TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The transcript discusses FBI activity related to January 6. Christopher Wray stated there were no FBI assets involved in the riot at the Capitol. George Hill recounts that the Boston field office refused to open cases on individuals attending a political rally, asserting it was a First Amendment-protected activity. The Washington Field Office (WFO) allegedly couldn't provide video evidence because it might expose undercover officers or confidential sources. Mr. Allen claims he faced retaliation for echoing Boston's stance that investigations require sufficient criminal predicate. Mr. O'Boyle alleges the WFO pressured him to act outside normal law enforcement procedures, specifically serving a federal grand jury subpoena based on an uncorroborated anonymous tip. He claims the WFO repeatedly pressured him to initiate processes without proper corroboration.

Breaking news from the Southern District of Florida (SD-FL): two junior assistant US attorneys have resigned after being asked to participate in a broad investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. A source familiar with internal concerns tells MSNBC that US Attorney Jason Redding Quinones called a division-wide meeting this afternoon to address the resignations and the investigation. The reporting notes that at least 30 subpoenas were sent out late Friday by SD-FL to individuals including former CIA chief John Brennan and former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. In addition to the resignations, it is reported that one of the junior ASAs who resigned felt unable to participate because doing so would violate their ethical responsibilities. The resignations are notable because it would be unusual for junior ASAs to be pulled into such a major investigation. Significantly, the subpoenas were signed by SD-FL’s number three, the executive assistant US attorney, rather than by a career prosecutor in leadership. This is presented as abnormal, with a comparison made to past instances where leadership signatures were absent from such actions, such as Lindsay Halligan signing indictments in the Northern District of Virginia due to a lack of available career prosecutors. The developments prompted SD-FL US Attorney Quinones to convene a unit-wide meeting of two to three dozen prosecutors in the major crimes division. The scope of the ongoing investigation remains unclear, but it is connected to the broader claim—involving Trump administration officials—that former Obama and Biden administration officials undertook to undermine the candidacies and presidencies of Donald Trump. The report also notes that President Trump has explicitly called for the jailing of Barack Obama and referenced other individuals in relation to the investigation. Subpoenas have been issued, and at least two SD-FL assistant US attorneys have resigned so far. In summary, two junior ASAs resigned after being asked to participate in a high-profile investigation tied to claims of Russian interference in 2016, with subpoenas issued to notable former officials, and the sign-off on those subpoenas coming from the office’s number-three official, prompting an internal meeting at SD-FL.

After three weeks of training, the speaker received a litigation hold and a memo granting permission to fire probationary employees from the capital c section who had been moved within the office. The memo referenced people but lacked specific names, causing confusion. Upon returning to the office, the speaker and colleagues were met with confusion and heartbreak. Two hours later, termination letters began to arrive. Ultimately, 15 assistant US attorneys were fired. The speaker's termination letter cited actions and prosecutions related to the events at or near the US Capitol on 01/06/2021. It referenced an executive order characterizing the work as a grave national injustice and stated that the speaker's hiring hindered the acting US attorney's ability to implement President Trump's agenda. The speaker believes the US attorneys represent the United States, not the president. The speaker believes that firing 15 qualified attorneys created a problem.

In March 2022, FBI Director Christopher Wray, who is known for his loyalty to the left, made efforts to pursue their political opponents.

A recent report reveals that 26 confidential human sources were present during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Of these, three were authorized by the FBI to monitor the event due to concerns over domestic terrorism. One of these sources entered the Capitol, while two others accessed restricted areas. The FBI did not authorize any sources to enter the building. Additionally, 23 other sources were present independently but had previously collaborated with the FBI. Notably, none of the sources who entered restricted areas were prosecuted, aligning with the DC US attorney's office's approach of not charging individuals for merely entering restricted grounds. Outgoing FBI director Christopher Wray has faced scrutiny regarding the agency's role on that day, emphasizing that the violence was not orchestrated by FBI sources or agents. Further information is anticipated from Capitol Hill and the White House.

