search icon
Live chat

‘DOJ and FBI Threatened My Safety’—Kash Patel Discusses Mar-a-Lago Affidavit Redactions, Special Master Appointment, & More

In this episode of Kash’s Corner, Kash Patel discusses the Mar-a-Lago affidavit and argues that the DOJ and FBI deliberately revealed his name in an effort to intimidate and threaten him.

“Two names were unredacted: President Trump’s and mine,” says Kash Patel. “The only thing they cared about was putting my name on blast again, after knowing that I had been threatened before because of their careless conduct on the Jan. 6 committee for doing the same exact thing.”

FBI agent Timothy Thibault recently announced he will “retire.” According to Kash Patel, Thibault is trying to avoid being investigated and prosecuted for his role in Russiagate and covering up the Hunter Biden laptop story.

“Mr. Thibault was on a trip to Prague with Bruce and Nellie Ohr as an agent for the FBI in early 2016, when we said the Russiagate investigation was getting going … In government, there are no coincidences,” says Kash Patel.

What is the real reason behind the DOJ’s opposition to appointing a special master to review and verify the Mar-a-Lago raid process? Were the seized Mar-a-Lago documents recently released to the public actually a staged FBI photo-op to incriminate former President Donald Trump?

“It’s like going into a murder scene and finding the gun in the garbage can and one of the murder suspects on the ground, and taking the gun and putting it in his hand and taking a photo with him pointing it at the person that’s dead … It’s literally ‘investigatory 101,’’ says Kash Patel.

* Click the “Save” button below the video to access it later on “My List.”


Kash Patel:

Hey, everybody. And welcome back to Kash’s Corner. Jan, what do we have in store today?

Jan Jekielek:

Well, the Mar-a-Lago raid and everything around it seemed to be something that just can’t get out of the news cycle. So, I think we were going to have to cover these things. Frankly, this affidavit was released at the end of last week. We were surprised to discover your name unredacted there. We got to talk about that.

We have Agent Thibault. I never know how to pronounce his name properly. But Thibault has now left the FBI and we know that he’s been involved in all sorts of things over the last years. We’re going to talk about that.

And finally, the DOJ expressly has a filing opposing this appointment of the special master. And a lot of people still don’t understand what that actually means. So, we should get into that and I think probably a few other things too.

Mr. Patel:

Yes. There’s a couple other things like the DOJ telling people not to go talk to Congress. But we’ll get into all that.

Mr. Jekielek:

Absolutely. So, let’s start just with this unredacted name amidst the whole flurry of redaction. So first of all, what actually is the impact of that?

Mr. Patel:

Yes. And I think it’s worth noting for our audience. We tape our show and we release it on Friday night, but we tape it beforehand, usually two days prior. So, that’s why if people are wondering why didn’t we talk about it that Friday night. It was literally breaking news right before the airtime of our show. And so, happy to speak about it today.

And I really haven’t talked about it in detail in many places. But what happened was after the Jan 6th committee issued their subpoena, the first subpoena they issued was against me and a couple other people.  They didn’t call me. They didn’t ask me to come in, which I would have done. I’ve said that publicly, “It’s your duty to go in and testify before Congress about matters of consequence for the American people like Jan 6,” because I was Chief of Staff of the DoD. But they wanted the political media hit.

And they wanted me to get lawyers and spend money. And that’s the routine as putting it politely. I think it’s an evil operation that they’re running. So, I got subpoenaed from them in December of 2021 if I have the date right. So, we’re at what? Nine, 10 months-ish out?

Immediately after that subpoena, I received some of the most vile, disgusting hate mail I’ve ever received, to include death threats, which we sent to the FBI who you would think would respond to that appropriately. I informed the January 6th committee of those death threats, submitted into evidence. They could not care less. They could not be bothered with the fact that they jeopardized my safety or my families.

