Government

Home Government

White House Releases Memos Detailing Secret FBI Investigation Into Trump

1

The FBI’s Russia investigation did not stop at Trump campaign aides.

One week after President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey in May 2017, bureau officials opened a counterintelligence investigation aimed directly at Trump, according to newly declassified memos released by the White House and reported by Fox News.

The closely guarded probe carried an unusual codename: “Oxferd Comma”—with “Oxford” apparently misspelled for reasons that remain unclear.

But the questions behind the name were anything but trivial.

In a May 16, 2017, opening memo, investigators said they sought to determine whether Trump was “directed by, controlled by, and/or coordinated activities with, the Russian Federation in a manner constituting a threat to the national security of the United States and/or a violation of federal criminal statutes,” according to Fox News.

The FBI also widened its focus to possible obstruction. The memo’s wording, as released, stated: “In addition, this investigation will also seek to determine whether President Trump and others yet to be named obstructed and/or conspiracy to obstruct any associated FBI investigation.”

In other words, Comey’s firing triggered an extraordinary inquiry into whether the sitting president was acting in concert with a hostile foreign power—and whether he or others had tried to derail the bureau’s work.

From Comey’s Firing to a Probe of the President

Comey, appointed by President Barack Obama, led the FBI from 2013 until Trump dismissed him in 2017.

During that tenure, Comey oversaw two investigations that became defining controversies of the 2016 election. The FBI examined Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, and Comey notified Congress shortly before Election Day that agents had found emails that “appear to be pertinent” to that case.

Comey also oversaw the launch of “Crossfire Hurricane,” the FBI investigation opened in July 2016 after the bureau received information that Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos had suggested Russia possessed damaging material about Clinton.

When Trump fired Comey, the administration initially pointed to the FBI director’s handling of the Clinton email investigation. The dismissal, however, rapidly intensified scrutiny of the president and the Russia inquiry.

On May 17, 2017, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller as special counsel. