The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) revoked the security clearances of two whistleblowers ahead of their Congressional testimony regarding alleged abuses within the agency, the acting assistant director of the FBI revealed to the subcommittee chairman, Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan.
Christopher Dunham responded to a subpoena from the Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government regarding the revoked clearances of former FBI agents and whistleblowers, claiming the two violated multiple rules and guidelines leading to the loss of their clearances, The Washington Post
reported. Friend and Allen have maintained that the loss of their clearances was an act of retaliation for speaking out, in part, over the FBI’s investigation into the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.
Dunham claimed that Friend’s security clearance was revoked in September 2022 after an investigation concluded there were “security concerns” related to the agent’s conduct. Jennifer Moore, the FBI’s executive assistant director of human resources, reported the security concerns at the time in a letter obtained by The Washington Post.
“The security concerns stem from your refusal to execute a court-ordered, arrest warrant, unauthorized download of sensitive FBI information, failure to participate in a Security Awareness Briefing, unauthorized dissemination of sensitive FBI information, unauthorized recording of executive management, unsanctioned interviews with the media, and lack of candor during an interview with the Security Division,” Moore wrote, according to The Washington Post.
Dunham further claimed that Friend’s clearance was revoked because he “espoused alternative theories about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol” and “downloaded documents from FBI computer systems to an unauthorized removable flash drive,” The Washington Post reported. “The FBI then required Mr. Friend to attend a Security Awareness Briefing (SAB) regarding his actions, but he refused to do so.”
As for Allen, his security clearance was revoked “due to security concerns regarding his personal conduct and his “allegiance to the United States,” according to Dunham’s letter to Jordan, cited by the outlet. According to Dunham, Allen claimed “he did not find any information” that a Jan. 6 suspect had engaged in criminal activity. When the case was re-opened by another agent, however,it was found that publicly available information refuted Allen’s claim.
“Investigative activity established that this subject physically assaulted U.S. Capitol Police officers on January 6, 2021,” Dunham wrote of the Jan. 6 suspect, adding that Allen expressed “sympathy for persons or organizations that advocate, threaten or use force of violence … in an effort to prevent federal government personnel from performing their official duties,” the Washington Post reported.
Earlier this week, John Durham’s
report regarding the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation revealed that the agency used “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence” as a basis of their investigation of the 2016 Trump campaign. In short,
Durham argued an investigation
should have never been launched against the former president and further argued its decision to do so caused “severe repetitional harm” to the agency.
“This is a last minute Hail Mary from the FBI in a desperate attempt to salvage their reputation after John Durham illuminated their election interference and before brave whistleblowers testify about the agency’s politicized behavior and retaliation against anyone who dares speak out,” Russell Dye, a spokesperson for Jordan, told The Washington Post of Dunham’s letter.
(RELATED: REPORT: DOJ Removes Investigative Team From Hunter Biden Probe, Attorneys Say) Agents who have spoken out against the FBI’s alleged politically motivated activity have testified the FBI sought to rid the bureau of “critical thinkers who challenged conventional wisdom.” They further claim that cash bonuses were distributed to local field offices as “perverse incentives for the FBI to utilize law-enforcement tools and resources where they may not be needed or appropriate in order for FBI leadership to benefit financially,” The Washington Post reported.
