Category: Washington Post

FBI Director Kash Patel is pressing to release a decade-old investigative file involving Rep. Eric Swalwell (D., Calif.) and a suspected Chinese intelligence operative, recently dispatching agents in the bureau’s San Francisco office to quickly redact the files before they are released publicly despite no evidence of wrongdoing by Swalwell, according to three people familiar with the effort.

The potential release is part of the Trump administration’s aggressive push to investigate Swalwell, a vocal critic of President Donald Trump and a leading Democratic candidate for California governor, according to the people familiar with the effort. It is highly unusual for the FBI to release case files tied to a probe that did not result in criminal charges.

As FBI director, Patel has focused on trying to bring a criminal case against the outspoken Democrat, reassigning multiple agents in San Francisco to work on the matter, the current and former officials said. FBI leaders have even discussed sending agents to China to talk to the suspected intelligence operative, believing she could have damaging information about Swalwell, according to two of the people familiar with the investigation. The people familiar with the matter spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an investigation that has not been made public.

The Chinese woman at issue is Christine Fang, also known as Fang Fang, who reportedly courted Swalwell and other California politicians in the United States from 2011 to 2015. She helped with fundraising for Swalwell’s 2014 reelection campaign and even helped place an intern in his congressional office. When federal agents conveyed their concerns about Fang to Swalwell around 2015, he reportedly cut off ties with her and said he helped investigators.

Swalwell was not accused of any wrongdoing when the FBI investigated his relationship with Fang a decade ago. In 2023, the Republican-led House Ethics Committee closed a two-year investigation into the congressman, deciding to “take no further action.”

Despite that, FBI leaders have recently suggested in internal discussions that the government could try to arrange for Fang to get a U.S. visa in exchange for speaking with FBI agents about the Democrat, according to the three people with knowledge of Patel’s efforts. It would be highly unorthodox to grant a visa to a person suspected of being an intelligence agent for a foreign superpower.

An FBI spokesperson disputed any notion of improper motives. “The contentions in this story are incorrect,” the spokesperson said. “This FBI, being the most transparent in history, prepares documents for numerous different reasons, including for release to different agencies and departments to further review investigations that may have been opened under previous administrations.”

The push to publicly release the investigative files, the people interviewed said, suggests that the FBI has struggled to so far build a criminal case against Swalwell. Even if there is no incriminating evidence in the files, an extensive case file could contain revealing and personal details about Swalwell and his campaign operations.

The lengths that Patel’s circle is going to in the bid to pursue a political foe of the president has raised alarms within the bureau, where some officials fear that releasing the files — even with redactions — could compromise law enforcement sources and investigatory methods, making it harder for the FBI to gain trust with potential witnesses.

They also said they feared the repercussions of sending agents to the territory of an adversarial nation to dig up information on a sitting congressman. Such an interview, legal experts said, would be impossible without Chinese interference, and Fang would be considered an unreliable witness.

“Most troubling about this is that we are now literally at war. We also face threats against the homeland,” Swalwell said in a statement to the Washington Post. “Kash Patel should be spending every moment trying to keep us safe, not scoring political points. A lot of people have bent the knee to this administration. But I will not, and neither will the people of California.”

Swalwell, who unsuccessfully sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, has been an unusually aggressive and colorful critic of the president, frequently criticizing the president in media interviews and on the dais as a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Swalwell also was a House “manager” — essentially, a prosecutor — in Trump’s 2021 impeachment for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Swalwell’s district in Northern California includes a large Chinese American population. Republicans and media personalities frequently criticize Swalwell for his ties to Fang and the Chinese community, suggesting that he is improperly working with them.

But FBI agents typically need a specific investigative reason to reopen a closed investigation. The people familiar with the probe said it is unclear how or why the FBI reopened its examination of Swalwell.

Internal Justice Department policy has long said that law enforcement should refrain from taking any public investigatory steps against a political candidate in the 60 days before an election, to prevent even the appearance of the department using its power to sway the vote.

The Justice Department is not legally bound to follow this rule, however, and it is unclear whether it would do so in Swalwell’s case. The California gubernatorial primary is June 2.

In California’s primaries, the top two vote-getters, regardless of party affiliation, move on to the November general election. Two Republicans currently lead the governor’s race in recent polls, despite the state’s liberal leanings, as a large number of Democrats — led by Swalwell — split the vote. Democratic leaders hope their voters ultimately coalesce around one or two candidates, but the outcome remains uncertain.

