The FBI’s November 2021 predawn raid on Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe’s home began as a “sensitive investigative matter” that required approval from high-level bureau officials, according to a purported whistleblower.
Project Veritas published its interview of the anonymous alleged whistleblower on May 11, describing him as someone “still on payroll with the bureau” and with several years of experience as a special agent. The whistleblower provided Project Veritas with a file, which he says summarizes the FBI’s investigation into the media organization.
With critics questioning why the FBI was involved in an investigation into property theft—in this case, a possible copy of a diary belonging to Ashley Biden, President Joe Biden’s daughter—the whistleblower’s file suggests that the bureau may have been looking into possible election crimes. According to the whistleblower, the file’s number, “56D,” refers to federal election crimes.The whistleblower said he didn’t know why the theft of a diary would qualify for such a classification.
“This document does not answer that,” he told O’Keefe in the May 11 interview. “I think that’s a question a lot of people within the bureau would probably also be curious to know.”
The whistleblower’s file also classified the FBI’s probe into Project Veritas as a sensitive investigative matter [SIM], which is a designation for sensitive institutions such as media, churches, elected officials, and other government agencies.
The whistleblower explained the multiple layers of bureaucracy that an agent must go through to launch a SIM.
“There’s supposed to be a higher level of supervision, done in conjunction with the chief division counsel of that field office, who’s going to be the office’s top internal lawyer,” he said.
In this case, the file states that the SIM was launched on Oct. 29, 2020—the same day Ashley Biden’s attorney responded to Project Veritas’s request for comment with the following email statement: “This is insane. We should send to [prosecutors at the Southern District of New York].”
O’Keefe questioned the whistleblower about the timing of the investigation. The whistleblower said the FBI was likely considering the investigation prior to Oct. 29, 2020.
“A case opening can be done in a morning; there’s no question about that. But generally speaking, if you’re going to do something like a SIM, it’s been talked about for a little while. What we’re seeing on the date that says the opening was Oct. 29—that tells us when a full investigation was initiated. But that doesn’t mean that there wasn’t a … preliminary investigation,” he said.
“What I do know is that if it happened in a day, it’s likely something that was discussed prior. If you have an interest in opening a case based on a SIM, it has to be discussed. It has to be signed off on.”
In March, the Washington Times released the results of a scathing internal FBI audit, which found that special agents broke their own rules more than twice per reviewed case when investigating sensitive institutions. The audit reviewed 353 cases involving sensitive investigative matters, finding rules broken 747 times from Jan. 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019.
Republicans have called for congressional hearings over the audit results.
“It has been nearly two weeks since this information was revealed, and the FBI has thus far declined to comment or provide additional transparency,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) wrote in a March 31 letter to the FBI. “I believe the Senate would benefit from hearing directly from Inspector General [Michael] Horowitz, FBI Director [Christopher] Wray, as well as any division directors with knowledge of the audit or the errors detailed in it.”
Previous reporting from The Epoch Times has detailed Utah attorney Jesse Trentadue’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the FBI for records about informants used in sensitive institutions. A federal judge dismissed Trentadue’s lawsuit in 2015, ruling that the FBI could exercise FOIA’s national security exemptions to withhold records about the bureau’s sensitive informants.
The FBI did not respond to emails seeking comment.
