TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

I'm sharing an email from James Dennehy, the assistant director in charge of the New York field office, that highlights resistance within the FBI. Dennehy sent a very direct email to his staff, challenging the Trump administration, stating that the FBI is currently in an internal battle. He notes that good people are being forced out, while others are being targeted simply for doing their jobs according to the law and FBI policy.

A presidential memorandum requires immediate declassification of all FBI files related to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, which is considered an instance of weaponization of law enforcement. The aim is to give the American people a full understanding of the files. The declassification gives the media the right to examine the files. All will be declassified except for a classified annex. The speaker suggests the FBI and Department of Justice should be ashamed, as should Biden.

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.

The discussion outlines that a year before January 6, the FBI conducted a planning exercise and had specific plans for the event. Speaker 1 states there was a tabletop exercise run in Boston in August 2020, five months before January 6. The memos that Kash Patel turned over to Congress, recently provided at the request of Chairman Barry Lautomilk, show that the FBI knew there was a strong possibility of a hanging or contested election, with both sides agitated and likely to escalate to violence. The memos also reveal that the FBI devised specific strategies, including embedding informants inside groups where political violence or agitation might occur. According to Speaker 1, the FBI had two dozen informants on the ground on the morning of January 6, and recommended mass prosecutions, even for the most minor crimes—described as exactly what the FBI did after January 6. Speaker 1 emphasizes two major points about the strategy: first, that the strategy was conceived months in advance and was carried out; second, that it represented a double standard because it differed from how political violence at BLM protests and far-left actions in 2020 were handled. The claim is that informants were embedded in both left- and right-wing groups, including Antifa and right-wing groups, and that intelligence suggested a bad episode would occur. They allege that, according to Chairman Barry Lautemux, warnings from informants were strong, but Capitol stakeholders in Washington, DC, did not receive those warnings or pass them along. This, they argue, shows two failed examples of the FBI under the Chris Ray era, with foreknowledge of events but actions that hurt conservatives while not alerting liberals or those who could have prevented violence. The documents are presented as now public, described as stunning by the speakers. Regarding whether there was any briefing to higher-level officials, Speaker 0 asks if there is evidence that Bill Barr, Chris Ray, or staff at the White House were briefed after the tabletop exercise and plan development. Speaker 1 responds that there is no indication of briefing the attorney general or other senior officials. There is no documentation showing that Barr, the Homeland Security Department, the Capitol Police, or the Washington, DC Metropolitan Police were alerted. The speaker notes that this suggests an insular FBI operation, drawing a comparison to pre-nine-eleven dynamics, implying systemic issues within the FBI.

In this video, the speaker reflects on the current state of the White House and how it is difficult to imagine two FBI agents being in the situation room. The speaker admits to sending the agents, which may not have been possible in a more organized investigation or administration. Typically, the FBI would coordinate with the White House counsel for interviews with senior officials, involving discussions and approvals. However, the speaker decided to send a couple of agents without going through the usual process, considering it was early in the investigation.

The speaker asserts that the investigation was conducted properly and according to protocol. They claim that regardless of high-level decisions regarding public statements, the investigative work itself was done correctly by the men and women involved. The speaker encourages listeners to be assured that both investigations followed proper procedure.

The speaker states that they have not interfered with the Hunter Biden investigation, and there has been no political interference. They cannot comment on whether Joe Biden is being investigated or if the Department of Justice (DOJ) said he is off-limits. The speaker refers to the ongoing investigation led by special counsel Weiss and mentions a long-standing policy. They emphasize the FBI's responsibility to remain non-partisan and deny opening an investigation into the attorney general. The speaker avoids discussing whether the FBI tipped off Hunter Biden's lawyer before executing a search warrant on a storage unit. They conclude by stating that the FBI is not accountable to Congress or the American people.

