Patel and Ratcliffe try to bolster claims that FBI and CIA conspired against Trump
The FBI released emails on Tuesday that purport to show an effort by the bureau's leaders in 2020 to cover up a source's claim that there was a Chinese plot to throw the presidential election to Joe Biden. In a statement to the Daily Mail, Trump's FBI director, Kash Patel, said the emails reveal that bureau leaders 'chose to play politics and withhold key information from the American people.'
And CIA Director John Ratcliffe released an internal agency analysis related to the 2020 election that he argued showed that Democratic appointees 'manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals — all to get Trump.'
Patel's and Ratcliffe's claims went beyond the information contained in the released documents. The documents do not describe definitive evidence that any official acted out of political motive or engaged in anything beyond the good-faith debate that is typical of the intelligence verification and analysis process.
The emails do show that at least one FBI official raised the concern that the report conflicted with congressional testimony at the time by Director Christopher Wray, who said the FBI was not aware of any Chinese attempt to interfere in the presidential election. A former FBI official told NBC News that Wray does not recall being made aware of the report.
A former senior FBI official said he was not aware of the report either. The former official, who requested anonymity, noted that the bureau produces hundreds of reports every day based on such tips, which do not always pan out.
Patel also promoted an article by the right-wing journalist John Solomon than mentioned that U.S. Customs and Border Protection had seized fake licenses that were arriving mostly from China and Hong Kong around the time the FBI received the tip.
According to a 2020 news release from CBP, 20,000 fake licenses were seized in Chicago between that January and June. It said 'most were for college-age students,' a population that has historically sought licenses with fake birthdays so underage students can purchase alcohol.
The FBI did not respond to a request for comment from Patel regarding the fake licenses.
Dozens of judges, including Trump appointees, have found no evidence of widespread or systemic voter fraud affecting the 2020 election, despite allegations promoted by Trump and his allies since he lost that year's presidential race.
The day after Patel released the emails, though, Trump appeared to mention them during a press conference where he talked about 'China and the license plates' and claimed that 'tens of thousands of cards' were used to vote in the 2020 election.
The emails released by Patel offer a window into the deep concern among senior career FBI analysts about an intelligence report from an agent in the Albany field office based on a single, unvetted source making a historic allegation: that the Chinese government sent thousands of fake IDs to help people fraudulently vote for Biden.
The report was ultimately withdrawn over concerns about its veracity. Two FBI officials familiar with the matter told NBC News that the tip was not credible intelligence and never should have been sent out in an intelligence report.
The CIA analysis cited by Ratcliffe found procedural faults with how the agency crafted its assessment that Russia tried to denigrate Hillary Clinton and help Trump get elected in 2016. But it didn't question that broad conclusion — one echoed by two exhaustive congressional investigations.
Yet Trump appointees and allies quickly argued the documents vindicated Trump's long-running claims that he had been wronged by intelligence agencies investigating foreign election interference.
The CIA review found that 'Obama's Trump-Russia collusion report was corrupt from start,' read the headline of a New York Post piece by conservative columnist Miranda Devine.
A press release from the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, said the 'bombshell' FBI emails showed 'FBI headquarters interfered with [an] alleged Chinese election interference probe' to shield then-Director Christopher Wray 'from political blowback.'
The FBI emails show that senior career public servants at the bureau had concerns about the reliability of information from a confidential human source who claimed that the Chinese Communist Party planned to use fake IDs to cast ballots for Biden in the 2020 election.
The information came from a source that an FBI agent based in Albany, New York, had just met, who in turn got it from a separate unnamed source. The emails say the source in Albany also repeated a claim made on social media that the Chinese government was intentionally spreading Covid in the U.S. — an allegation that has never been corroborated. One email released by the FBI said the information had not been verified through other intelligence-gathering methods.
The emails say top bureau intelligence analysts Nikki Floris and Tonya Ugoretz ordered the intelligence report recalled because it lacked corroboration. Floris was forced out of the FBI earlier this year, and Ugoretz — who was promoted to become the FBI's top intelligence official — was recently placed on leave. The FBI has not said why. Floris and Ugoretz did not respond to requests for comment.