And so we and my counsel, not me directly, stayed on it every month. What happened? You have verifiable credible evidence that you can electronically trace. And me and my counsel, being former federal prosecutors, know how this works and worked with the agents, too, reverse-trace people’s phone numbers and emails and what we call selector information and find them. And we used it to find them in the middle of deserts overseas.

So, finding them in America is not a big lift. Nothing, no response. Nothing, no response. Then on Friday of last week, the same day, the DOJ and FBI unredacted my name from the most infamous search warrant in  U.S. history. The FBI informs my counsel that they have run into a dead end as it relates to the death threats that were made to me. Not that they weren’t credible, not that they couldn’t find it, they just said they couldn’t expend any more resources on it which I know and my counsel knows as a federal prosecutor, they chose to do just enough to report on that Friday before the un-redacting of my name so they can publicly say we tried, but didn’t use everything in their arsenal to go do it.

They could have used further grand jury subpoenas. They could have used subpoena power. They could have agents on the ground. And I’m not going to say where this individual was located or in what area because then they’ll say I’m jeopardizing an ongoing investigation. But as I’ve said before, Jan, there are no coincidences in government.

Do you really believe this FBI had a nine-plus-month investigation into someone who threatened my life on the same day that DOJ and FBI got together and decided to unredact my name and not think of it knowing there’s ongoing threats against me? For me personally, I think that should be a matter that Congress investigates.

The DOJ and FBI are supposed to protect people’s identities and know when they put people’s information out on blast especially on something that is literally the most scrutinized and publicized investigation in the last, what, 50 years if not longer involving President Trump. Two names were unredacted, President Trump’s and mine.

And for anyone that doesn’t think they did it intentionally and without wanton disregard for my safety, they could have just covered up my name because they covered up the next what six or seven pages almost entirely after my name. So, it’s not like there was something of consequence to that. The only thing they cared about was putting my name on blast again after knowing that I’d been threatened before because of their careless conduct on the January 6th committee for doing the same exact thing.

And what happened? The hate mail started coming in right away again. The threats started coming in. The racist comments started coming in. And, of course, we’ve documented that. And we’ve I think informed the FBI or at least are in the process of doing it. I don’t talk to them directly. The lawyers do. They knew exactly what they were doing. They wanted to threaten me, have me threatened again.

And anybody over there that says it to the contrary or we didn’t know or it was a coincidence is flat out lying. There is no value in my name being revealed in that search warrant. It adds zero value informing the public of what that affidavit was about. And you know whose names weren’t unredacted? The FBI agents that signed the affidavit, those that were involved in it. They are so worried about their safety and their security and rightfully so left those names redacted along with so many others.

Look at John Durham’s investigations for a stark example. Even though we are, through our investigations, able to ascertain some of the identities involved, John Durham has not once issued the identity of anyone in his pleadings. He used ambiguous terminology, witness one or chief investigator two or media reporter three to protect the identity of those people. That’s what the DOJ and FBI guidelines demand.

So, what I want to know is why the FBI and DOJ violated the very rules I abided by when I was a federal prosecutor and put my name out there. And if that were enough, we have media outlets that they are leaking to that are giving out literally my personal cell phone number and my personal email and thinking that that’s acceptable. So, we’ll be taking legal action against all of it in the time to come here while we get our ducks in a row. But as I said on Truth Social, the government gangsters are now on notice.

Mr. Jekielek:

Andrew Weissmann and Peter Strzok both in tweets have advised you to get a good lawyer. What do you make of that?

Mr. Patel:

Peter Strzok and Andrew Weissmann. You could not have picked two more biased individuals to make such a comment. Peter Strzok, the corrupt criminal FBI agent who lied about launching the Russiagate conspiracy, who lied to a federal court to unlawfully obtain a surveillance warrant, who allowed his mistress to doctor information during a Russiagate investigation that the FBI was supposedly running squarely and then got together with her and showed great animus and all the text messages we’ve revealed as a result of our investigation.