When people talk about the deep state, in a sense, this is the commanding control of a major part of the deep state. No. It is the commanding control of the deep state. Congress said, we want comprehensive oversight on both operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and we want a plan for oversight and we're going to delegate this directly to the chair of the SIGI. I see. So you really worked for the chair of the SIGI. Well, this is the interesting piece. He in turn delegates it down to the IG at the DOD. Yeah. And I'm working for him. Yeah. So, you're working directly for the inspector general at DOD. But for the SIGI actually. But in effect You really were working for the SIGI. You bet. And who at the SIGI? Michael E Horowitz. Wow. Horowitz? Yes. One of the worst. Yes. One of the absolute worst. Horowitz of Russia collusion fame. Yes. Who now is at is not out of the government, who now is at the Federal Reserve. Right. Maybe. Ready to come back. Right. Still probably providing emeritus status on the SIGI. What was his position officially at the He was the DOJ IG. He was the inspector general at DOJ. And he replaced Glenn Fine who went to DOD. Wow. It's a really nice tightrope. And his deputy then went on to become the DODIG. And his deputy was spent thirty years over in The US Attorney's Office District Of Columbia. They really have it all sewn up, don't they? The assistant FBI director for integrity and ethics were for Glenn Fine and runs the DO runs the FBI. Yes. Think of the Siggy as an integrated command and control center. So, the buck stops with them. Yes. Because every complaint that is made. In any agency whatsoever goes to the Inspector General, and from those IGs report to the SIGI and it dies. And are investigated by the SIGI. And are investigated by the SIGI and it all dies. That's whistleblower complaints actually go to die. If it's against the members of the SIGI. Unless it's in their interest to prosecute it. Politically, yes. So, when people talk about the deep state, in a sense, this is the command and control of a major part of the deep state. No. It is the command and control of the deep state. It's in every bureau, every board, every agency, and every commission. One person, 2,300,000 people in the executive branch. I only need about 40 people to run the whole show. As long as you ensure that no one can foil my records, as long as everything I do is law enforcement sensitive, and as long as anybody that is a whistleblower can get collective punishment. Which is what you have seen with over 700 documented cases of people who've been Retaliated against. We see it every day. We see it every day.

The transcript centers on Amjed Fassisi, a CIA contractor who works with Deloitte and, at times, within the CIA’s China Mission Center on cyber operations. He describes a career path that includes time at the CIA starting in 2008, a stint at the NSA for two years, then a return to the CIA in 2011, where he managed about 80 cybersecurity practitioners and later helped stand up a threat program inside the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Fassisi asserts that he holds a high-level clearance (top secret/SCIs) and that his role involves cross-agency work across the enterprise, though he does not disclose specific details. Key, repeated claims attributed to Fassisi: - The higher-ups in the intelligence community, including CIA directors Gina Haspel and Mike Pompeo, and the upper echelons of their staffs, colluded to withhold information from sitting President Donald Trump. Fassisi states, “We kept information from him,” and later explains “the executive staff” (the director and subordinates) were involved. - Fassisi contends that the CIA and other agencies monitored Trump and his inner circle, using human sources and surveillance. He mentions that Trump could be targeted or spied on, including claims that he would “call Vladimir Putin and tell him” secrets, and that “the intelligence agencies thought that president Trump was a, quote, fucking dumbass and would disclose information.” - He asserts that information about Trump’s activities was intentionally withheld from him by the intelligence community, and that this withholding involved high-level officials who would not share details with the president. - Fassisi suggests that the intelligence community engaged in surveillance of Trump and his team using methods such as human intelligence rather than only wiretaps, and that the FBI, NSA, and other agencies were involved, with implications that FISA-related processes were used to monitor Trump. - He asserts distrust and lack of information-sharing among agencies, stating “the NSA and CIA don’t share information” and describing internal fragmentation and territoriality between agencies as a problem. - Fassisi alleges that there was a broader pattern of weaponizing the CIA and collaborating with foreign partners to influence or monitor Trump associates, referencing the broader narrative around Trump and Russia and implying ongoing monitoring of Trump’s activities post-presidency as well. - He makes broad allegations about Israel and other allies, asserting distrust and claiming Israel “steals intelligence” from the U.S.; he frames relations with allies as fraught and unreliable. - Fassisi describes the reporting by Michael Schellenberger and Matt Taibbi as validated by his claims, and positions the ongoing investigation as exposing corruption within the CIA, FBI, and Department of Justice, with a narrative that information was hidden from the public and from Trump. Supporting context around the interview: - The exchange includes tense moments where Fassisi is shown a CIA badge and discusses his role; the interviewer questions the plausibility and provenance of his claims, pressing for documentation or proof, while Fassisi provides limited responses about his clearance, division (China Mission Center), and contractor status. - The segment also includes editorial framing by the presenter, interjecting with external commentary and promotional content not directly related to Fassisi’s assertions. The interviewer promises follow-up coverage and frames Fassisi’s statements as part of a broader whistleblower narrative. - Throughout, the content repeatedly emphasizes claims of withheld information from Trump, surveillance of Trump and his associates, inter-agency distrust, and internal CIA culture, without providing verifiable documentation within the interview itself.