The emails lay out an internal debate over the reliability of the intelligence, which former FBI agents say is typical. The Albany office, backing its agent, sought to prevent the report from being recalled. Senior FBI officials, meanwhile, pushed for corroboration of the source's allegations.
In a Sept. 25, 2020, email, an assistant section chief in the Criminal Intelligence Branch said the claim about Chinese election interference was 'getting a lot of attention from all HQ divisions.'
The assistant section chief added, 'We know that the source is first contact and hasn't been re-interviewed. Are you considering recalling the [intelligence report] until you can track the source down and re-interview? Everything election is getting scrutiny, and we just want to be sure we have reliable sourcing.'
In a Sept. 28 email, another official noted that the allegation that China was trying to influence the election in favor of Biden, as well as previous seizures of fake driver's licenses imported from China, 'were all documented in some fashion on open sources.'
The official added that 'Given the lack of specifics we received in the initial reporting, my first opinion was that the [confidential human source] wants to help and is probably supplementing his reporting via open sources.'
Ultimately, the emails show, an FBI official who specializes in Chinese foreign interference instructed the Albany office that 'we have not approved a re-issue' of the report 'specifically because of our concerns that the reporting is not authoritative.'
The new head of the FBI's Office of Congressional Affairs is Marshall Yates. A former Republican aide on Capitol Hill, Yates has ties to figures that have long backed Trump's false claim that the 2020 election was stolen.
Yates was chief of staff to former Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., on Jan. 6, 2021, when Brooks spoke at Trump's rally in support of efforts to overturn his election loss. Yates then went on to work for the Election Integrity Network, a project headed by Republican lawyer Cleta Mitchell, a key figure in the efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
In a 2022 speech in New Mexico, Yates said the 'election objection did not go as we wanted in 2020, on Jan. 6,' but that 'luckily' it had 'sparked a grassroots movement across the country for election integrity.'
The FBI did not reply to a request for comment about Yates' involvement.
The internal review released by Ratcliffe last week examined how the CIA put together a 2017 intelligence assessment that concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.
The review found some deviance from standard procedures, but it defended the assessment's overall findings. The report disclosed that two senior leaders of a CIA mission center focusing on Russia objected to the conclusion that Russia's goal was to help secure Trump's victory but agreed that Putin hoped to denigrate Clinton and undermine the U.S. democratic process.
The review also cited complaints by some CIA officers that they felt rushed by a tight deadline to produce the assessment. The CIA director at the time, John Brennan, was a Democratic political appointee who has since become an ardent Trump critic.
In a second post on X, Ratcliffe argued that the complaints about the process were evidence the 'assessment was conducted through an atypical & corrupt process under the politically charged environments' of Brennan and then-FBI Director James Comey. The CIA declined to comment when asked to explain the basis for Ratcliffe's accusation.