This guy who got fired as a result of my investigation that I ran with Devin Nunes in Russiagate comes in on full blast and says, “Kash Patel needs to get a lawyer.” This is exactly what the FBI and DOJ and the corrupt criminals running those two organizations at the top wanted. That’s the effect they wanted. They want these guys to go on TV. They want to scare, not just threaten, actually threaten my safety but get their fake news headlines so they can put me on blast. And in that sense, they succeeded.

And Andrew Weissmann, he’s just ticked off because he’s the guy that Mueller hired to prove what? Collusion that never existed. As a result of my investigation, the DOJ IG report and many congressional investigations, Mueller’s investigation and Weissman’s was ended before it ever got off the ground as it relates to Trump-Russia collusion. It’s the one thing Weissmann wanted to hang his hat on.

This is also the guy that put out political statements when he was supposed to be a square federal prosecutor. And I remind the audience, no senior level prosecutor has been reversed in terms of trial convictions of high-profile cases than Andrew Weissmann, not one person. He is the most reverse prosecutor in modern DOJ history with cases like Enron saying the appeals courts are telling DOJ and him, “You brought these cases with bias and unlawfully and improperly and didn’t use the evidence.” These are the two guys that  have to go out on mainstream media and tell me that I need to get a lawyer.

Mr. Jekielek:

I saw a very interesting post by Hans Mahncke, of course, one of our regular columnists and hosts. Hans is basically talking about Agent Thibault. And this is … I think we want to dig into that a little bit. I’m going to want to find out when you first heard about him, for example. But let me read this since we’re talking about redactions. He says, “FBI concealed Thibault’s name due to ‘privacy.’ Again and again, the real purpose of these redactions is to cover up important facts, in this case, the fact that Thibault traveled to Prague with Bruce and Nellie Ohr just as Trump was becoming the GOP nominee.”

So, of course, Hans is talking about something that happened way back in 2016. It might seem to counteract what you’re talking about, about redacting agents’ names and so forth. Hans is saying basically that the only reason these redactions exist is basically to hide the facts.

Mr. Patel:

We are both right. So, what Hans is saying through his great reporting is that what we said improved during Russiagate. The FBI and DOJ, the guys Strzok and company and McCabe and all these folks spent years redacting and withholding information to the public that exposes their corruption. And by law, that is one thing you can never use a redaction for. The courts have spoken unequivocally to that.

But what you’re supposed to use redactions for, which is what I said earlier, is to actually protect people who are doing their jobs following the law and doing the law enforcement roles the proper way. And also innocent civilians that come in and out during these investigations, their names and roles should always be redacted.

But what Hans is referring to is I think we need to unpack it a little bit and just give our audience a refresher course other than that. Bruce and Nellie Ohr, just think about this, Bruce Ohr, the former associate deputy attorney general at the Department of Justice, one of the senior most positions that reports directly to the number two at DOJ was proven by our investigation to be what? A source, a cutout for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. While a federal prosecutor was a source for Christopher Steele after he got canned so that the FBI could get bad intel from Christopher Steele into the Crossfire Hurricane investigation which they continued into Trump.

This is the individual along with Bruce Ohr’s wife who we showed when we subpoenaed the bank records of Fusion GPS, was on the payroll of Fusion GPS which is getting paid by Hillary and the DNC. Bruce and Nelly Ohr are married. They were working on this together. Bruce Ohr is the individual that introduced Christopher Steele to the FBI because of his years’ long relationship with Christopher Steele and said, “Hey, this guy might have information about this Trump-Russia collusion narrative. You agents who I’ve worked with in the past need to meet him.”

Now, thanks to Hans’ great reporting, what do we find out? That Mr. Thibault was on a trip to Prague with Bruce and Nellie Ohr as an agent for the FBI in early 2016 when we said the Russiagate investigation was getting going. That as I have just told you, Jan, in government, there are no coincidences. How is it that he is on this trip overseas to a country and location that was brought up specifically in Christopher Steele’s dossier to falsely dirty up Donald Trump and Russian conspiracies.