The investigatory files are likely to include numerous interviews with Swalwell, his aides, friends and others about the congressman’s interactions with Fang, details about his campaign and more.

Under a long-standing legal principle, agencies do not release potentially damaging material about people against whom they were unable to build a case strong enough to take to court.

The department recently released the investigatory files in the case of sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who had been indicted on federal sex trafficking charges but had not yet faced trial before killing himself. But in that case, the department’s hand was forced by political pressure and ultimately an act of Congress.

Republicans and Democrats criticized the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein release, saying the rollout was disorganized with few effective systems in place to ensure that appropriate redactions were made.

Since Trump took office, his administration has mounted an aggressive campaign to use federal law enforcement agencies to pursue his political adversaries.

The Justice Department filed criminal cases against former FBI Director James B. Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, for example. A judge threw out both indictments in November, ruling that Lindsey Halligan, the prosecutor overseeing both cases, had been unlawfully appointed.

Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte — a staunch Trump ally — referred Swalwell to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution over mortgage fraud allegations, but the department never indicted Swalwell. Swalwell sued Pulte, saying he unlawfully looked used his position to look through private mortgage fraud documents, but he ultimately dropped the lawsuit.

The department is also investigating Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell over the cost of the Fed’s recent building renovations. A federal prosecutor acknowledged in a closed-door hearing this month that the department did not have evidence of wrongdoing, the Post has reported.

Even against this backdrop, a proposal to release extensive files, send agents to China to interview a suspected intelligence operative and offer her a U.S. visa in exchange for revelations about a U.S. congressman would be extraordinary.

Patel, who before becoming FBI director was a conservative firebrand who attacked the “deep state” and vowed to “come after” Trump’s adversaries, has long been a critic of Swalwell. In his 2023 book Government Gangsters, Patel published a list of 60 names in an appendix that has been widely viewed by Patel’s critics as a sort of enemies list. It includes Trump foes, Democrats, and FBI agents who were involved in investigations into the president.

Swalwell was among those named by Patel, who has said that his critics are mischaracterizing the appendix by calling it an enemies list.

At a congressional hearing last year, Swalwell asked Patel if he would recuse himself from any investigation of people on the list, and Patel said no.

Congressional Democrats have joined a legal challenge to President Donald Trump’s planned 250-foot triumphal arch, arguing in U.S. District Court that the project must receive congressional approval before moving forward.

The top Democrats on committees overseeing federal lands and natural resources filed an amicus brief Friday, citing the Commemorative Works Act, a 40-year-old federal law that governs the design and placement of memorials in Washington. Under the law, certain parts of the city — including Memorial Circle, a traffic roundabout near Arlington National Cemetery, which Trump is eyeing for his planned arch — are considered protected land, and monuments built there would require congressional authorization. The circle sits narrowly inside the boundaries of Washington.

“Washington D.C. is not the President’s backyard to renovate, relandscape, and build in as he sees fit,” Sens. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, Angus King of Maine, and Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Reps. Jared Huffman of California, Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, and Maxine Dexter of Oregon wrote in their brief. King is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.

King also requested a review from the Congressional Research Service, the nonpartisan think tank that serves lawmakers, which independently concluded that an arch built in Memorial Circle would require congressional authorization. King’s office shared the review with the Washington Post.

“This is a straightforward issue of who’s in charge,” King said in an interview Friday. “The law is clear that any structure in this zone — of which Memorial Circle is certainly part — has to have the express approval of Congress.”

Huffman said the president’s plans raise “moral and political” questions, including whether the arch is a “vanity project” rather than a necessary monument.

“This is not Pyongyang,” Huffman said, invoking the capital of North Korea. “Most Americans want to be able to appreciate the view of Arlington Cemetery without a massive eyesore.”

The White House criticized Democrats’ legal challenge, saying that the party is “opposed to anything that celebrates the greatness of our Country” and mocking them as “America Last losers.”

“The Triumphal Arch in Memorial Circle is going to be one of the most iconic landmarks not only in Washington, D.C., but throughout the world,” spokesman Davis Ingle said in a statement. “It will enhance the visitor experience at Arlington National Cemetery for veterans, the families of the fallen, and all Americans alike, serving as a visual reminder of the noble sacrifices borne by so many American heroes throughout our 250 year history so we can enjoy our freedoms today.”

The White House did not respond to questions about whether officials would seek congressional approval of their planned arch.