Every investigative decision involves multiple layers of oversight and collaboration. There are various levels of leadership above, including the assistant director, executive assistant director, deputy director, and director of the FBI. Additionally, there are many individuals below, such as section chiefs, supervisors, unit chiefs, case agents, and analysts, all contributing to these decisions.

I've never completely understood the term "deep state". What I can tell you is that the FBI has 37,000 men and women working in field offices all over the country and in LIGAD offices all over the world. These are people of character, of courage, of principle, of selflessness, and of patriotism. That's the FBI that I see. I appreciate that, and I hope the president stops attacking the FBI.

Director Brennan, director Clapper, director Panetta, and director Morrell were involved in signing a statement. The speaker mentioned that they would have informed the director or deputy director by providing them with a copy of the statement, as per their usual process.

Work for the department of justice. Been there, like, twenty three years. I'm an analyst. I'll be acting deputy chief of our office for a few months starting next week. I work closely with all the federal law enforcement agencies and the US attorney's offices As a gospel. The prosecutors and stuff. The thing is it's what you're saying because I do deal with so many of the agencies, like the Bureau of Brisons, the Marshal Service, the FBI, US attorney's offices. It's like

The speaker wants the American public to know that the FBI has had problems. The FBI will hold itself internally accountable and meet out justice to those who abuse their roles. Those who have taken missteps have already been eliminated from the FBI. The FBI will vigorously uphold justice as vigorously as they pursue violent crime, on a twenty four seven, three sixty five basis. The speaker will have zero tolerance for those who utilize their badge to harm the country.

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.

The speaker states that the FBI works directly with the ADL daily and that the FBI's work fighting antisemitism depends on the ADL protecting the community. The speaker expresses deep appreciation for FBI Director Wray and all FBI professionals for their work.

The speaker repeatedly questions why the FBI is always referenced for information. They press the other speaker, who claims to have communicated with the FBI, about details of an investigation. Despite being asked about shell casings and explosives, the speaker deflects, insisting on referring to the FBI for answers. The questioning becomes more intense, with accusations of withholding information and covering up. The speaker continues to evade direct answers, emphasizing the ongoing criminal investigation.