And what’s even more stunning is, as Devin and I have said, we got out a lot of the corruption but we didn’t get out all the documents and all the names we wanted. Why? Because as Hans reported, so much of it was redacted and withheld from the American public. We didn’t come across names like Thibault and this guy Atton and all the other individuals that John Durham has listed are basically under investigation. Heidi for another, the guy that’s working at the FBI.

Why? Because these guys’ names were redacted not for the protection of their safety but to hide government corruption. And so, he’s onto something and that’s a big story. And that’s a big part of the reason why I’ve been saying all roads lead back to Russiagate. These guys can put out statements saying they didn’t have involvement in X, Y or Z. But remember, their superiors, their partners in crime, Peter Strzok, Andy McCabe, James Comey, these are the same guys that covered the redactions to withhold their unlawful activities during Russiagate.

And now, we have a track record that’s been proven to show their corruption and Hans Mahncke is on the trail I think again.

Mr. Jekielek:

So, this is pretty fascinating in the context. And just in case anyone on the show isn’t aware that Agent Thibault according to the statement that he gave recently, he left the FBI on August 26th, so just recently.

Mr. Patel:

So, let’s review what’s been publicly reported about his departure and compare it to those who are similarly situated in recent years. He’s saying he left government on his own volition and retired early. Well, that reminds me of the time that as a result of our DOJ investigation, a dozen or so people left the DOJ and FBI and retired early.

Do you think when Peter Strzok was walked out of the building and he said he retired he wasn’t running away from his corruption which we exposed? How about Andy McCabe? How about James Comey? What about Lisa Page? What about the others? He is taking a page out of his mentor’s playbook and leaving so he can avoid being further questioned and interrogated about his corruption and running away from it rather than running toward it. And I think he’s basically portraying it as a fiction that he has chosen to voluntarily retire.

And by the way as a side note, no agent in the FBI who’s been there for 30 years doesn’t get a proper sendoff, doesn’t get a goodbye party, doesn’t bring his colleagues together. I know. I’ve been to tons of them. As they should, those that have worked credibly and honorably should be honored on their way out for their decades’ long service. So, I don’t buy that for a second.

And here’s the biggest kicker and I think our audience knows this, Jan. If you are not employed by the federal government, you are out of reach of the inspector general. So, the DOJ inspector general who is looking into this no longer has a mandate over Thibault. He’s gone. He’s supposedly a private citizen. So, Thibault’s cooperation with this investigation is entirely voluntary now.

And his attorneys came out and put out a statement saying, “We look forward to a fair and complete review of this matter to show this client is innocent.” You know whose attorney said the same thing? Strzok, McCabe, Comey’s, Page’s and so many others. The same exact thing, the same exact methodology to try and get the fake news media to come in and put out a massive disinformation campaign to squash their corruption and say, “Look left,” and when instead we should be looking right.

Mr. Jekielek:

So, before we continue, let’s just recap quickly what we know about Thibault because as you said, his name was redacted. And frankly, you and I only learned about him relatively recently.

Mr. Patel:

Yes. And we learned about his trip with the people who helped propagate and stand up the Russia hoax falsely to Prague in 2016. What else is there? And his lawyers aren’t coming out and saying the one thing that completely innocent partners would say, that he had zero involvement in Russiagate, that he had zero involvement in the Hunter Biden laptop story, that he had zero involvement in the Mar-a-Lago raid investigation. That’s not what they’re saying.

Mr. Jekielek:

Let me actually read what he says. He says, “To further set the record straight, Mr. Thibault was not involved in the search at Mar-a-Lago, either in its planning or its execution. And Mr. Thibault did not supervise the investigation of Hunter Biden, which confirmed by the FBI director on August 4, 2022, is being handled by the Baltimore Field Office. In particular, Mr. Thibault was not involved in any decisions related to any laptop that may be at issue in that investigation. And he did not seek to close the investigation.”