A special counsel appointed during the first Trump administration looked extensively into how the CIA crafted its assessment but filed no criminal charges and reported no clear evidence that political bias tainted the process. A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation in 2020 concurred with the 2017 intelligence assessment and found no reason to dispute its conclusions.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Motor Trend
7 minutes ago
- Motor Trend
How the One Big Beautiful Bill Will Affect Car Buying and Ownership
On July 4, President Trump signed the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' Act into law. The budget reconciliation bill made big changes to federal spending, taxes, and regulation, some of which will have big effects on car owners, enthusiasts, and the automotive industry. We've read through the 879-page bill and outlined the parts that'll affect your next car purchase, the price of gas, and your commute. The "One Big Beautiful Bill" affects car buying by altering tax deductions on auto loans, ending EV tax credits, reducing CAFE penalties to zero, and cutting grants for clean vehicles. It also impacts gas and power prices by changing drilling and energy policies. This summary was generated by AI using content from this MotorTrend article Read Next Because this is a reconciliation bill, which modifies existing budget legislation rather than starting from scratch, there are limits to what can be included in the legislation. Everything in the bill has to be directly related to government spending and taxation, so some of the changes are creatively written in order to make the cut. (As always, please consult your tax professional before making financial decisions. The below is provided for information purposes only and is not tax or financial advice.) 'No' Tax on Car Loan Interest This one is confusing, and 'no' is in quotation marks because it's misleading. Car buyers looking to finance their next purchase may be able to write off some—but not all—of the interest charged on the loan each calendar year on their taxes. That's not the same as abolishing or suspending the tax altogether, as the claim implies. There are also a number of rules for qualifying which will cut off a lot of buyers. First and foremost, the vehicle you're buying has to be assembled in the U.S. That will be confusing for some buyers, because some of the bestselling vehicles in the U.S, such as the Toyota RAV4 and Chevrolet Silverado, are built in multiple plants, not all of them in the U.S. The IRS will know where your vehicle is made because you have to supply the VIN when claiming the tax deduction, and that number includes a digit that represents the country of origin. The tax deduction doesn't apply to leases, either, only purchases. It appears to apply to both new and used vehicle purchases, as the legislation makes no distinction. Vehicles with salvage titles and parts cars don't count, either. Similarly, it doesn't apply to anything with a gross vehicle weight rating over 14,000 pounds (which is the rating of a Ford F-350, as an example). Commercial vehicles qualify but only if they're for personal use, not business use. Business fleet purchases don't qualify, so be careful if you're planning to register your vehicle to your small business in order to take advantage of other tax incentives. If your purchase qualifies, there are still more rules. The tax deduction is capped at $10,000 per calendar year, so if you pay more than that in interest, the balance will still be taxed. If you make more than $100,000 per year as an individual or $200,000 per year as a joint filer (married or similar), the amount of interest you're able to deduct goes down by $200 for every $1,000 of income you earn over $100,000 (individual, or $200,000 combined). Do the math and it means no tax credit for anyone making over $150,000 individually or $250,000 combined. Finally, the tax credit is only available for a limited time. You can't start counting interest payments towards a deduction until January 1, 2026, so the rest of this year doesn't count. The tax credit will expire on December 31, 2029 unless Congress extends it. EV Tax Credits End September 30 The (up to) $7,500 federal tax credit for new and used EVs now expires on September 30 of this year. Previously, both tax credits were scheduled to expire on December 31, 2032. Likewise, the tax credit for commercial EVs expires the same day. State tax credits are not affected. On a related note, the federal tax credit for installing an EV charger or renewable fuel dispenser at your home or business will expire even sooner, on July 30 of this year. Tax credits have been a huge driver of EV sales to date, so the end of them could cause final vehicle sale prices to rise and sales to plummet. A large drop in sales could lead automakers to discontinue some or all of their EVs, reducing choice in the market. Lower cost EVs with smaller profit margins would be vulnerable, which could lead to only more expensive EVs on the market. Less Help With Bad Auto Loans Stopping predatory auto loans had been a major focus for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau during the Biden administration, but enforcement is likely to drop off substantially after the passage of this bill. Funding for the bureau is cut by 54 percent, which will drastically reduce the number of investigations and actions it's able to execute. No Penalties for CAFE Violations Because this is a reconciliation bill, Congress could not make changes to vehicle emissions and fuel economy laws. Rather than replace or abolish the Corporate Average Fuel Economy