Kash Patel Fires 10 Agents After ‘Shocking’ Wiretapping Scandal
White House chief of staff Susie Wiles was reportedly left “in shock” after learning that the FBI under former President Joe Biden subpoenaed her phone records during high-profile investigations into President Donald Trump, according to multiple reports.
Wiles, who served as Trump’s 2024 campaign manager before becoming chief of staff, told associates, “I am in shock,” after details of the subpoenas became public, Axios reported. The development has reignited debate over the scope of investigative tactics used during the Biden-era Justice Department’s pursuit of cases tied to Trump.
Reuters first disclosed that federal investigators subpoenaed toll records belonging to Wiles and current FBI Director Kash Patel in 2022 and 2023. The subpoenas were issued while special counsel Jack Smith was leading investigations into Trump’s efforts to challenge the 2020 election results and his handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
The records obtained consisted of metadata — including phone numbers and the dates and times of calls — but did not include the content of any conversations.
However, in addition to the toll record subpoenas, the FBI recorded a 2023 phone call between Wiles and her attorney. Two FBI officials told the outlet that the attorney was aware the call was being recorded and consented, but Wiles herself was not aware.
The revelation that the campaign manager of a former and future president had her records subpoenaed has sent shockwaves through Trump allies and congressional Republicans, many of whom argue the move reflects politically motivated overreach.
The subpoenas were issued during an aggressive investigative phase. In 2023, Smith charged Trump with multiple felony counts related to alleged election interference and classified documents retention. Trump denied wrongdoing. After Trump’s re-election in 2024, Smith moved to drop the election interference case, which was dismissed by a federal judge. Smith also dropped the Justice Department’s appeal in the classified documents matter.
The circumstances surrounding that recording have further inflamed critics, who argue that investigative boundaries may have been pushed too far.
Patel, who now leads the bureau, issued a blistering statement condemning the actions of prior FBI leadership.
“It is outrageous and deeply alarming that the previous FBI leadership secretly subpoenaed my own phone records — along with those of now White House chief of staff Susie Wiles — using flimsy pretexts and burying the entire process in prohibited case files designed to evade all oversight,” Patel said.
Patel has stated that one of his early reforms as director was eliminating the FBI’s ability to categorize files as “Prohibited,” a designation he argues limited internal visibility and shielded sensitive actions from routine oversight channels.
The controversy coincided with a wave of firings inside the bureau. At least 10 FBI employees were terminated this week, though officials declined to release names, citing privacy protections.
The FBI Agents Association (FBIAA), however, issued a sharply worded statement condemning the firings
“The FBIAA condemns today’s unlawful termination of FBI Special Agents, which — like other firings by Director Patel — violates the due process rights of those who risk their lives to protect our country,” the association said. “These actions weaken the Bureau by stripping away critical expertise and destabilizing the workforce, undermining trust in leadership and jeopardizing the Bureau’s ability to meet its recruitment goals — ultimately putting the nation at greater risk.”
The revelations come amid broader Republican efforts to examine the investigative conduct of the Biden-era Justice Department. House GOP lawmakers have already held contentious hearings with Smith and other officials, questioning the scope of surveillance tools and subpoena authority used during the Trump probes.
Legal experts note that toll record subpoenas are not uncommon in federal investigations and do not automatically imply wrongdoing by the individuals whose records are collected. However, the political sensitivity of this case has intensified scrutiny.
It remains unclear whether additional subpoenas were issued to other Trump advisers during the same timeframe. Congressional Republicans are expected to seek further documentation from the Justice Department and FBI regarding the scope of records obtained, the legal justifications cited, and the internal review processes used.
Obama Judge Says 3 Trump Prosecutors Are in Unlawful Roles
An Obama-appointed federal judge ruled that a three-person leadership team of the New Jersey federal prosecutor’s office was unlawful and said President Donald Trump’s insistence on handpicking U.S. attorneys showed that the White House cared more about personal control than public safety.
Matthew W. Brann, the judge, was making a decision regarding the legality of the three prosecutors who have been in charge of the New Jersey office since December. The New York Times reported that he also discussed the widespread practice of the Justice Department dismissing judicially appointed prosecutors immediately upon their appointment.
The judge outrageously claimed that the Trump administration cared more about who ran the U.S. attorney’s office in New Jersey than whether it was running at all, using italics to highlight the elevated tone of his decision.
Judge Brann stated that “scores of dangerous criminals could have their cases dismissed or convictions eventually reversed” as a result of the president’s ongoing reliance on illegal procedures to appoint top federal prosecutors.
He expressed his frustration by saying that judges would have to dismiss pending cases if there were any more attempts “to unlawfully” control the office’s leadership. To give the government time to file an appeal, Judge Brann said he would postpone his own ruling.