Mr. Patel:

So, let’s say it goes in reverse order real quick. So, he’s saying he’s not a supervisor in the Hunter Biden laptop investigation. Okay. Do you know how many agents work on that level of a counterintelligence investigation? There aren’t many that have the experience at the CI level to work that, A. So, that’s a dodge.

Then they’re saying he didn’t work to end it. I don’t even know what he means by that. Is it over? That would be news to both me and you and probably America that the Hunter Biden laptop investigation is over. And then, let’s go back to the Mar-a-Lago raid. They’re saying he didn’t take part in the search. So what? Search agents are generally different than the guys that are running quarterbacking the operation investigation from headquarters. It’s a different skillset. And as we know now, there’s 30 guys down there at Mar-a-Lago doing this search.

That’s all they’re saying. They’re not saying he wasn’t a part of the write-up of the search warrant or the work in the affidavit. They’re not saying he doesn’t have FBI 302s that he signed or that he was a supervisor for and his agent signed under him to dig up this information. They’re not saying any of that. Because what we know now is that he was involved and now they’re trying to run away from that because … And here’s what I’ve seen in the press lately and based on this reporting, I think I agree with it.

If it’s shown that Thibault and which I believe was directly tied to the Mar-a-Lago raid, the FBI and DOJ have yet again launched another politically-motivated investigation into Donald Trump based on false premises from an agent who has gone out and excoriated Trump on social media calling him some pretty nasty things, just like Peter Strzok did.

What they don’t want, they the FBI and DOJ don’t want to have happen again is for somebody, Congress or otherwise, to expose their corruption for doing the exact same thing they got caught doing in Russiagate and maybe in the Hunter Biden laptop, and now it looks like in the Mar-a-Lago raid. So, this is another deflection I think from a central target of what should be an actual investigation into more corruption at the FBI and DOJ.

And by the way, I don’t know if you’ve read the headlines lately, but many FBI agents have now come out and called for Chris Wray’s resignation.

Mr. Jekielek:

It also makes me think of right now, basically, Attorney General Merrick Garland essentially saying that DOJ officials should be reducing their communication with Congress from what I understand.

Mr. Patel:

I get that every day. Prosecutors aren’t supposed to talk to Congress, supposed to work through normal channels and legislative affairs, offices and communicate. That’s appropriate. I understand that. But what he’s saying by putting out this message is he’s saying, “Don’t go out and be whistleblowers.”

There’s a federal statute on the books that says, it’s called the Whistleblower Protection Act for agencies and departments within the United States government, “Anyone employed by the United States government can go into Congress and see any member of Congress or walk into any committee and say, ‘I am a witness to fraud, waste, and abuse. Do I meet the requirements for whistleblower protection or can I just give you information so that you can launch a congressional oversight investigation or the like?'”

That is an enviable right of every single U.S. government employee. And for Merrick Garland to come in as the number one law enforcement officer and throw cold water on that is something that everybody, Democrat and Republican, should be complaining about because unfortunately, there is fraud, waste and abuse in the U.S. government and it continues to this day.

And as we’ve seen recently by the reporting of Jim Jordan and Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, dozens of FBI whistleblowers have come forward to get us the information that we are now seeing. And it’s again not a coincidence in government that as this story is breaking, as the DOJ and FBI’s credibility is being destroyed by their own corrupt actions and it’s being revealed to the public, the attorney general comes in and says, “Don’t do that.” And I’m paraphrasing. But I think that has an extremely chilling effect.

And what will the attorney general say? He will say, “Well, I never said, ‘Specifically, don’t go be a whistleblower.'” What’s the need for putting out a statement like that? Prosecutors of the DOJ are trained employees and they know what the chain of command is, what rules to follow. But they also know that, I hope they know that and I hope this is the statement Merrick Garland should have put out and Chris Wray should have put out the same statement, “If you’re aware of any fraud, waste or abuse or corruption at the FBI, immediately report it, not just to us but to our congressional oversight committees who fund and oversee our agencies.”