Military veterans and a historic preservationist sued the Trump administration last month, arguing that Trump’s planned arch would obstruct key views when visiting Arlington National Cemetery and interfere with the intent of nearby monuments. Public Citizen, a government watchdog organization, is seeking to halt the project until the administration secures approval from Congress and federal review panels.

The White House has yet to formally propose its arch or seek those approvals, but Trump has repeatedly said that construction will soon begin. He has also tied the arch to the nation’s 250th anniversary, with Freedom 250 — a Trump-aligned group helping plan commemorative activities this year — helping guide the project’s development.

“We’re doing one that will be more magnificent and larger than the Arc de Triomphe in Paris,” the president said in an interview last month with NBC News, invoking the famous 164-foot-tall arch in France. Trump said that his planned arch would be “about” 250 feet high.

Last week, FBI Director Kash Patel fired roughly a dozen agents and staff members who once had ties to an investigation of Donald Trump. Among them were agents who specialized in addressing threats from Iran and its proxies.

Three days after the firings began, the United States was bombarding Iran.

The fighting abroad poses a major test for a Justice Department and FBI reeling from mass firings, reassignments, and departures during Trump’s 14 months in office for his second term, according to current and former officials familiar with the matter, most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity either out of concern about retaliation or to discuss continuing investigations.

The FBI and Justice Department still have skilled leaders in many key national security positions, the people said, but they warned that the bench of expertise has significantly thinned over the past year, and the number of leaders with deep expertise in handling domestic threats has diminished.

Thinner ranks, especially of experienced staff members, can matter in multiple ways, the current and former officials said.

When the U.S. is engaged in conflict abroad, domestic law enforcement goes into high alert. FBI agents with national security experience sift through scores of possible threats, determining which are worth investigating further, which may be tied to terrorist groups — and which do not need to be followed up on.

For serious threats, FBI agents often coordinate with Justice Department prosecutors to determine whether and how to execute warrants to surveil and arrest people before any possible violence occurs.

Today, experienced agents and prosecutors are more scarce. At the FBI, the recent terminations came on top of scores of firings of agents and field-office leaders that Patel has ordered during his tenure, often without explanation.

One former prosecutor, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to broadly discuss an investigation that has not been made public, said he worked last year with more than a half-dozen FBI agents to surveil a man who officials feared may have been planning a violent attack.

FBI agents surveilled the man 24-7, the former prosecutor said. But Patel reassigned those agents to work on immigration, and the FBI’s capabilities to trail that suspect around-the-clock waned, the prosecutor said.

As of October, roughly 25% of FBI agents had been assigned to immigration enforcement, stretching thin an already busy workforce.

Each termination of an experienced agent also rids the bureau of years of source building, the current and former officials said.

It’s impossible to know for sure what impact such departures have on the ability to track threats, they said. But, they said, each of the Iranian experts the FBI has lost probably had sources in and around Iranian American communities that they used to help monitor specific threats and people. Such source relationships, which are built on trust, cannot easily be transferred and are typically severed when agents leave.

FBI spokesman Ben Williamson defended the bureau on social media. The recent firing of agents happened because “they acted unethically and violated the mission,” he said, adding that three agents with Iran expertise were ousted. The bureau did not answer questions about how the agents acted unethically or violated the FBI’s mission.

“While we do not comment on personnel matters, the FBI maintains a robust counterintelligence operation, with personnel all over the country, who delivered record results in 2025 — including a 35% increase in counterintelligence arrests, six of the Ten Most Wanted Fugitives captured, and multiple foiled terrorism plots just in December alone,” Williamson said in a statement. “Our teams remain fully engaged across the country and prepared to mobilize any security assets needed to assist federal partners — as well as state and local law enforcement.”

There’s no question, however, that the administration’s firings across the Justice Department and FBI have created big gaps in expertise across the law enforcement agency. The staffing losses have been widespread, hitting U.S. attorneys offices, FBI field offices and critical divisions at headquarters in Washington. The Justice Department has struggled to fill many of these slots with qualified people, the Washington Post has reported.

The firings started on Day One of the Trump administration. Top Justice Department leaders pushed out Bruce Swartz, the deputy for international affairs in the criminal division, who had worked at the department for decades. Michael Nordwall, who headed the FBI’s criminal and cyber investigations division, and Robert Wells, whose portfolio included all of national security for the FBI, were also pushed out.

