Update from Catherine Herridge:

TOP LINE: The animus is personal.   

Covering last week’s confirmation hearing for Kash Patel, nominated by President Trump to lead the FBI, was a significant test for many reporters who fear and loathe the longtime Trump aide.  

Kash Patel’s investigative work undercut the mainstream media narrative about Russia Gate as well as the event timeline leading up to January 6. 

As a result, a fair, fact driven assessment of Patel’s performance may be hard to come by.

DEEP DIVE:

I speak from experience. 

In 2018, I was among the first reporters to obtain the so-called Nunes memo which was spearheaded by then republican chairman of the House intelligence committee Devin Nunes.  The four page memo was drafted by Patel.

The declassified document laid bare significant defects in the FBI and Justice Department surveillance warrant for Carter Page, a Trump campaign aide during the 2016 election.  Those defects were later confirmed and amplified in the 2019 DOJ Inspector General Horowitz report. 

To simplify, the most senior FBI and Justice Department officials wrongly relied on the Steele Dossier, opposition research largely funded by the Clinton campaign, as well as flawed sub-sources to secure the Page surveillance warrants.  Surveilling Page was a window into the communications of the broader Trump campaign which was the ultimate target.

Applications to the highly secretive FISA court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) also took the unusual step of citing news media reports to strengthen the case for multiple surveillance warrants.  A former FBI agent who has personally drafted surveillance warrants told me that in their decades long career, they had never seen a FISA application rely on media reporting.

That matters because Patel’s investigation revealed evidence of “circular reporting.”  Here’s how it works: an FBI or other government official leaks information to a reporter, who then publishes the information, and it then comes full circle when the FBI cites the same reporter’s work as evidence to back up their case.

(Attached FISA application)

Pulling back the curtain on circular reporting undercuts the credibility of some journalists who raised their profiles through Russia Gate “scoops” from anonymous ‘law enforcement officials’ or ‘sources familiar with the matter.’

For other journalists, Patel’s second strike was his first hand account of requests for DoD support prior to January 6, specifically National Guard troops. One of the big moments at the confirmation hearing came when GOP Senator Ted Cruz pinned down Patel on the alleged actions of then-House Speaker Pelosi.

In February 2021, I obtained the internal DoD timeline for security requests from Washington D.C.’s mayor, Capitol Hill police and others.    The timeline states that before January 6 “DoD confirmed with U.S Capitol Police (USCP) there is no request for DoD support" and the DC Mayor requested limited Guard forces for "Traffic Control Points" and "Metro Station support."

I also know from personal experience that to stray from the mainstream January 6 narrative was like touching a third rail.  Because I was asking legitimate and basic questions about the US Attorney's strategy, and showed curiosity about the timeline, I felt a target on my back.

I also reported on internal law enforcement records about weapons brought to the Capitol on January 6 and the violent fallout. Those reports drew no scrutiny among my CBS News colleagues.

You may be hard pressed to find stories about Patel’s confirmation that don’t include “controversial choice” or “grilling.”  That because all roads lead back to Patel’s memos, and the DoD January 6 timeline.

To borrow a phrase, buckle up, because the new Trump-appointed CIA Director John Ratcliffe is positioned to declassify more Russia Gate records as well as CIA related correspondence about the Hunter Biden laptop.

https://x.com/realaf_patriot/status/1886429378759766043?s=46