There are reports of FBI lawyers claiming that actions against certain employees could be unconstitutional. Norm Eisen and Mark Zaid have warned the DOJ about potential legal action if the Trump administration attempts to remove or reassign FBI or DOJ staff. This is ironic, given their past violations of due process rights for January 6 defendants. Meanwhile, rumors suggest an impending FBI walkout, with some agents urged to stand their ground. One New York FBI field office director emphasized entitlement to their jobs. A walkout could expose the agents’ sense of entitlement and accountability for eroding public trust in the DOJ and FBI.

FBI agents and analysts, who handle investigations and execute warrants, are facing unprecedented challenges due to political pressures. These dedicated professionals, who typically commit to long careers, are now worried about potential job loss and its repercussions on their families and futures. Many are concerned about losing their reputations, pensions, and health insurance if they are terminated. The current atmosphere within the FBI is one of fear and uncertainty, as employees feel targeted for simply doing their jobs on significant national security cases. This situation is seen as disgraceful and unjust, reflecting a troubling trend of political retribution affecting those who serve in the agency.

They say the FBI anticipated consternation around the election and actually prepared plans for January 6. They held a tabletop exercise in Boston in August 2020, five months before January 6. Kash Patel recently turned over memos to Congress at the request of Chairman Barry Lautenberg (Lautomilk) of the J-six investigation. The memos show the FBI knew there was a strong possibility of a hanging or contested election, with both sides agitated and likely to escalate to violence. They devised specific strategies, including embedding informants inside the groups where political violence or agitation might occur. They say the FBI had two dozen informants on the ground the morning of January 6. They also recommended mass prosecutions, even for the most minor crimes, which is described as exactly what the FBI did after January 6. Two big takeaways: the strategy appears to have been hatched months before and then carried out, and it involved a clear double standard compared to the political violence by the left in 2020. The FBI allegedly embedded informants in a broad range of groups, including Antifa and right-wing groups, and gathered intelligence suggesting a bad episode would occur. Barry Lautemux reportedly stated that while the warnings from informants were strong, the preparations of warnings to the brethren of the Capitol in Washington, DC did not exist. In other words, warnings were not passed along. The claim is that two failed examples of the Chris era of the FBI show that, knowing something was going to happen, they implemented a strategy that hurt conservatives but not liberals and did not warn the people who could actually prevent the violence. This is described as the legacy of the Chris Ray FBI, now laid open in documents for all to see. The question is whether any part shows that Bill Barr or Chris Ray briefed the president or his staff, or senior White House officials after the tabletop exercise and the development of the informant plan. The answer given is no: there is no documentation showing that the attorney general, Barr or other brass were briefed, and no mention that the White House, Homeland Security Department, Capitol Police, or Washington DC Metropolitan Police were alerted. The characterization is that the FBI remained insular, echoing the same “diseases” seen before nine-eleven.

A recent memo from the acting FBI director, Brian Driscoll, revealed a list of FBI agents involved in the January 6th investigation, ordered by the deputy attorney general. This situation is unprecedented, as incoming administrations typically do not exert political control over the FBI. The memo indicates a potential purge of experienced agents, including those overseeing national security and criminal investigations, many of whom have been linked to cases that Donald Trump opposed. Additionally, political operatives have been placed in the FBI director's office, raising concerns about their influence on ongoing decisions. The implications of these changes could significantly impact the FBI's operations and integrity.

Why isn't FBI Director Chris Wray publicly defending his department's actions regarding the January 6th investigation? His resignation implies a lack of apolitical integrity within the FBI, suggesting that each presidential administration dictates priorities, rather than upholding a consistent, unbiased approach. This leaves the impression that wrongdoing occurred. The prioritization of the January 6th investigation over other crucial cases, like those involving child sex trafficking and serial killers, has negatively impacted agents' morale. However, some pushback exists; DC judges, including those appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents, have openly criticized the Department of Justice's actions, refusing to allow these cases to be dismissed. Their outspokenness provides a counterpoint to the perceived silence from other quarters.

