• FBI Special Agent Steve Friend saw the FBI as using an unnecessarily “hard hand” with nonviolent Jan. 6 suspects
• Friend refused to participate in raids on some Jan. 6 suspects in Florida, saying the FBI may have been abusing its power

The following excerpt of a transcript is from Sharyl Attkisson’s interview with FBI whistleblower Special Agent Steve Friend.

Sharyl Attkisson:

As you started reading up and gathering facts, what were some of the thoughts that you had about the January 6th incident and the cases?

Steve Friend:

I had sort of a mixed review. To me, there were some violent actions by individuals that probably warranted a criminal prosecution. But then I also saw other cases where the individual was simply walking into the capital building with the permission of Capitol police officers, and had told the FBI that very same fact and, on occasion, there was surveillance video to support it. So in knowing that, and having that ahead of time, kind of seemed to me that it was a waste of our valuable resources to pursue even an interview with that individual if we had them on video not committing any crime and just walking into the Capitol building, which is their right to do as an American citizen.

Sharyl Attkisson:

So what happened when you expressed that? Or did you express that?

Steve Friend:

I expressed that within the JTTF [FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force], and they shared my sentiments, but there was definitely ‘We’re just following orders’ mentality. And after sitting through that for about 10 months, that’s when I made my decision to bring my concerns, along with others, to my supervisor.

Sharyl Attkisson:

So somewhere down the line, you assume word came down that even the people who weren’t violent, who were welcomed or allowed into the Capitol– which is a public building and normally had a right to be there– even those people were to be prosecuted?

Steve Friend:

I sat in an interview with an individual who just described going to Washington, D.C. for President Trump’s speech, making his way over to the Capitol, going into the Capitol with permission of Capitol police officers. There was video footage of him not even walking across the red velvet rope. He was fully cooperative and, at that point, was working with an attorney. So he did a interview with us. And after, they [suspect and attorney] messaged the other agent that I was with, doing an interview, [the FBI Agent] said to him, “You know, we’ll let you know what gets decided in Washington,” so it was still in limbo. There was not a determination made at that point.

Sharyl Attkisson:

What’s happened since, do you know?

Steve Friend:

I don’t know.

…

Sharyl Attkisson:

When you said you decided to do something and step forward, what is it that you did internally first, before you decided to go to members of Congress or blow the whistle?

Steve Friend:

So there was an email that was sent out that there was, in fact, going to be several arrests and search warrant operations happening the following week. And working in a small office, that sort of information gets circulated to everyone because normally we ask everybody be available, rearrange their schedules so that we can have everybody, you know, participate if needed. So when that email came out and I realized that our actions were gonna be choreographed with another division’s, I knew that there was not gonna be putting off anything at that point. So I spoke to my supervisor in my office and told him that I did not wanna be involved with the operations, and actually volunteered to do other essential duties that day, and we got into a conversation about my concerns were in general with the cases.

Sharyl Attkisson:

What’s the summary of what your concerns were?

Steve Friend:

So, the nuts and bolts are the FBI is operating outside of its rules as far as managing its cases. Now our domestic investigations guide spells out the rules that we’re supposed to follow. Typically, if a case is opened in a particular field office, it’s because the individual committed the crime there or they might reside there. Now, the rules also say that FBI Headquarters can deem an office to be the office of origin at its own discretion. But once that decision is made and that case is opened and that case agent is assigned, that case agent, that field office, owns that case and is responsible for every investigative decision that is made. In my eight years with the FBI, have opened probably 200 cases, and every single time followed those rules, with the exception of January 6th investigations. And then those, there was a pressure from Washington for the field offices to open cases on individuals who were at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, based on where they lived. So if they lived in our area, we were going to be the offices of origin. However, the way that those cases were investigated was essentially run from Washington, D.C.

Sharyl Attkisson:

So, in shorthand, what was so different about the cases? You explained what the normal rules were, but what was happening?

Steve Friend:

Well, the personnel that we had in our offices were doing some investigative work. It was at the direction of the agents and task force officers in Washington, D.C. They were telling them, “You need to go interview somebody. You need to go conduct surveillance on somebody.” And that is out of line with the rules because those decisions should’ve been up to the purview of the case agents for those cases.

Sharyl Attkisson:

And what is the implication? What motivation do you think there was, or what conclusions did you draw from that?

Steve Friend:

Well, I was told, uh, that the actual on-record motivation for it was to get quote-unquote “buy in” from the field. And that was said on a conference call to field offices around the country.

…

Sharyl Attkisson:

Who was your supervisor that you spoke to?

Steve Friend:

His name is Greg Federico.

Sharyl Attkisson:

And what happened when you told him you didn’t want to be part of the raids?

Steve Friend:

We had a very cordial conversation and it was very friendly. And he essentially expressed to me that I was a domestic terrorism investigator and it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to just not wanna be involved with a domestic terror operation. He said that, you know, he wanted to give me the weekend to reconsider that and he said that he even would’ve been happier if I just called in sick that day because I was essentially tying his hands, that he had to report it up the chain, even though I’d volunteered to perform other duties that day. So he said that maybe I need to do an assessment of what my future was gonna be with the FBI if I was gonna be unwilling to participate. We left it there, and that was on a Friday afternoon. Spent the weekend considering the conversation with my wife, returned Monday, got to work, and told them that my opinions have not changed and …

Sharyl Attkisson:

…What time period was that?

Steve Friend:

That was in August of 2022. The arrests were gonna be happening, I believe, August 24th, so it was the week before.

Sharyl Attkisson:

And you came back to work or called and told them you felt the same way, you didn’t wanna be part of it?

Steve Friend:

I returned to the office on Monday. The arrests were gonna be on Wednesday. I told them that my opinion on the matter hadn’t changed and that I wanted to be considered to either be a conscientious objector, uh, having a conflict of interest or whatever term they wanted to use, and I would volunteer to do other duties…

Sharyl Attkisson:

What did you think was so wrong about the raids? I understand the technical objection that you found or that you had, but why didn’t you wanna be part of it?

Steve Friend:

Well, beyond just the fact that the FBI was operating outside of its rules, I felt that there was definitely a harder hand in the way that the arrests and the searches were gonna be carried out, regardless of the individuals’ involvement in January 6th. They had been interviewed. There had been open line of communication between the FBI and those individuals. Some of them were actually in contact with attorneys. So the FBI … It’s perfectly legal to use resources that it deems necessary and if it’s a tactical team, then that’s at their disposal. But there are other mechanisms that I felt that were better, if it was using surveillance to arrest an individual when he was outside his home and, you know, identifying him on the way to work and doing an arrest there. That could be warranted…

Sharyl Attkisson:

…Can you arrange someone to turn themselves in through their attorney?

Steve Friend:

Yes. It’s a process called issuing a summons to somebody and it’s very common, especially in white collar, nonviolent crimes. But even in situations where it is an allegation of violence, where the … you know, say it’s somebody who’s a public figure, you see it all the time, that they’ll surrender themselves to the court.

Sharyl Attkisson:

So what happened? Do you know how many people were arrested in that raid?

Steve Friend:

I believe that day there five individuals that were going to be arrested, and there were going to be a few search warrants that were gonna be executed at their residences. I did not participate that day because I was told not to come to work that day.

Note: Sharyl Attkisson asked the FBI for an interview and to comment on Friend’s claims, but the FBI declined the interview request and issued a written statement indicating the agency would never open an investigation on anyone based solely on First Amendment activity.

Watch Sharyl’s story about Steve Friend here or by clicking the link below.

https://fullmeasure.news/news/cover-story/fbi-whistleblower