that because the answer is yes Yeah. And that would compromise whatever their operation was. Exactly."

The transcript centers on a report from NBC News about the man charged with planting two pipe bombs near the Democratic and Republican party headquarters on the eve of the January 6th attack. The speaker cites NBC’s article, which states that the suspect told the FBI he believed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, according to two people familiar with the matter. The speaker notes that NBC provides no direct quote or further context beyond that single claim. The speaker asserts that their own sources indicate the word used by the suspect, Brian Cole Jr., in his FBI interview was that he believed the 2020 election was stolen. However, the speaker claims there is a widespread belief within the FBI that this comment was a legal maneuver rather than a genuine belief. According to the speaker, the FBI allegedly thinks the statement was coached by Cole’s lawyer to secure a pardon from President Trump, specifically a retroactive pardon because Trump had issued a pardon for individuals convicted of January 6–related crimes. The speaker emphasizes that there is no additional evidence in Cole Jr.’s background, as far as their sources can determine, indicating he is a Trump supporter. They remark that NBC is one of the few outlets making this claim, noting that the article contains several paragraphs but only repeats the initial sentence without further detail. The speaker suggests that even within liberal media, there is a belief that the comment was a legal maneuver rather than a reflection of genuine political conviction, and argues that NBC’s reporting is selectively presented to push a particular narrative. Throughout, the speaker contrasts this with a broader media portrayal, arguing that while Brian Cole Jr. did make the comment about the 2020 election being stolen, the context is missing, and the media narrative is being shaped by selective reporting. The speaker frames the situation as an instance of media cherry-picking intended to influence perceptions about the suspect’s political affiliations and the nature of his statements to the FBI, rather than providing a complete account.

Speaker 0 claims to have video footage from January 6th of two federal agents attacking the Capitol. Speaker 0 states they have been trying to get the FBI to investigate for over a year, providing them with twenty-nine minutes of high-definition footage. Speaker 0 says the FBI has not arrested the agents, nor have their images appeared online. Speaker 0 claims the FBI refuses to accept a statement or view video from January 5th, 6th, and 7th. Speaker 1 says the FBI raided them twice, came to their home, and took their phones. Speaker 1 advises Speaker 0 to avoid the FBI if possible.

The speaker discusses the FBI's ongoing investigation into the January 6th Capitol riot and the arrest of Trump supporters. They highlight the FBI's inability to find information about the person or people who planted pipe bombs outside the RNC and DNC headquarters the night before the riot. The speaker then introduces new surveillance footage released by Capitol Police, showing the moment one of the bombs was discovered. They describe the video, pointing out the lack of concern from law enforcement and the Secret Service, as well as the proximity of the bomb to VP-elect Kamala Harris. The speaker raises questions about the identity of the person who alerted authorities to the bomb and the subsequent cover-up.

Speaker 0: Social media is wildly out of control and there’s too much clickbait in this country. One of the things I highlighted in Congress in my testimony last week is that if we wanna protect our youth, we gotta get more involved in social media and online platforms because that’s where the folks, the assassins of this world get radicalized. That’s where they’re the long-lived afters in general. And so we have to get after that problem set, and I asked for Congress to help in doing so. But speaking of Charlie Kirk, was a very dear friend of mine, and then I was tasked with leading the nationwide manhunt to find the perpetrators involved, of course, we were gonna use every resource we have to find every single person involved, and the investigation's still ongoing. But we, as one of the pillars of my leadership here at the FBI, is transparency. We've produced more documents to Congress than my last two predecessors combined by twofold. Just to put it in perspective. So when we take our investigations out to the streets, I have the same ethos. And this is how we got Charlie Kirk's assassin, alleged assassin, so fast. The Boston Marathon bomber, which happened in Downtown Boston during the Boston Marathon took five days, and there was a police officer who was killed in that manhunt. Luigi Mangione, who allegedly murdered an individual, the CEO of the health care company, in Downtown Manhattan in broad daylight took five days to find him. Our investigation is very much ongoing. But we've also Armstrong in an unusual thing put out publicly more information as to what we found because of it is of such public importance. The flip side of that is the social media people get involved and they come run with their crazy conspiracy theories because it makes them money. It gives them clickbait. And I don't work for them, and I don't respond to them. My duty is the American people. If there was anyone else involved in Charlie Kirk's murder, you can look at our record. We'll find them, and we'll...

Kash Patel is now the FBI director, a positive development. Dan Bongino will be the deputy director, assisting Patel. Bongino has highlighted abuses of the deep state and the FBI and has a storied law enforcement career, making him a near-perfect fit. He will run the FBI's day-to-day operations under Patel. The question is whether Patel can save the FBI, which has been corrupted. The FBI raided President Trump's home and gave the speaker a subpoena, which they claim is abusive. The FBI has been targeting the opposition to the deep state and the democratic left machine, subverting the rule of law and the constitutional republic. The issue is whether the FBI can be relied upon to uphold the rule of law and advance the public interest.