The FBI is accused of working against the American people and needing reform. Whistleblowers spoke out about the bureau's corruption and retaliation tactics during a congressional hearing. They detailed instances of being suspended, losing financial support, and facing humiliation and intimidation. Democrats attempted to discredit the whistleblowers, but they followed proper protocols and made protected disclosures. The FBI's role in the January 6th events was also questioned, with allegations of withholding video footage and the possibility of undercover agents being present. Protecting whistleblowers and holding those who retaliate against them accountable is crucial. Financial support is being provided to the whistleblowers through a crowdfunding campaign.

A recent report reveals that on January 6, 2021, there were 26 confidential human sources present at the Capitol. Of these, three were authorized by the FBI to monitor concerns related to domestic terrorism. One source entered the Capitol, while two accessed restricted areas, but the FBI did not authorize these actions. The remaining 23 sources were there independently, having previously collaborated with the FBI but not specifically for the January 6 rally. Notably, none of the sources who entered restricted areas faced prosecution, aligning with the DC US attorney's office's approach of not charging individuals whose only offense was entering restricted grounds. Outgoing FBI director Christopher Wray has consistently denied that the violence was orchestrated by FBI agents or sources.

The Justice Department has prosecuted over 1400 individuals for interfering with the peaceful transfer of power. These prosecutions demonstrate how seriously the department takes efforts to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power, whether regarding the last January 6th, the coming January 6th, or any January 6th in the future. The Justice Department aims to make clear to anyone contemplating interference that they can see the consequences based on the January 6th prosecutions. The Justice Department will continue to protect democracy.

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.

After three weeks of training, the speaker saw a litigation hold on their phone with a memo giving Mr. Martin permission to fire probationary employees from the capital c section. The memo referenced people but didn't have a list of names. The speaker headed back to the office and was met by colleagues who shared their confusion. Two hours later, letters terminating them started rolling in. At the end of the night, 15 assistant U. S. Attorneys had been fired. The termination letter stated the decision was based on actions and the prosecution of persons relating to the events that occurred at or near The U. S. Capitol on 01/06/2021. An executive order characterized that work as having involved a grave national injustice. The speaker's hiring hindered the ability of the acting US attorney Martin to staff his office in furtherance of his obligation to faithfully implement the agenda that the American people elected president Trump to SCU. The termination letter made it clear that mister Martin does not understand the role of a prosecutor. Firing 15 qualified attorneys created an immediate deficit in the office to appropriately prosecute cases.

The FBI is being accused of corruption and targeting politicians, parents, and ordinary citizens. Whistleblowers have bravely come forward, facing retaliation and being blocked from working both inside and outside the FBI. This is a troubling time for the American people.

We must remain focused on conducting our work properly, adhering to rules without letting partisan preferences influence our approach. In the investigations involving the president-elect, we strived to uphold these principles. Regarding the FBI's search for classified documents at Trump's home, we only resort to search warrants when all other avenues, like voluntary returns and subpoenas, have been exhausted and obstructed. There has been no interaction with the Biden White House concerning investigations into Trump. The FBI also investigated President Biden for classified documents and his son Hunter, who faced legal issues. This job often angers powerful individuals, but the rule of law dictates that investigations are driven by facts and legal standards, not political pressures.

I joined the FBI in 2014, focusing on violent crimes on Indian reservations and later on child pornography and human trafficking in Florida. In 2021, I was reassigned to domestic terrorism, where I became concerned about the January 6 investigations. I noticed the FBI was straying from its guidelines, which I believed jeopardized important cases and public safety. After raising my concerns, my security clearance was suspended, and I was placed in an unpaid position indefinitely. The FBI pressured me to lie to charge me with a crime and denied my requests for outside employment. If the FBI treats its own agents this way, what might they do to ordinary citizens?

