Jim Jordan Says 14 FBI Whistleblowers Have Come Forward to Expose the Corruption
Two days ago CF noted the following:
Prior to the FBI’s raid Monday on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, a string of whistleblower reports alleged that senior officials at the FBI exhibited a pattern of bias in their handling of politically sensitive investigations and also reclassified cases without justification to substantiate the White House’s public narratives on crime and extremism.
Beginning in late May, Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley called attention to then-Washington Field Office Assistant Special Agent in Charge Timothy Thibault over political bias concerns. Thibault expressed support for several “highly partisan” opinion articles on LinkedIn and made a series of politically charged social media posts, according to Grassley, who referred Thibault to the Office of Special Counsel to address the federal agent’s potential violations of the Hatch Act, which bars government officials from partisan political activity.
Concerns surrounding Thibault escalated in July, as whistleblowers came forward claiming Thibault’s partisan persuasion directly impacted his work at the bureau. While seeking approval from FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland to open an investigation into Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign, Thibault withheld from them that his predicating evidence was based in “substantial part” on information from a “left-aligned organization,” according to Grassley’s office.
In a separate instance, whistleblowers claim Thibault worked to falsely discredit evidence against President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, and prevent the bureau from investigating him.
“Whistleblowers have told my office that the FBI maintains many sources that have provided extensive information on Hunter Biden,” Grassley said in August. “That information allegedly involves potential criminal activity such as money laundering. According to allegations, the underlying information was verified and verifiable. However, instead of green-lighting investigative activity, the FBI shut it down.”
Grassley also pointed to Robert Pilger of the Election Crimes Branch, who he alleges was of vital aid to Thibault in his efforts to open the investigation into Trump. Former Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue, the Iowa Republican noted, testified that “Pilger’s conduct frustrated the department’s ability to properly operate the Election Crimes Branch.”
Thibault, Grassley confirmed, was reassigned to an unspecified posting prior to the bureau securing a warrant to raid Trump’s estate. Sources briefed on the raid confirmed to Just the News that the agents came from the Washington Field Office, in which Thibault was serving until just days prior.
In late July, whistleblower reports emerged that bureau supervisors were pressuring agents to reclassify cases under the label of “domestic violent extremism” (DVE) without substantive justification in order to support White House narratives…..
“You are not allowed to disagree with the FBI”
The raid at Mar-a-Lago was by people flown in from the D.C. Field office where many of the whistleblower accusations have taken place. Which is interesting because some of these individuals at the D.C. office are under investigation by Durham… which would explain why the had the warrant set up the way they did.
And even the “judge” that okayed the warrant had a duty to keep the warrant focused and not as broad as it was. But something smells here. Here is my response to JIM G. on my Facebook:
- FBI seizes privileged Trump records during raid; DOJ opposes request for independent review: sources (FOX)
- Trump Warrant Furthers Justice Department’s January 6 Investigation (NATIONAL REVIEW)
Judge Bruce W. Reinhart even recused himself just six weeks before giving the green light to the FBI raid on Trump’s home. All this is important, because it shows a disregard for the law by the FBI. Which Alan Dersowitz notes well:
…..What’s more, the agents had no right to open Trump’s safe, as they did, without a special warrant that goes above and beyond a normal search warrant, Dershowitz noted:
“Not only that, but under the law, if you seize a safe, you don’t go into the safe – you have to get a special warrant to get into the safe, and you have to prove that the material in the locked safe would have been destroyed.”
“They darn well better have smoking-gun proof,” the Constitution scholar and law professor said. And, since it’s unlikely they do, the FBI has violated Justice Department rules, Dershowitz declared:
“So it seems to me that they have violated the rules of the Justice Department, they have gone after both a former president and a future candidate – and they darn well better have smoking-gun proof – which I don’t see happening.”
The FBI’s behavior is not redolent of that of a democratic rule-of-law country, especially since there’s no evidence that Trump committed “a serious, serious crime,” Dershowitz said:
“And, clearly, there’s been a double standard here. But, even if it was a single standard, it’s not good enough!
“You don’t get a warrant, unless a subpoena won’t suffice. In a democratic rule-of-law country, you do it legitimately: you go to the lawyer, you say, ‘By tomorrow I want that safe delivered to the Justice Department. I want these documents turned over.’
“And unless you can demonstrate that there was a very substantial chance they would have been maliciously destroyed – which would have been a serious, serious crime. I mean, that would be a serious crime.
“That’s Nixon – and there’s no evidence that that happened here.”
“I don’t think you use search warrants and prosecutions to go after political enemies,” so the Biden Administration is acting like the government of a third-world Banana Republic, Dershowitz said.
“That’s not supposed to happen in the United States,” Dershowitz said, denouncing the Biden Administration’s unjustified prosecution of its opponents as “impermissible in a democracy”:
“I’ve just written a whole book on that, called ‘The Price of Principle,‘ where I go into the whole issue of why you don’t use partisan considerations to go after political enemies. That’s what happens in Banana Republics.
“That’s what happens in third-world countries. That’s not supposed to happen in the United States. It was right not to go after Hillary Clinton, because she was a candidate for president. You need a much higher standard, but you can’t apply one standard to Hillary Clinton and another standard to Donald Trump. That is impermissible in a democracy.”
What FX does this have?
….A new poll from Convention of States and Trafalgar Group shows that 83.3 percent of Republicans and 71.7 percent of independent voters are now more motivated to vote following the FBI’s raid at Mar-A-Lago on Aug. 8.
Overall, nearly half of voters believe the raid was carried out by Trump’s political enemies. Among Republicans, that figure is more than 76.7 percent and among independent voters that number is 53.9 percent. However, 70.5 percent of Democrats believe the raid was conducted by “the impartial justice system.”
The polling data also show that after the FBI’s raid at Trump’s home, motivation to vote in the 2022 election increased 53.4 percent among Asians, 73.7 percent among blacks, 80 percent among Hispanics, and 69 percent among white voters…..
In real time? A guy I have gone rounds with a couple times on FB had this to say:
Yep. I was pulling for DeSantis… but Trump now is my guy.
RPT’s RUMBLE