…and Larry look who’s here, it’s our friend. It’s called you Larry. Julie, look who’s here, it’s our friend Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch. Good morning Tom, good to talk with you. Good morning, the two Aries. Yeah, oh god, what a nightmare. You are joining us just as we were discussing the extraordinary interview between FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino yesterday. There’s one item that we didn’t get to, but we held it for you because we figured you’d want to comment on it. Here they are talking about what they’ve learned with regard to the events of January 6th.

Were there FBI agents undercover egging people on? Like I said, that answer is coming and it’s on its way to Congress. You’re about to, I saw it, I saw the portfolio of information. Wow. We dug far and wide to find it and I’m pretty sure now we have a conclusive definitive answer, but you and the public are going to have it. You’re going to see it in writing over to Capitol Hill, but I just want to be sure we’re clear having been an agent and a police officer. There is a difference between an agent, I know you know this, I don’t mean to sound ridiculous, an agent meaning a trained GS 1811 federal agent and a source or an asset.

There’s a difference. So when you see the material, which I promise you is coming again, I’m not asking you to trust us. I know it’s coming because I saw it yesterday. All right. So decipher that for me. Will you, Tom Fitton, from your perspective, because you followed this story very acutely. Well, it seems to me, Dan and cash are further confirming what’s been previously reported that there were assets at the Capitol on January 6th and they’re suggesting they were involved in a more active manner than the inspector general did in releasing and hiding that information until after the election.

I don’t know why they’re being coy about what they found. Is this a state secret? You know, I was a bit frustrated about the interview. Don’t worry. We’ll tell you who everything we already know in two weeks. Again, what’s, what’s, what’s, why they’re hiding and is there, and they also suggest that there were false statements later in that same section by Biden officials about the activities of FBI assets or confidential sources and who knew what and when. And is there a criminal investigation of those false statements? I don’t know. You know, what I heard from that interview generally is they’re not doing a criminal investigation of anything that we care about.

I haven’t seen anything that they pursuing in this area in terms of warfare against Trump. They ruled out anything related to the Obama era and really Trump era warfare or warfare against Trump by suggesting that your limitations have passed while then suggesting they just found new evidence. I don’t know what all that means. That just means we’re going to get some good FOIA responses, which is good. And there is a measure of accountability there. But we’re still going to have the FBI that did what they did to Trump last year, and I don’t see any cuts or any efforts to curtail that agency institutionally.

Well, the deputy director of on Gino did say with regard to the Russian collusion and Lord knows Dan knows that I said earlier, Dan and catch probably actually, sorry for referring to the mother first names, but I mean, we know these guys. Director Patel and deputy director of on Gino have forgotten more about the Russian collusion scandal than most people will know, except for you, Tom Fitten. He said, we want to do this the right way. Does that suggest to you that, you know, there is a very real criminal investigation going on here.

It’s just that it’s going to be very deliberate, unlike the half hazard slapshot political approach that their predecessors took. Or are you hearing something with your trained ear that suggests no, no, no, the whatever they are doing, whether they’re doing it the right way and dotting every I crossing the T, it’s still not actually a criminal investigation. Yes, I heard the second part. And, uh, and what Dan said, I, we, you can do it quicker, you can do it right, but you can’t do it both ways. You can’t have it both.

Actually, that’s not true. We can quickly, we can quickly fire most of the FBI. We can quickly use the USA ID approach and get rid of most of those agents and personnel or, as others have said, and I’ve said, shatter and scatter the FBI’s authorities and necessary functions to other agencies. I, I, you know, I just hear a lot of excuses here and they don’t want to release FOIA records quickly. He suggests because the last administration, the Biden administration gave millions of dollars to page and struck in a way that were corrupt in a way that was seemingly corrupt, uh, because they disclosed to the public, uh, their relationship and other information about them that exposed the corruption behind the targeting of Trump.

This is to me confused. Um, and they say there’s a lot of other things they’re working on. And I guess those are going to take a priority over the accountability that we want for the American people, which is fine, but it’s not what I think people were expecting. Tom, they also seem to have sort of closed the book on the Epstein death. What were your thoughts on that? They basically said, nope, it was a suicide moving on. Yeah, they looked at the file. I’m not aware of any other investigation. I’ve been of looking at the file.

I mean, there are reasonable questions about the death and I, I don’t know if they’re aware of them. Uh, but, um, I forget the name of the forensic investigator who did a separate investigation of this. And he found, you know, it was clear indications that it was a homicide, but they looked at the file that’s already there that no one else has seen. Evidently we sued for them. We haven’t gotten the records and they’ve told us that there’s no need for additional investigation. So there you have it. You sound, um, we know you pretty well.

Uh, and we can tell from your tone that you sound a little disheartened here. Yeah, it’s frustrating. Um, look, now to be fair to them, they do have a lot to do. So they probably see current activities and crimes requiring their attention and they want to do it. But I think their approach to protecting the FBI, I think is misplaced and they may not be able to do it. Uh, given the situations they’re in, they’re being asked to run an agency and they’re not going to voluntarily dismantle it unless they’re told to do so.

And maybe president Trump needs to tell them to dismantle the agency. Uh, maybe somebody needs to be told to do a criminal investigation that’s serious and broad as opposed to, you know, oh, we can’t do it too quickly because we want to do it right, which is to me a signal that there’s not much being done at all. We’d be in our final moments here, Tom, we’d be remiss if we didn’t, uh, congratulate your clients, the family of Ashley Babbitt and commend you and judicial watch for your work representing them. Because it appears as though you have a settlement with the federal government over her wrongful death.

Is there anything you can expand on that for us? Yeah, we have a settlement in principle and hopefully, you know, we will be able to finalize it soon. It’s taking longer than we all want to finalize it. But there are some technical issues that kind of have to be dealt with, but it’s going to be settled. There’s no doubt. In my, my mind, as I said, we’ve agreed to in principle, then it’s a remarkable victory for the family. Uh, it’s not a perfect victory. And, uh, but it certainly, uh, blows out of the water.

The narrative about January 6th, Ashley was the only homicide victim on January 6th that we know. You know, I say it all the time, no matter who’s in charge of the house and the Senate and even who’s in charge of the white house or the justice department or the FBI. Ultimately, the work that judicial watch and Tom Fitton does continues to transcend those various, uh, political maneuvers. We love what you do, Tom. And thank you for certainly in the Ashley Babbitt case for getting those results amongst all the other lists of your accomplishments.

Thanks, Tom. [tr:trw].

See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.