Mr. Jekielek:

So, let’s jump to this DOJ filing on the special master. And actually, why don’t we do this? First of all, the DOJ opposes basically establishing a special master. But what does that actually mean?

Mr. Patel:

Yes. So, a special master just quickly review, in a lot of cases, where there’s extensive documents and sense of evidence. The prosecutor in defense goes into the court and says, “Hey, somebody needs to sift through all this stuff and see what’s applicable to us,” is the long and short of it. If there were ever a need for a special master, you would think it would be when the former president of the United States is a target of the Department of Justice.

And for the DOJ to come out and say, this DOJ and this FBI to come out and say, “After having being caught being corrupt on multiple investigations and personnel tied to not just this investigation but one’s involving the same target, President Trump, be it Russiagiate and otherwise, for them to say nothing to see here because we have our own taint team or our own team that’s going to act as the special master would. And we have set aside the documents that we think are executive privilege and attorney-client privilege.”

No good, not good enough in this instance. Basically, what is wrong with having a neutral and detached arbiter review these documents and then tell the federal judge who would appoint the special master who I believe last week said she was inclined to do so but has not yet made a decision, allowing that process to proceed. It’s time-consuming and it takes intense scrutiny to get it right. Maybe that’s the reason DOJ opposes it or maybe once again, are they hiding more of their corruption by saying, “We get to act as the judge, the jury, the referee and the executioner in this case.”

I think if there were ever a case, as I said, if a former president who might be the next presumptive nominee of the Republican Party to be present again is a target, why wouldn’t you take every precaution to get it right? And a special master seems to be a fair and neutral person to decide over the hotly contested issues of attorney-client privilege, presidential-executive privilege, and what documents fall under that.

Not just that, are there documents and things the FBI sees that were outside the parameters of the search warrant? What’s wrong with having someone who isn’t at the DOJ and FBI who isn’t involved with these people that keep getting fired or terminated or resigned or more corruption is shown through oversight or whistleblowers. What’s wrong with having someone who has just completely at of distance from this, review the material and say, “Hey judge, I think this is what you can use and this is what you can’t use.”

Mr. Jekielek:

Let me read a few things from Epoch Times reporting on this. “First of all, the DOJ’s position is, the special master is unnecessary because any materials that might be subject to attorney-client privilege have already been separated by the government’s filter team.” What do you think about that?

Mr. Patel:

Oh yeah. So, they’re basically telling the judge, “We did the work already.” Whether they did the work already, in this again type of landscape, in this atmosphere, when it’s so charged and so hotly contested, what is the DOJ’s problem and the FBI’s problem with having a special master look at it? What do they have to lose? Maybe the special master agrees with them and says, “Hey, you guys got it right.”

They’re worried about the special master coming in and saying, “You guys got it wrong.” And then, what does that do? Ignites another firestorm to say more corruption, more biased conduct, more politically-motivated actions by the FBI and DOJ who are investigating Donald Trump yet again. 

And that brings us back full circle to this whole Thibault thing and this raid on Mar-a-Lago. Do we have definitive proof now that another investigation into Donald Trump was launched by politically-motivated actors who violated the DOJ and FBI regulations, maybe the rule of law and conducted themselves improperly just to get another investigation launched?

These are questions the American people are owed the answers for. If it was a righteous investigation, why wouldn’t the FBI and DOJ support a verification process to do so? One in which they take part routinely in slews of other cases across America with special master appointments; it happens all the time.

So, it gives me pause in this instance when they come out so quickly and so fervently against a special master because they claim they have a team in place that can do that work arbitrarily. I don’t buy it.