Usually nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, U.S. attorneys oversee prosecutors’ offices in more than 90 districts. However, senators in their states have blocked several of Trump’s preferred nominees, such as Alina Habba, his choice to head the New Jersey office. Consequently, the law has compelled judges to select their own candidates to fill vacancies.
The Justice Department has dismissed judges who appointed U.S. attorneys during Mr. Trump’s second term. Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general, posted on social media following the appointment of an interim U.S. attorney in upstate New York: “Judges don’t pick U.S. Attorneys, @POTUS does.” Refer to our Constitution’s Article II.
Judge Brann, a federal judge who typically sits in Pennsylvania but was designated to handle the matter in New Jersey, referred to that statement and others like it as “combative (and legally incomplete).”
He said that such assertions clearly indicated that “the Department of Justice would not permit anyone to hold any United States attorney’s office if that person was not handpicked by the president.”
Habba, a former personal lawyer to Trump who now works at the Justice Department in Washington, responded on social media to Judge Brann on Monday, calling his ruling “ridiculous.”
“Judges may continue to try and stop President Trump from carrying out what the American people voted for, but we will not be deterred,” she wrote. “The unconstitutionality of this complete overreach into the Executive Branch, time and time again, will not succeed.”
Judge Brann came to the conclusion in August that Habba had broken the law by continuing to hold office. Three prosecutors, Philip Lamparello, Jordan Fox, and Ari Fontecchio, took Habba’s place after he left the office in December after an appeals court ruled in his favor.
They have been sharing the duties of the U.S. attorney ever since.
However, Judge Brann declared the arrangement to be unworkable from a legal standpoint.
On Monday, he wrote that the Trump administration had again overstepped its authority, as it claimed to have discovered “enormous grants of executive power hidden in the vagaries and silences of the code.”
“Why does the fate of thousands of criminal prosecutions in this district potentially rest on the legitimacy of an unprecedented and byzantine leadership structure?” he asked. “The government tells us: The president doesn’t like that he cannot simply appoint whomever he wants.”
After two defendants accused of crimes in the District of New Jersey contested Habba’s jurisdiction and attempted to have the charges against them dropped, Judge Brann was given the case over the summer.
More challenges were filed following Habba’s resignation and Attorney General Pam Bondi’s appointment of the three prosecutors to jointly head the Newark office, which resulted in Monday’s ruling.
Democrats DEFY Hakeem Jeffries
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The standoff paralyzing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) just took a dramatic turn on the House floor. In a highly polarized 221–207 vote, the House of Representatives successfully passed a bill to fund DHS through the end of the fiscal year.
While the vote fell largely along party lines, four moderate Democrats openly defied Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and crossed the aisle to side with the Republican majority.
THE FOUR DEFECTORS
The Democrats who broke ranks to support restoring full funding for border security, cybersecurity operations, and emergency preparedness programs were:
Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas)
Rep. Don Davis (North Carolina)
Rep. Jared Golden (Maine)
Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Washington)
Despite the House victory, the legislative triumph was short-lived. Over in the upper chamber, Senate Democrats successfully blocked a similar measure in a 51-45 procedural vote, falling well short of the 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) was the only Senate Democrat to join Republicans in attempting to end the shutdown.
THE HUMAN COST OF THE STANDOFF
DHS has been partially shut down since its temporary funding expired on February 14. While agencies like the TSA, FEMA, and the Coast Guard are considered essential—meaning their personnel are forced to work without pay—other crucial divisions, such as the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), have already begun furloughing employees.
House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.) took to the floor to deliver a blistering rebuke of the Democrats' strategy, accusing them of using federal workers as political pawns to punish the Trump administration.
“They are punishing the TSA agents who are working hard to keep their community safe, they’re punishing FEMA employees who are trying to help Americans fighting through these winter storms, they are punishing the cybersecurity analysts at CISA who are combating constant threats to our infrastructure,” Cole argued. “Shutting down the Department of Homeland Security over a partisan fight hasn’t changed the stakes.”
THE DEMOCRATIC RESISTANCE
The core of the dispute revolves around fierce Democratic opposition to the Trump administration's immigration enforcement policies.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democratic appropriator, dismissed the GOP's funding bill as pure "political theater." She made it abundantly clear that her caucus will continue to hold the DHS budget hostage until Republicans agree to massive operational reforms regarding U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
“I will not vote for another dime for these agencies until we get the reforms that the American people want and stopping these agencies for terrorizing these communities,” DeLauro declared.
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) was utterly disgusted by the Democrats' refusal to fund national security, issuing a harsh warning to the American public.
May you like
“Anybody who votes to block funding for the homeland, it is shameful,” Johnson told reporters. “It speaks to a long record of Democrats’ deliberate efforts to undermine America’s safety and the essential operations of DHS.”
With neither side willing to blink, the men and women tasked with defending America's borders, waters, and skies remain caught in the crossfire of Washington's most brutal political fight.