program (CAFE), this bill keeps all the existing rules in place but reduces the penalties for breaking them to $0.00. This means automakers are free to ignore federal fuel economy regulations as the EPA cannot meaningfully enforce them. This could potentially affect consumers in multiple ways. If automakers stop following CAFE rules, fuel economy could go down and emissions could go up. Any savings on R&D could then be passed on to the consumer. This is unlikely, however. Automakers plan as much as a decade in advance, so vehicles for sale today were engineered years ago and the money already spent. Future iterations of Congress and future presidents could also reinstate the penalties in a few years, which would wipe out any savings and put automakers behind on R&D. Fuel economy regulations elsewhere in the world aren't changing, so there's little incentive for automakers to cut R&D spending regardless, meaning no reduction in pricing is likely. No More Money for Clean Commercial Vehicles Businesses and local governments around the country have taken advantage of federal grants to help offset the cost of replacing older heavy duty commercial vehicles with EVs. These grants were commonly used to replace old, diesel school busses with new, electric versions and also covered installation of chargers and training employees to work on those vehicles and chargers. Any grant money not already spent has been taken away. Similarly, grants for reducing diesel exhaust emissions in low income and disadvantaged areas have been cut, with all unspent money withdrawn. Funding has also been cut for an EPA program which studies the health and environmental effects of fuel additives. Reduction in Tax Credits for Commuters If your employer provides a transit passes, vanpool reimbursement, parking passes, or a bicycle commuting reimbursement, the amount you're able to deduct on your taxes is going down. Previously, you could deduct up to $175 per month each for your vanpool, transit pass, or parking pass. Now, you can only deduct up to $175 total per month for any combination of those services. The deduction for bicycle commuting has been eliminated entirely. No More Money or Credits For Home Solar and Battery Backups This is tangential to car buying and ownership, but if you were planning to take advantage of tax credits to install solar panels and battery backups in your home to offset the cost of charging an EV, you're out of luck. Any money not already spent on those grants and tax credits has been rescinded. Likewise, the business tax credit for building specifically energy efficient new homes has been cut, along with business tax credits for training contractors to install solar panels, batteries, and more efficient appliances. Gas and Power Prices Could Be Affected Portions of the bill addressing oil drilling and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve may have a small impact on gas prices in the future. Various provisions restart new oil and gas drilling leases both in the U.S. and offshore in its oceans, which would eventually add to the global oil supply and potentially push down prices. However, it will take years for any new leases to be acquired, explored, drilled, and turned into production wells, and oil companies are already sitting on a large number of unexplored leases. Because oil is a globally traded commodity, adding more supply doesn't necessarily change the price of a barrel of oil, nor the price of a gallon of gas. The bill also requires the government to abandon a plan introduced during Trump's first term to sell down part of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Instead, it requires the government to buy more oil it can store for future emergencies. Presidents like to draw on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve during times of high gas prices, but the quantities withdrawn are typically so small they have little to no impact on lowering the price at the pump. With regard to electricity generation, the bill paves the way to reopen old, closed power plants and cuts tax credits for wind and solar farms. Old power plants will now be able to reopen without any retrofitting of modern pollution controls, which could make them economically viable, although it depends on the individual plant. New wind and solar farms now have a shorter window to begin operations before the tax credits are cut off, and the lack of credits is expected to make new such farms economically unviable in the future. Fewer wind and solar farms means energy prices are less likely to go down or remain flat, while old power plants coming back online could partially offset their absence at the cost of greater air pollution in those communities. The bill also undoes several provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, which provided loans and grants for electrical infrastructure improvements nationally, including transmission line improvements in particular, as well as integrating offshore wind farms into the power grid and improving electrical infrastructure on tribal land. Any reductions in electricity prices or increases in reliability these improvements may have provided are off the table. Similarly, by cutting the clean hydrogen production credit several years earlier than planned, the bill will likely slow or halt the adoption of clean sources of hydrogen and slow or stall the nascent hydrogen vehicle industry, both for private and commercial vehicles. Most hydrogen today is produced from gas and oil, which is both cheaper and dirtier than clean alternatives.
15 minutes ago
What would it take for Elon Musk to create a new political party in America?
