FBI’s Privacy Act breach exposed in report on undermining Trump’s appointments.

FBI Bias in Background‍ Investigations of Trump ⁣Nominees Revealed‌ in Report

The FBI’s background investigations ⁢into President Donald Trump’s ⁤nominees, to fill various posts during his administration⁤ were biased ⁣and benefited people who were “politically opposed” to him ​revealed a recent report‍ by nonprofit advocacy‍ America First Legal (AFL).

“The federal background investigation ⁣(BI) process is broken,” stated the Sept. 14 AFL report (pdf). “During ‌the Trump Administration, ⁢candidates for presidential appointments ⁤were subject to a BI‌ process that involved the ⁢FBI’s ⁤repeated, agency-wide violations of the Privacy Act ‌and the Paperwork ⁣Reduction Act, among other laws.”​ It alleges that⁢ certain agents in D.C. tanked President Trump’s potential appointees through selective reporting ‍of⁤ unsubstantiated, derogatory‍ information.

The report⁣ “reveals procedural infirmities⁤ that biased the⁤ FBI BI process in ways that benefited those politically opposed to former President Trump.”

Related ⁤Stories

• Trump ‌Pledges Task Force to Investigate‌ Alleged Persecution of Political⁣ Prisoners ⁢by Biden Administration
  9/16/2023
• Florida GOP⁢ Removes Loyalty⁤ Oath Primary⁤ Condition Which Trump Opposed
  9/15/2023

During the Trump administration, the FBI provided files directly to the ‍Senate without filtering unsubstantiated allegations‍ or determining which information was relevant and which was not, said ‌the⁤ report. The White House then disclosed such⁢ unedited accounts of potential nominees to the relevant Senate committees.

The report gave the example of Justice Brett Kavanaugh to describe⁣ how the “broken” background‌ investigation process of ​the FBI was used to ‌smear him. Justice Kavanaugh was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Trump.

“In 2018, due to concerns that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh may have committed inappropriate activities when he was a minor, ⁣the Senate Judiciary Committee sought—and the⁣ White House complied with—a‍ supplemental FBI investigation into the allegations,” it said (pdf).

“After Justice Kavanaugh was confirmed with no findings of wrongdoing, Senate Democrats determined that ​the FBI supplemental investigation⁣ was ‘fake’ and that ‘proper oversight’ must be made into⁤ how thoroughly the FBI investigated Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing.”

The fact that the ⁣background ‍investigation processes can be steered by either the White House or the Senate is “evidence that ⁤it ‌is subject to significant ‍bias,”‌ the report said.

“Several of President Trump’s ⁢nominees, including Representative Darrell Issa, Representative Ronny Jackson, Judge Sul Ozerden, Jeffrey Byard, and William Bryan ⁢were denied confirmations on the basis of FBI BI issues.”

Biden Compromises Nominee ‍Protections

The Department‌ of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy (OLP) coordinates‌ with the FBI in matters related to background investigations on appointees to law enforcement and the courts.⁣ Following the Clinton‍ administration’s ​“politicization‍ of privacy ‌to​ spy on its political enemies,” the OLP established rules to prevent such issues​ from⁤ happening again, the ​report said.

But under the Biden administration, “those protections have been⁢ rescinded.” The OLP revoked such regulations that were “designed to protect individuals subject to the BI process.”

The ⁢Privacy Act of​ 1974 establishes‌ a code of⁤ practices⁤ governing the collection and dissemination of information of individuals ​by federal agencies.

AFL notes ⁣that several requirements of the Privacy ⁤Act ⁤were not ⁣enforced by the‍ FBI to protect judicial nominees ​during background investigations.

For‌ instance, new regulations by​ the⁣ Biden administration⁢ allowed the White House to direct the FBI’s ⁣investigation of any potential candidates ‍as the agency was no longer required to obtain ​written consent of ⁣the​ nominees. Moreover, the White House and the FBI can now disclose such background investigations ⁤outside of the Executive Branch without any notice.

“The will of the American people is thwarted when the deep state interferes‍ with‌ the nominations⁢ process established in the Constitution and laws‌ of the United States,” said ⁢Gene ‌Hamilton, AFL vice president and general counsel.

“The President deserves to have the Senate give proper advice and consent to his nominees, but the manner in which the background investigation⁢ process has worked has deprived the President–and in turn, the ‌American people–of that right. This report⁣ highlights the need for reform and how gamesmanship behind the scenes can interfere with our constitutional order.”

The Epoch Times has reached⁤ out to the ​FBI for ‍comment.

The⁢ Politicization Issue

The AFL report comes as concerns ‍about the politicization of federal departments is a hot-button topic‍ among lawmakers.