At the time, The Post reported that Brian Driscoll — the acting FBI director while Patel was awaiting Senate confirmation — fought to keep Nordwall and Wells, saying their expertise was needed. Driscoll lost that fight. He subsequently was also pushed out by Patel.

George Toscas — a veteran national security prosecutor who, in previous administrations, would have been overseeing the threats cases — was also ousted.

Some of the removed leaders have been replaced with others who have years of experience in the department, the people interviewed said. In many cases, however, talented employees were promoted before they otherwise would have been, cutting short their training for senior positions. Others, they said, are unqualified for their jobs.

Further stretching the national security leadership, Matthew Blue — the chief of the Justice Department’s counterterrorism section — is an Air Force veteran who has been serving in the D.C. National Guard since August. Trump deployed the D.C. National Guard to tackle “out of control” crime in the nation’s capital.

One of Blue’s deputy chiefs, a longtime Justice Department prosecutor, has been serving as acting chief in his absence.

Firings in other parts of the Justice Department can also have a ripple effect. Kyle Boynton — a former Civil Rights Division prosecutor and FBI agent who left the Justice Department in 2025 — noted that prosecutors who have reason to fear a person is planning a violent act can sometimes bring charges of an attempt to commit a hate crime before they carry out a violent attack. That can be a critical tool in preventing attacks, he said.

As a prosecutor in the Civil Rights Division, Boynton said he would receive calls from FBI agents when they were tracking a threat against a synagogue, for example. He would help determine what search warrants or surveillance measures they could legally request. Boynton said he fears that few people remain in the division’s criminal section who have handled such investigations.

The entire leadership of the criminal section of the Civil Rights Division has departed or been ousted in recent months, two people familiar with staffing in the division said.

“It requires an enormous amount of manpower to track people before they commit a crime,” Boynton said. “What you are looking for is evidence of intent and evidence that they have taken substantial steps in furtherance of intent. That requires an enormous amount of attention and scrutiny by FBI agents and DOJ prosecutors.”

Current and former Justice Department attorneys said they are frustrated that the Trump administration, including Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi, did not appear to carefully consider the long-term ramifications of their staffing decisions.

“We are now in a heightened-threat situation, not just in the Mideast but also here in the U.S. Iran, acting through its proxies, has long sought to carry out a terrorist attack or assassination inside the country,” said one longtime former senior National Security official.

“The danger today is that we have lost so much of our capability to uncover and stop such an attack,” the official said. “We have let down our guard at the worst time.”

Two groups — one with the imprimatur of Congress, the other with President Donald Trump’s blessing — are jockeying to host celebrations marking America’s 250th anniversary, sparking confusion, muddled messages, and new scrutiny from Democrats who ask why the Trump-aligned group is receiving federal money.

America250, led by a bipartisan board created by Congress a decade ago to mark the nation’s Semiquincentennial, has overseen events such as the Army’s 250th anniversary last year. It has also issued grants to state commissions and sponsored initiatives such as a float in this year’s Rose Parade.

Freedom 250, a public-private partnership launched by the White House in December, has emerged as the more publicized and prolific group, with a flurry of high-profile announcements, including some from the Oval Office.

“Freedom Trucks,” six customized semitrucks backed by $10 million in federal funds and with educational content crafted by conservative educators, have begun crisscrossing red states. A “Freedom Plane” took flight from Washington this week, beginning a National Archives-led nationwide tour in which the Boeing 737 will ferry an original engraving of the Declaration of Independence and other historic documents. The group is also planning a national prayer event on the National Mall, an IndyCar race around D.C., and a UFC fight hosted outside the White House on Trump’s birthday. The organization is led by Keith Krach, who served in the first Trump administration.

Both groups are drawing on private funds for their programming, with sponsors such as Exiger, Oracle, and Palantir contributing to both organizations. The groups are also set to share in $150 million appropriated by Congress last year and managed by the Interior Department.

The rapid rise of Freedom 250, with its Trump-tailored programming, has unnerved some liberals and watchdog organizations, who question whether it is wrongly tapping into funds intended for nationwide anniversary celebrations and promising access to the president at a price. Twelve Senate Democrats on Tuesday pressed the Interior Department to provide a “clear accounting” of money routed to Freedom 250, in a letter sent to the Trump administration and shared with the Washington Post.

“The Trump administration’s latest venture, Freedom 250, continues to raise serious and troubling questions about whether access to the president or official government events is for sale to the highest bidders,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), who led the letter, said in a statement to the Post. “And if the administration is commingling taxpayer dollars with other funds in an unaccountable private entity run by the president’s allies, it is an open invitation for corruption. We need answers.”

Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization, also has called for congressional investigations, citing a recent New York Times report that donors to Freedom 250 were offered access to Trump if they gave $1 million or more.

Freedom 250 spokeswoman Rachel Reisner referred questions about its federal funding to the Interior Department. Trump “is deeply grateful for the support of his donors, but unlike the politicians of the past, he can’t be bought,” she said in a statement.

She added that the organization has reached out to all 50 governors and partnered with a range of organizations, including PragerU and MyAmerica2026.

“As we approach this historic milestone in our nation’s founding, we will not be deterred by any partisan outrage or political theater,” Reisner said.

The Trump administration also has touted its approach, and Trump has repeatedly celebrated that he will be the president to oversee the nation’s 250th anniversary — an idea he embraced on the campaign trail.

Asked about its plans to distribute the $150 million provided by Congress and what share would go toward Freedom 250, the Interior Department declined to comment.

“The Department of the Interior looks forward to celebrating Freedom 250 and saluting 250 years of American greatness alongside President Donald J. Trump — the most iconic and accomplished President in the history of our great nation,” the department said in a statement.

America250 and Freedom 250 have publicly touted their shared commitment to the nation’s Semiquincentennial.

Rosie Rios, the Democrat leading America 250, has repeatedly praised her counterparts in interviews and statements, saying that Freedom 250 will focus on Washington-area events while her group tackles nationwide programming.

The bipartisan commission “has taken every possible step” to support the Trump administration’s activities, the group said in its report to Congress in January.

But the tensions between the organizations have grown, according to five people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations. Freedom 250 officials have bristled at the pace of America250’s work and output, and argued that the bipartisan group has been overly bureaucratic and politically correct. They also argue that America250 — which has received more than $100 million in federal funding since 2019 — has little to show for those contributions.

In comparison, one person familiar with the matter said, Freedom 250 drew on $3 million in federal funds last year to quickly produce a New Year’s Eve light display on the Washington Monument.

America250 said in a statement that it continues to actively collaborate with the White House task force, Freedom 250 and the full executive branch to plan the celebrations.

The group has been running a nationwide contest for students to submit perspectives on what America means to them and has been to eight states so far with a storytelling program on identity, service, community, and personal legacy.

Meanwhile, America250 officials and allies have questioned whether the Trump-backed group is too focused on activities that please the president and say the group threatens to siphon money that could be used for nationwide activities. America250 has received $25 million of the $150 million apportioned by Congress last year for anniversary activities, according to a person familiar with its finances.

The friction between the groups reached a breaking point in the planning for the Army’s 250th birthday last summer — a military parade in Washington that coincided with Trump’s birthday, said one person familiar with the plans. America250 wanted the celebration to focus on the military, not the president. Freedom 250 wanted Trump, as the commander in chief, to be front and center, the person said.

Some programming has shifted between the two groups. America250 originally applied for and received a grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the Freedom Trucks, mobile museums inspired by the American Freedom Train that crisscrossed the country from 1975-1976. The institute is a federal agency that provides financial support for museums and libraries. The $10 million grant was later voluntarily transferred to Freedom 250, according to an official of the agency.

“These mobile museums, which tell the incredible story of our nation’s founding, will be a cherished memory for an entire generation,” Keith Sonderling, a Trump appointee who leads the museum and library agency, said in a statement.

Marissa Streit, chief executive of PragerU, a conservative media organization, said her company volunteered to produce all video and educational content for the Freedom Trucks after White House officials came up with the vision and worked with Hillsdale College to develop the displays.

Streit insisted that despite the uniformly conservative credentials of the people involved, the exhibits showed a balanced view of history.

“I believe we need to teach and talk about both the negative things that have happened in our country as well as the positive,” she said.

The tensions are a departure from the approach taken during the bicentennial under President Gerald Ford, who sought to make sure the celebrations did not raise questions of impropriety in the wake of the Watergate scandal, said Richard Painter, the chief White House ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration.

“The one thing our taxpayer funds should not be used for is politicizing the 250th anniversary of the founding of the country,” said Painter, co-author of The U.S. Presidency: Power, Responsibility, and Accountability. “One of the things [the founders] were most afraid of is faction and political parties destroying our democracy. The celebrations here shouldn’t be owned by one political party or another.”