Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this new report involves the FBI sources who admit that they're worried about Elon Musk coming in and cleaning house as well.

Trump made a campaign promise vowing to create a government efficiency commission to audit the entire federal government. Musk would reportedly lead the effort.

One source tells the Times that cutting waste at the FBI will naturally lead to a massive reduction in staff, because the waste is everywhere in this partisan cesspool.

“When he tries to do efficiency at headquarters, the place is going to have five people … if he’s talking about a lot of dead weight,” they said, according to Picket.

“Try to find a person that’s actually working,” they continued, suggesting the FBI is clearly "bloated." //

pat
17 minutes ago
Those that agree to testify about FBI corruption, malfeasance and misfeasance and bring receipts, can stay.

According to Real Clear Investigations, which discovered the change, the new data represents a reversal from a 2.1 percent decrase to a 4.5 percent increase.

When the FBI originally released the “final” crime data for 2022 in September 2023, it reported that the nation’s violent crime rate fell by 2.1%. This quickly became, and remains, a Democratic Party talking point to counter Donald Trump’s claims of soaring crime.

But the FBI has quietly revised those numbers, releasing new data that shows violent crime increased in 2022 by 4.5%. The new data includes thousands more murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults.

For context, 2022 would be the second most recent year on record as 2024 data is not compiled yet. But if the FBI's data in that year was so off, why should anyone believe their 2023 data, which claims a three percent decrease in violent crime? Will that data be revised in the coming future as well? I think we can take a pretty guess at that one. //

It also couldn't be ignored that around 40 percent of police departments were no longer even sharing crime data with the FBI. That left the bureau increasingly relying on a questionable system of estimation to produce its published crime rates. //

The next thing someone may be wondering is if these revisions are normal. To put it simply, they aren't. Carl Moody, a professor at William and Mary College, looked into past years and found that no revisions happened between 2004 and 2015 while 2016 to 2020 saw only minute changes of less than one percent. It wasn't until Biden and Harris took office that the FBI started producing these massive revisions for 2021 and 2022 (and no doubt, eventually, 2023).

Sonia Purnell’s just released biography of Pamela Harriman, Kingmaker, attempts to be fairer to its subject than previous biographies. As the subtitle implies, Harriman led a “Life of Power, Seduction, and Intrigue,” and there is a lot in here about the subject’s early role as a courtesan. Whatever the details of that role, it was far in the past when I came to know and work with Ambassador Harriman on issues of international importance.

During my last four years in the FBI, I worked with dozens of U.S. ambassadors. I served as the Legal Attaché (“Legat” in Bureau jargon) at the U.S. Embassy in Paris. However, for the FBI and the DOJ, our office had wide regional responsibility. We handled the business of the Justice Department with 26 countries in Africa. So, I dealt with a wide variety of our ambassadors at posts large and small.

“Political” ambassadors are often criticized as dilettantes who buy their appointments with large campaign donations. They are contrasted with career ambassadors, who rise through the ranks of the State Department. I have quite a different impression. The political ambassadors, coming from various roles in American society, saw their mission as representing the United States as a whole, while career ambassadors narrowly protected the interests of the State Department, to the exclusion of other agencies.

When I was first assigned to the embassy in Paris, it was led by an ambassador who understood and valued what the FBI could do. Yes, she was a substantial fundraiser for President Bill Clinton, who appointed her, but she demonstrated a love for her adopted country. Pamela Churchill Harriman, a British-born aristocrat, had become the U.S. ambassador to France just months before my arrival in June 1994. //

That is how we happened to set up a luncheon for a group of federal judges.

At that luncheon, Thomas S. Ellis III, a federal district judge from the Eastern District of Virginia, discussed the World War II Normandy landings. Tom Ellis was recommending a new book. He mentioned a specific finding by the author, concerning a key Allied decision.

Ambassador Harriman responded, “No, that was Ike’s call.”

Judge Ellis persisted. “This author says …”

The ambassador: “Oh, no, Omar Bradley told me it was Ike’s call.”

A look of recognition came over Judge Ellis’s face: He realized he was in the presence of someone with firsthand knowledge of World War II.

Pamela Churchill Harriman was truly a remarkable woman. Once married to Winston Churchill’s only son and the mother of Churchill’s only grandson, she was in the room when many of the key decisions of World War II were made. For the next half century, she would continue to meet influential men, be they from London, Washington, or Hollywood. //

Thomas J. Baker is an international law enforcement consultant. He served as a FBI Special Agent for 33 years in a variety of investigative and management positions facing the challenges of crime and terrorism. He is the author of "The Fall of the FBI: How a Once Great Agency Became a Threat to Democracy."