We are reporting from the heart of the campus that sparked a global student movement for Palestine. We’re seeing right now, Chris, we’re trapped in a dorm room. There are 10 white PDs barricading the doors, and we’re not allowed to leave. What started off as a protest against genocide at an elite Ivy League university was met with a military-style operation to suppress it. We need to find a way to get some spare medication. So when Columbia University sent the NYPD on the campus, they were willing to deploy violent militarized police to maintain their active investment in genocide. This is not about students expressing ideas. It is about a change in tactics that presents a concern and a normalization and mainstreaming of rhetoric. And I’m not just talking about language. I’m now talking about tactics, and that’s what shifted our response yesterday. But a normalization and mainstreaming of rhetoric associated with terrorism has now become pretty common on college campuses. Right? You see people wearing headbands associated with foreign terrorist organizations. This happened in October when you had a viral TikTok reissuing Osama bin Laden’s 2002 letter to America. So that’s a larger concern. It’s separate from what happened yesterday, but they’re related. Speaker 3 asks what was found: basically, NYPD changed the way it did business after the attacks of September Eleventh. It not only changed the way it did business, it created a very deep connection with the CIA. They started to build these intelligence programs that infiltrated Muslim communities in ways that, if the federal government did it, would totally go against rules designed to protect civil liberties. And they did it with an unusual partnership with the CIA. A very senior CIA officer was dispatched by CIA Director George Tenet to be his personal representative to the NYPD and help create these intelligence gathering programs, directing and supervising the intelligence gathering, and that relationship continues today. Speaker 3 notes: Recently, the CIA sent one of its most senior undercover officers to work out of 1 Police Plaza in New York as a covert officer. So we’re talking about former CIA agents now working within the New York Police Department. Well, they’re current CIA; they’re on CIA payroll. They’re on the CIA payroll, working with the NYPD, traveling abroad, and using intelligence in conjunction with the NYPD. Speaker 2 describes one element: there is a program called the demographics program. Officers described it as mapping the human terrain of the city. They placed undercover officers, ethnic officers inside Middle Eastern neighborhoods to blend in and look for things that are suspicious. That could be something as simple as who’s looking at radical books in a bookstore or who’s watching Al Jazeera and perhaps applauds at a report about an IED in Iraq, and that could be enough to get you into a report at the NYPD. They also have informants called mosque crawlers who go to the mosque as the eyes and ears for the NYPD. The FBI places informants in mosques with a criterion of specific information related to criminal activity, while the NYPD reportedly does not have that bar and says they follow leads; but those involved with the mosque crawler program say they’re there as eyes and ears.

The speaker discusses the concept of the deep state, explaining that it is not comprised of one individual but rather a machine or beast that goes beyond any single person. They use the example of the FBI to illustrate this point, stating that while many individuals who work there may be good people, they are part of a larger system that has its own culture and history of corruption. The speaker also discusses the decentralization of censorship, where the government delegates the task to administrative agencies, private sector executives, and AI algorithms. They argue that we are in a modern 1775 moment, where the real divide is between the managerial class and the citizen.

I had a successful career in the FBI, overseeing operations in Southern California with a large team and budget. However, I believe that the organization has been infiltrated by the Illuminati Movement, along with other agencies like the NSA and CIA. I will provide more information on this later.

The speaker worked with around 80 coworkers in two shifts at the election headquarters. They were all instructed to falsify the ballot package by backdating it each day with a different date, even though it was never the correct date. Multiple supervisors were involved in giving these instructions.

There were multiple layers of people above me at every investigative decision, including the assistant director, executive assistant director, deputy director, and director of the FBI. There were also multiple layers of people below me, such as section chiefs, supervisors, unit chiefs, case agents, and analysts. All of these individuals were involved in all of these decisions.

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.

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 speaker testifies about the weaponization of the FBI and DOJ against its own employees and the American people. He served in the Army in Iraq and Afghanistan, then as a police officer, and later as an FBI special agent. Despite receiving high performance reviews and being selected for specialized units, he has been smeared as a subpar employee after witnessing weaponization within the FBI. He states that too many in the FBI prioritize avoiding difficulty over upholding the Constitution, leading to an Orwellian atmosphere that silences dissent. He is speaking out despite the potential personal cost, including the loss of his job and family's home. He claims the FBI allowed him to accept orders to a new position, sell his family's home, and report to the new unit before suspending him on his first day, rendering his family homeless. He concludes that bad actors have begun running parts of the government, but he will never stop trying to serve the nation and protect the innocent.