On the heels of the Fourth of July -- and amid his feud with President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans over the president's tax policy bill -- tech billionaire Elon Musk announced plans for a brand new political party, dubbed "America Party," to represent what he called "the 80% in the middle." Musk, who recently left his temporary government post as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency, told his X followers that his new party will "give you back your freedom." In a series of posts over the weekend, Musk said his party would use "extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield" to target "2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts," which he believes "would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws." So what would it take for Musk to launch his third-party effort? Here's an overview. Getting on the ballot To start, Musk would have to get his party on the ballots in the states where he wants to compete -- each with its own process for qualifying. In many states -- including Kentucky, where the race to fill retiring Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell's open seat in 2026 is heating up -- a party-designated candidate must win a nomination from a state-recognized political party that has received a certain percentage of votes in the previous presidential election -- or else a candidate has to run as an independent or a write-in candidate. In other states, the America Party's name itself could present a problem -- like in New York, where state law prohibits political parties from having the word "American," or any part of it, as part of their party names, according to Election Law Blog. Bankrolling these state-level efforts would take significant resources. Experts would be needed to navigate each state's election laws and political systems in order to identify and nominate promising candidates, and canvassers would have to gather thousands to tens of thousands of signatures for each candidate to get them on the ballot. Traditionally, candidates and their parties spearhead these operations, working together to strategize signature-gathering, voter registration, and campaign fundraising and spending. But Musk's America Party is unlikely to become a certified political party anytime soon, because the Federal Election Commission, which reviews political organizations' qualification as political parties, has not been in quorum to do so since a commissioner resigned in April, leaving the agency with just three commissioners. FEC commissioners can only be appointed by President Trump himself. It's not yet clear if Musk has filed any paperwork for his America Party, and an FEC spokesperson declined to comment on whether the agency has received any paperwork from Musk's team. Going the PAC route Faced with the long odds of gaining party certification, some election experts say that Musk, at least for the time being, could focus on House and Senate candidates through a super PAC. That's because ballot access for congressional races is governed by the states -- not the federal government -- so the America Party could still put its designated candidates on the ballot without the FEC's certification, as long as they pass state qualifications. And because super PACs are unconstrained by fundraising or spending limits, an America Party super PAC could be funded by unlimited donations from supporters including Musk himself, and could independently spend an unlimited amount of money in support of its candidates. The only catch is that super PACs are unable to work directly with campaigns the way FEC-certified political parties can -- but election lawyer Matt Sanderson of Caplin and Drysdale told ABC News that the efficiency of a super PAC can actually outweigh the advantages of a political party. "Form a super PAC, just call yourselves a political party -- that's not against the rules. The FEC blessing is not needed," said Sanderson, who was legal counsel for the No Labels movement during the 2024 election. "I actually don't think it makes a lick of sense in this day and age to try to form yourself as a national party committee." "They can call themselves whatever they want," Sanderson said, explaining that the FEC doesn't prohibit a super PAC from calling itself a political party as long as it doesn't coordinate directly with campaigns. "Just skip right past this very cumbersome and not-all-that-beneficial process, hold themselves out as a political party, and move forward." Joining forces Additionally, Musk could enlist the help of existing third parties, like the Libertarian Party or the Green Party. However, third parties historically have had little success in gaining office in the United States. During the 2024 election, the centrist group No Labels led a third-party presidential movement but ended its efforts months before the Republican and Democratic national conventions, after failing to find their candidate before their self-imposed deadline. Longstanding Libertarian Party nominee Chase Oliver ran in the 2024 presidential race but received less than 0.5% of the total vote. Still, a possible collaboration could be in the works: Musk has been in touch with one-time Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, who in recent days has spearheaded a third party centrist effort of his own, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to ABC News. Caleb Burns, an election lawyer at Wiley Rein, acknowledged the potential significance of obtaining an official party status through the FEC instead of bypassing that step with a super PAC -- stressing the role of a political party as a "brand for politicians." "The success of any new political party will turn on whether there are sufficient candidates -- and, by extension, members of the public -- interested in aligning with that new brand," Burns said. "If the answer is yes, then it makes sense to do everything possible to enhance and promote that brand -- which means proceeding with the organizational and legal burdens necessary to create and formalize a new political party." "The critical predicate, however, is the political question of whether or not there is sufficient interest in a new brand of politician," Burns said. "For that, it seems we will have to wait and see what Mr. Musk concludes."
Bloomberg
16 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Pressures South Korea to Pay More for Defense
President Donald Trump said South Korea should pay more for its own defense, upping pressure on the Asian ally after sending a letter to extend time for negotiations before 25% across-the-board levies are set to kick in for its shipments to the US. 'South Korea is making a lot of money and they are very good, they are very good but you know, they should be paying for their own military,' Trump said during a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday.