The hearing will examine how the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has used its security clearance adjudication process to purge its ranks of conservatives and whistleblowers, and unlawfully punish those with views contrary to FBI leadership.

The witnesses included DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, Empower Oversight President Tristan Leavitt, FBI Whistleblower Marcus Allen, and former Assistant US Attorney Glenn Kirschner.

Marcus Allen, some may recall, is the former FBI Staff Operations Specialist who suffered retaliation by the agency after daring to question some of the agency's actions. He testified before the subcommittee in May of 2023 and recently (in June of 2024) received some vindication regarding his claims, reaching a settlement with the agency, though it appears his awarded back pay has yet to be disbursed to him. //

Despite the stress and uncertainty, I have never once regretted standing up for truth. In fact, I am actually grateful for the experience. If you do not worship God, then you will worship something else. You can either serve God or you can serve mammon, but you cannot serve both.

While we lost material items, we gained more important things. We have stored up for ourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy and where thieves do not break in and steal. (Matthew 6:20). Our faith has increased, and we have seen the hand of God move in our lives in unexpected ways. What we have gained has far outweighed what was lost.

John Adams noted that the framework of our country was built for a moral and religious people and unfit for the governance of any other. James Madison notes the duty to honor God is precedent both in order of time and degree of obligation to the claims of civil society. Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the universe. //

"This is a warning — to the American people, I say: I personally have no confidence that the FBI will rein in its own conduct. I have been persecuted, along with Garret (O'Boyle), Steve (Friend) and Kyle (Seraphin), and countless other whistleblowers. It is my opinion that the Bureau used reprisal and fear to control the workforce. It has been a seemingly effective tactic.

"I personally believe that there are no current, effective checks and balances against them conducting lawless action with any type of correction in a legitimate timeframe. I welcome the work of the IG, but I think any type of lawless action, there's no legitimate timeframe to rein them back in. Their ability to over-classify information can allow them to stonewall forever.

"To the American people, you have a duty as a citizen to vote, and I strongly urge you to do so. It's how you participate in the American experience. I know people have doubts about election integrity, but you must vote — it is your claim. Stake your claim, and don't forfeit it willingly. Have your voice heard.

"My other recommendations are in the natural order: First, vote. The second is the Second Amendment — arm yourself and know how to defend yourself. Make three to four friends in your neighborhood and promise to come to each other's mutual aid in times of hardship. And during the Great Depression, people stocked up a pantry. So, I think that's a good practice, especially in our economic times, to make sure you have three to four months of food. As a person of faith, I'd say pray the rosary, go to the First Friday devotions — that's for everybody, all my brothers and sisters of all faiths, and I know I'm Catholic — and read the Gospel of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and live it every day."

“On Friday, September 20, federal authorities executed search warrants at my residences. They took materials that came into my possession approximately 20 years ago and are unrelated to my work with the New York City Police Department,” the statement said. //

So what was Donlon doing 20 years ago? Working in counterterrorism for the FBI. //

Maximus Decimus Cassius
11 hours ago edited
One gets the sense that something rather significant is afoot. For now, we're left to wonder what exactly that might be.

If I may, the answer seems simple enough considering a possible Trump victory looming: Covering tracks, tying up loose ends, burying evidence and hiding proof of criminality. You know, typical FBI stuff. //

oldgimpy&cranky
11 hours ago
I would love to think this means the feebs are doing their proper job.

I have absolutely no faith, nor evidence that is the case and - at best - I suspect this is another "op" which is supposed to make us all swoon over the "Great, Good Work" the feebs have done for us.