Mr. Jekielek:

So, let me read something directly from their response here. Okay? So, they’re basically saying that they had evidence that “government records were likely concealed and removed from the storage room.” This is of course in Mar-a-Lago. And that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation. What do you think about that? This is in the response to the special master.

Mr. Patel:

That almost makes the case for the special master. I don’t know what those documents are. But as you know and as we’ll put up for the audience to see, the FBI and DOJ staged their photo op with cover sheets that say material is classified or not. And the cover sheets, just so we’re clear, government agencies use those all the time. The cover sheets themselves are not classified even when the cover sheet says top secret. It’s a cover sheet. It’s supposed to be on top of documents that are classified.

And what the president has publicly contended is that those documents at Mar-a-Lago were already declassified by him as the president. We’ve extensively covered that in other episodes. So, why the photo op? Why the staging opportunity? And why the opposition to the special master? He could come in or she could come in and look at that and say, “Oh yeah, well actually, these documents aren’t classified. So, why were you putting a staged photo on blast for the world to see?”

And let me analogize this to my days as a former federal prosecutor, national security prosecutor. When we went into homes and warehouses and garages and places of work executing a search warrant, we took photographs of things as they were found. Because once you move them, you interfere with the chain of custody and you interfere with the efficacy of their evidentiary value.

It’s like going into a murder scene and finding the gun in the garbage can. And one of the murder suspects on the ground and taking the gun and putting it in his hand and taking a photo with him, pointing it at the person that’s dead. You’re not supposed to do that. It’s literally investigatory 101.

I know the media is hopping on and saying, “Oh my God, look at this.” That’s what the DOJ and FBI wanted. But again, this biased DOJ and FBI violated the basic rules of executing a search warrant and at the 11th hour blast out this photo. And as I think somebody in the media said, it’s unrelated to the very charges that they stood up in the affidavit in the first place. But who could help us get to the bottom of all that? A special master.

Mr. Jekielek:

Right. And we’re referring, of course, to Byron York’s reporting, a fascinating thread actually, where he looks at how the documents that were seized were described as being found in the state in which they were found. And this photo that was shown is kind of nothing like the way that they’re described. So we know that this is something different like you were just describing. And frankly, to me, it smacks of  disinformation of sorts.

Mr. Patel:

We talk about it a lot. The efforts that corrupt bureaucrats and political operatives and their partners in the media go to, to execute disinformation campaigns. And this to me smacks of a disinformation campaign because it’s shock and awe value. People are going to see it not knowing anything about it and say, “Oh my God, look at that,” because they don’t have the understanding nor should they really about how documents are produced and what are cover sheets and what is classified, what’s not presidential authority to be classified, etcetera.

But they knew that that would be the media effect. They being the folks at DOJ and FBI. Mind you, some of the people that are working on this are the very people who are commenting on it like Strzok and all those folks and McCabe and Comey and then these guys like Atton and Heidi and now Thibault who are passing around comments are the same ones that said, “We never leaked to the media.” But we caught them leaking to the media weekly, if not daily, during Russiagate to put out effective disinformation campaigns to falsely say, “Donald Trump is a Russian asset,” to personally attack people like Devin and myself and jeopardize our safety and threaten our security then they could care less about any of that.

They say they want to take the high road but they have proven themselves over and over and over again to take the road that leads to the degradation of our faith in the FBI and DOJ. And I think this is just another step in that direction.

Mr. Jekielek:

So, Kash, I guess, it’s time for our shout-out.

Mr. Patel:

Yes, Jan. This week’s shout-out was one I should have given last week. The show this week is going to be dedicated just past the one year anniversary of the 13 soldiers that were killed in Afghanistan. Our shout-out is to them, their families, their friends. You’re in our thoughts and prayers. And I know everybody that watches Kash’s Corner and Epoch Times and Epoch TV is a strong supporter in this shout-out. And we pray for you and we wish you guys well and we will see you next week on Kash’s Corner.

This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.

Follow EpochTV on social media:

Truth Social:


Read More
Related Videos