After three weeks of training, the speaker received a litigation hold and a memo granting permission to fire probationary employees from the capital c section who had been moved within the office. The speaker was unsure if they were on the list. Upon returning to the office, colleagues shared their confusion. Two hours later, termination letters arrived, dismissing 15 assistant U.S. Attorneys. The speaker's letter cited their actions in prosecuting individuals involved in the events at or near the U.S. Capitol on 01/06/2021. It referenced an executive order from 01/20/2025 characterizing that work as a grave national injustice. The letter stated that the speaker's hiring hindered the acting U.S. attorney's ability to implement President Trump's agenda. The speaker believes Mr. Martin doesn't understand that U.S. attorneys represent the United States, not the president, and that firing 15 attorneys created a deficit in the office's ability to prosecute cases.

The Trump administration has executed a significant purge at the FBI, dismissing all six senior executives and multiple heads of field offices. This includes the leader of the Washington DC office, which was involved in prosecuting Trump, and several federal prosecutors linked to the January 6 investigations. These officials are career law enforcement professionals, not political appointees, and their removal could severely impact the FBI's ability to address terrorism and crime nationwide. Additionally, the acting deputy attorney general has requested a list of FBI employees involved in January 6 cases, affecting personnel across various field offices. This upheaval leaves local offices in disarray and raises concerns about the future of federal law enforcement.

I'm Norm Eisen, publisher of The Contrarian, and I'm joined by Jen Rubin, editor in chief. We have Andrew Weissman with us, who discussed the troubling termination of FBI agents involved in the January 6 investigations. Emil Bove, the acting deputy attorney general, has ordered the disclosure of names of all FBI personnel associated with these cases, potentially affecting thousands. This raises concerns about public safety for those involved in prosecutions. The FBI leadership is reportedly resisting this order, with some special agents standing up for their colleagues. The situation echoes past injustices, and it's crucial for the Department of Justice to uphold the law rather than compromise it. FBI agents are trained in the law and are committed to their mission, demonstrating loyalty to justice over political pressures.

The speaker claims that starting two days after January 6th, the FBI initiated twice-daily phone calls with policing agencies nationwide, including local, state, governor's offices, and mayoral offices. According to the speaker, these calls served as a national forum. The speaker alleges that the FBI used these calls to indoctrinate law enforcement agencies, mayor's offices, and governors across the country. The speaker asserts that the FBI used these calls to instruct them on how to prosecute individuals involved in January 6th.

We were federal prosecutors on the Justice Department's Capitol attack investigation until the Trump administration fired us on January 31st. Why were we fired? Because we did our job. We followed the facts and the law. What we did was justice for 140 police officers wounded on January 6th, 2021. We were hired to prosecute cases from the riot, and none of our defendants were acquitted, which shows the evidence was overwhelming. But last month, the president pardoned even the most violent convicts, calling them "hostages." Letters of termination hit the Justice Department, calling the prosecution itself a grave national injustice. Anyone who has watched videos of January 6th knows that prosecuting the rioters was not the injustice. The injustice has been the Department of Justice turning its back on law enforcement officers, members of Congress, and all the victims affected.

FBI agents and analysts, who handle investigations and surveillance, are not influenced by political changes and are dedicated to their work. Most intend to stay for their entire careers, often facing potential termination or retribution for doing their jobs on significant national security cases. This situation has created a sense of fear and uncertainty among them, as losing their jobs would jeopardize their reputations, financial stability, pensions, and health insurance. The current environment within the FBI is chaotic, with employees worried about their futures due to political maneuvering. It is unjust and unacceptable for them to endure such treatment.

The January 6 case involved a significant number of FBI personnel, with estimates suggesting that around three-fourths of the bureau had some involvement. This includes a wide range of cases, from minor misdemeanors to serious charges like seditious conspiracy and assaults on federal officers. Public sentiment generally supports prosecuting those who attacked law enforcement during the riots. The ongoing scrutiny of FBI leadership raises questions about how deeply this will affect the agency's rank and file. Each arrest requires multiple officials, and many individuals contribute to the paperwork and analysis related to these cases.