Defund, downsize and move them out of DC.

late Friday afternoon came the announcement that the Department of Justice has formally settled the claims brought against it by former FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, asserting that the release of their text exchanges in relation to the investigations into Hillary Clinton's emails and the "Russia Collusion" hoax regarding former President Donald Trump violated their privacy. //

Mary Katharine Ham
@mkhammer
·
Follow
A Friday night news dump F you. Brazen stuff. These people have no privacy on government devices. Their messages belong to us. The worse you behave, the more you get paid as long as it’s in service of the correct side. Disgraceful.
(((tedfrank)))
@tedfrank
Biden administration launders $1.2M payment to Peter Strzok (and likely a similar payment to Lisa Page) through settlement of likely-doomed lawsuit.
7:56 PM · Jul 26, 2024 //

That's right — our federal government will be dispensing $2 million in taxpayer dollars to settle claims by former government employees who exchanged messages on government-issued devices that the disclosure of said messages — which went directly to the heart of investigations in which they played critical roles — violated their privacy. //

Hans Mahncke
@HansMahncke
·
Follow
Strzok had no case. So the only way the Strzok payment makes any sense is that the Biden regime has started handing out hush money on its way out. Expect a lot more of this in the coming months.
10:42 PM · Jul 26, 2024 //

Right, so the government employees who played politics with the lives of the entire country bemoan playing politics when it affects them personally. Well, that's rich. And now, so are Page and Strzok.

Jason Foster
@JsnFostr
True,
@ChuckGrassley
is not intimidated by anyone.

Trust me. The
@FBI
has tried and is better at it than the
@SecretService
.

TL;DR Summary of one example — https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2014/f140331.pdf —

FBI: Senator, just want you to know that we know you are linked to a bad guy we’re investigating. Just a heads up.

Grassley: No I’m not, and what possible legit reason would you have to tell me that? Are you trying to intimidate me?

Inspector General: Hey FBI, Grassley’s right. That was totally not legit.

FBI: Y’all can go jump in a lake. We ain’t gonna discipline anyone. But we’ll talk internally and try not to be so stupid next time.
Susan Crabtree
Quote
Susan Crabtree
@susancrabtree
·
Jul 23
😂‼️NOW THIS IS GOOD. Apparently, @ChuckGrassley is not intimidated by the social media post circulating within the Secret Service community (both CURRENT and former agents and employees) that I posted about earlier and have attached below essentially telling @SpeakerJohnson and x.com/susancrabtree/…
Show more
9:50 PM · Jul 23, 2024

On Tuesday, journalist Julie Kelly posted court documents on X showing Special Counsel Jack Smith “admitted the FBI added cover sheets to alleged classified documents found at MAL and took photos for evidence.”

“This confirms my report from last month that the FBI doctored evidence to produce stunt photos of classified documents at [Mar-a-Lago],” Kelly said. //

The FBI purchased glossy cover sheets to use in photos of authorities’ unprecedented raid of former President Donald Trump. //

Prosecutors admitted to mishandling the evidence triggering the delay demanded by the judge which now threatens the possibility for Smith’s team to go to trial before the November election.

According to Kelly on Tuesday, the FBI’s colored cover sheets were included in “classified discovery” implicating prosecutors’ desire to keep the details of the added documents concealed from the public.

“The FBI brought colored classified cover sheets to the raid under the guise of using them to substitute classified documents found within Trump’s boxes,” Kelly wrote on X. “Instead, FBI agents attached the scary looking sheets to various files and took photos.”

The images published by prosecutors became emblematic of the former president’s apparent irresponsibility illustrated from the raid.

Chris A
6 hours ago
“What struck former President Trump in the ear was a bullet, whether whole or fragmented into smaller pieces, fired from the deceased subject’s rifle.”

They're getting you to focus on the wrong things.
Misdirection has always been the name of the Deep State's game.

The story here is not that Max Boot is disgusting (he is) or that he was targeted for marriage (my speculation because Terry is definitely out of the league of women Boot was used to playing in) by Terry because his position at the Post gave her propaganda greater reach and her more Vuitton bags. The real story is how this happened. How long has the FBI known of Terry's side gig? Did anyone at the Washington Post have any curiosity or qualms about the op-eds he was co-writing with his wife? And when did Boot, the spy-catcher of Trump's first term, discover that his wife was a foreign agent of influence?