In May,‌ Special Counsel John Durham’s report (pdf) on the FBI’s investigation into President Trump’s​ 2016 campaign stated that⁢ the agency’s handling of the matter was “seriously deficient.”

It also found that some of the FBI officials involved in the investigation were antagonistic to ⁤the former president like, for instance,‌ Deputy Assistant⁣ Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok who had “pronounced ⁣ hostile feelings toward Trump.”

Following the release of the Durham report, House Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) called on Congress to establish⁢ “new guardrails” for keeping the FBI​ in ​check.

“The report ⁣confirms that FBI personnel repeatedly disregarded critical protections established to protect ‌the American people from unlawful surveillance,” he said to The Epoch Times.

“Such actions should never have occurred, ‌and it is essential that Congress codifies clear guardrails that prevent future FBI ‌abuses and restores the public’s ​trust in our law‌ enforcement institutions.”

Recently, House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) sent subpoenas to ⁢six Biden administration officials over allegations that the Secret Service tipped off the Biden transition team about a planned interview of Hunter Biden regarding his tax probe.

“The Department of Justice initiated the⁢ Biden family coverup and now DHS under the leadership of ‌Secretary Mayorkas is complicit in ‍it,” Mr. Comer said in a statement.

He called the incident one of⁤ the “many examples of⁣ misconduct and politicization” during the Department of ⁤Justice’s‌ (DOJ) criminal investigation into the president’s son.

Mark Tapscott contributed to this report.

‌ What specific allegations does the AFL report make regarding FBI⁢ agents and their involvement in influencing the nomination process and harming the Trump administration?

D the allegations,” the report added.

The AFL report alleged that certain FBI ⁢agents in the ⁢Washington, ⁤D.C.‌ field office⁣ intentionally undermined President Trump’s nominees by ‍selectively reporting derogatory⁢ and unsubstantiated information. It stated that this selective reporting was done to influence the nomination process and ultimately harm the Trump administration.

The report ⁢further claimed that‌ FBI agents engaged in ⁣repeated violations of the Privacy Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act during the background investigation⁣ process. These violations⁣ allegedly​ resulted in‍ biased⁣ reporting‌ and the dissemination of inaccurate and damaging information ​about​ nominees.

One ​of the key examples​ cited in the report ⁣was the background investigation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was nominated to the Supreme ‌Court by President‍ Trump. The⁤ report‍ highlighted how ‌the FBI’s​ broken and biased process was used to smear Justice​ Kavanaugh’s‍ reputation.

The Senate Judiciary Committee had requested ‍a ⁢supplemental FBI investigation into allegations of ⁣inappropriate activities by Justice Kavanaugh when he was a minor. The White​ House complied with this request, and the FBI conducted the investigation. However, despite no findings of wrongdoing, Senate Democrats dismissed⁤ the ⁢investigation as “fake” and called⁢ for‍ further oversight into the FBI’s handling of ‌the allegations.

The AFL report is a concerning revelation of potential⁢ bias within ​the​ FBI’s background investigation process. It raises questions about the agency’s adherence ⁢to its mandate of conducting impartial ​and fair ⁣investigations. If ‍the allegations are true, they⁣ indicate a serious breach of trust and a disregard‌ for the integrity of the nomination⁤ process.

It is crucial that these claims are thoroughly investigated and appropriate⁣ measures are taken to‌ address‌ any bias and procedural violations within​ the FBI. The nomination and confirmation of individuals to key positions in the government ‌should ⁢be based on merit and integrity, free ⁤from any political or personal agendas.

The ‍AFL‍ report ⁣has called⁣ for reform and oversight of the background investigation process to ensure that it is fair, transparent, and‍ free‍ from‌ political influence. It emphasizes the need for accountability and the enforcement of existing laws, such as the Privacy Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act, to prevent future ⁢violations and biases.

The FBI plays a critical role in safeguarding the nation’s security and upholding the ‌rule of law. It ​is imperative that ⁣the agency operates with utmost professionalism, independence, and impartiality. Any hint of‍ bias ‍or politicization erodes ⁤public trust and undermines the integrity‌ of the FBI’s work.

Ultimately, the revelations from the AFL‌ report highlight the importance of⁣ maintaining the independence and integrity of ‍key governmental institutions. The ‌background investigation process ​must be transparent and fair, ⁣guided solely⁢ by the goal of selecting the most qualified individuals to ⁤serve in public office.

Addressing the ‌concerns raised in the AFL report is essential for restoring faith​ in the FBI and ensuring that future background investigations are conducted in a nonpartisan manner. The credibility ​of the agency⁤ and the⁤ trust of the American people ⁢depend on it.