 What happened on Sunday goes beyond protesting. This, and not moms going to school board meetings to demand that they be included in decisions about their children's education, is domestic terrorism, as defined by the FBI:

"Domestic Terrorism for the FBI’s purposes is referenced in U.S. Code at 18 U.S.C. 2331(5), and is defined as activities: Involving acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; Appearing to be intended to: Intimidate or coerce a civilian population; Influence the policy of government by intimidation or coercion; or Affect the conduct of a government ... //

What occurred Sunday is also not an isolated incident; since the November 2023 murder of a Jewish man, Paul Kessler, in nearby Thousand Oaks by pro-Hamas agitator Loay Alnaji during a so-called protest there have been violent demonstrations throughout Southern California by a coordinated group of terroristic, antisemitic thugs. Alnaji's Muslim Student Association group at Moorpark College proudly attends some of these intimidation rallies around Los Angeles, and we know that there is coordination going on nationwide. That makes this a federal issue that should be vigorously investigated by the US Department of Justice, but they're instead worrying about prosecuting pro-life grandmas who protest outside abortion clinics and doubling down on political intimidation by continuing to work to identify and indict Americans who were exercising their First Amendment rights on January 6. //

The public must know who has been calling the shots and who's been telling law enforcement officers to stand down and allow domestic terrorism to flourish. If it's been politicians calling the shots, that practice must end. Police chiefs need to know that they have the authority to do their jobs without political interference, and the Jewish community needs the reassurance that they will be protected.

Yet, the Bureau’s involvement in concocting terrorist plots and other violent schemes only to arrest those involved has been an open secret over recent decades. This practice, which appears aimed more at justifying the agency’s existence and funding than protecting the public, raises serious ethical and legal questions – especially since such practice typically results in the violation of rights. //

Mongoose
5 hours ago
There's actually a really simple legislative fix for this, which Mr. Friend sort of mentions. And it might be popular, even in both parties. I could see both sides getting on board.
Entrapment is an affirmative defense - you have to admit you did the act, but you're saying there's a legitimate excuse; you were entrapped by the government. There are two kinds of entrapment defenses, subjective and objective. Subjective, which is the one federal law and court decisions recognize at the federal level and in most states, relies on the mindset of the defendant, particularly his "predisposition to commit the offense." ...
...
Objective entrapment is wholly focused on the government's conduct and answering a basic question: Did law enforcement use tactics that would induce a reasonable, law-abiding person to commit the crime? Not the defendant, a "reasonable, law-abiding person." The classic example is an undercover drug agent who goes up to a known heroin dealer and offers to buy a bag for $100. The dealer says no. The undercover says, "How about $100,000?" That's objective entrapment because even a reasonable, law-abiding person might go for a deal like that. His predisposition is irrelevant.
So, go to Congress and have them legislate the objective standard into federal law, and all this FBI entrapment (which it is) crap goes away. I worked undercover at the federal level and in a state that used the objective standard and believe me, you have to be a lot more careful about what you say and do under the objective standard. I didn't mind; I wanted to make a good, solid case, so I didn't cross the line. But it would definitely slow the FBI way down.

Kristi Hamrick, vice president of Media and Policy for Students for Life of America, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the government is “not prosecuting the crime, they’re just prosecuting the point of view.”

The message is clear: If you are against abortion, then the government is against you – at least under the Biden administration.

The communications between Plaintiff and the Government Attorney took place, not on personal devices, but on Department-issued mobile devices, which contained clear banner warnings that inform users of the lack of any reasonable expectation of privacy. Id. //

(I've often wondered about that — Strzok and Page had to know their carrying-on was on department-issued devices. Perhaps they were so confident in their righteousness that they assumed they'd never be questioned or called to account — which is troubling in its own right.) //

jtt888
6 hours ago
I can't imagine using my company device and believe I had privacy. This was a payoff. They did their job and now they get paid.

anon-td49
8 hours ago
And the deal includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement. Perfect.

It’s a dry heat
9 hours ago edited
Just to be clear, including a provision in the direction for conducting the search warrant specifically authorizing heavily armed men to use deadly force is not deemed by Smith as creating "a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger" to a former President and his family is perfectly okay; but for Trump to recite verbatim this authorization to use deadly force against him and his family somehow creates an intolerable risk to Smith and his goons? That's the argument? Oh please, someone play some tiny violin music while Smith cowers against the possibility that the FBI threat to kill Trump might make some people mad.

Smith should include in his request that Trump not make mention of the fact the FBI staged that infamous photo of the so-called classified material that it recovered. When I read that it made me really mad.

FBI documents included in the unsealed filings also revealed that shortly before the raid was authorized and executed, Trump was cooperating with the FBI. //

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
·
Follow
I believe the redacted name is Trump's attorney.

He advised Trump not to permit the feds into another area of MAL. Trump overruled that counsel and let Bratt and FBI into the basement storage area where boxes were located.

Two months later, Bratt initiated the armed,… Show more
7:17 PM · May 23, 2024. //

In August 2022, the FBI did not believe that it was necessary to raid Mar-a-Lago. See Ex. 1 at USA-00940268.

UpLateAgain Lightning47
5 hours ago
The raid should NEVER have been authorized. It was total BS. But should the language restricting the use of deadly force have been removed from the op order? Absolutely NOT. The Deadly Force Policy RESTRICTS the use of deadly force. It's not a green light to use it. It specifies the only conditions under which it can be used. Police at every level (including the FBI) are commonly reminded of the department's shooting policy before an action. To remove it would be LEGALLY seen as inviting gun play. //

GBenton Lex Naturae
4 hours ago
As in War Games, the only way to win this is not to play.

There should have been no raid. The language, per se, is not the real issue. Every raid has the language for a reason. But it IS a very big freaking reason why they never, ever should have done this. //

GBenton mikwcas
5 hours ago
yeah, we're witnessing fascism, Communism, and tyranny. And we're parsing whether the use of force order was extraordinary.

We need to make them live by their own rules. They hype up nonsense into crimes. Well, turn around is fair play. They create a scenario for an illegitimate raid that included potential for use of deadly force, they gotta own it.

Tone it down? No. Wrong answer. Shout it from the rooftops. Biden tried to kill Trump if the circumstances allowed. And Jack Smith tried to frame him and set up the hit.

Oh, it's not unique to Trump. SO WHAT?

The entire raid shouldn't have been used in the first place. And this only makes that a zillion times more true. //

GBenton bk
5 hours ago
Good people project their good nature on others. It's hard for some to see that evil is being done intentionally on our soil by our government. Conservatives want to have faith in law enforcement and the legal system. But it's all been perverted.

The bottom line is they are manufacturing fake crimes to persecute Trump and those around him, not to mention Christians, parents, etc.

We should not ever again give these filth the benefit of the doubt. When our side gets back in power, and it will happen some day, odds are, the game needs to change: They need to be prosecuted for their actual crimes and abuse of power.

The Bush/McCain/Romney doctrine of let bygones be bygones is suicide. Only one said plays by the rules so the game is rigged against us.

Or, we could keep taking the high road, not pushing every advantage, and let them basically win by default over time. //

GBenton Susie Moore
4 hours ago
Agree 100% Characterizing it as a "hit" is over stepping.

But that the order made it possible use of force could have resulted in death underscores how wildly irresponsible this raid was in the full context.

There should never have been a raid if that inherently involved a risk of loss of life over documents, etc.

The FBI was authorized to use “deadly force” against former President Donald Trump when the Biden administration agency raided Mar-a-Lago in search of classified documents, according to newly unsealed court documents shared on X by independent journalist Julie Kelly.

Attorney General Merrick Garland personally approved the unprecedented raid on Trump’s Florida home in the summer of 2022, after which special counsel Jack Smith indicted Trump for allegedly mishandling classified documents. Notably, President Joe Biden also retained classified documents following his tenure as vice president but was not charged by his own Justice Department because prosecutors said he would likely “present himself to the jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

A newly unsealed operations order reveals the FBI was authorized to use deadly force against the former president if need be, Kelly reported.

The Federalist asked NARA whether the pallets shipped by GSA included the documents that were later confiscated by Smith’s team during their raid of Mar-a-Lago, and NARA’s media staff responded that the agency had “no awareness about the contents of the materials on the pallets and had no involvement in the move project that is referenced in the GSA emails.”

“NARA was harassing Trump throughout 2021 for what they insisted were government records apparently WITHOUT contacting GSA to search dozens of boxes in their possession,” Kelly observed.

America First Legal
@America1stLegal
·
Follow
/1🚨EXPLOSIVE — Unsealed docs reveal just how intimately the Biden White House worked with NARA to trigger the Special Counsel classified docs investigation of President Trump.

This confirms our own research that this prosecution is politically tainted and should be dismissed:
1:27 PM · Apr 26, 2024 //

As RedState previously reported, this week, an unredacted version of former President Trump's motion for discovery in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case released by Judge Aileen Cannon has already suggested collaboration between NARA, the Justice Department, and the Biden administration. The motion shows bias within NARA, including internal emails from General Counsel Stern discussing strategies to prejudice President Trump and timing public communications with Congress. Three days after these communications, the Biden Administration directed NARA to reject Trump's claim of executive privilege and disclose records to the January 6th Committee.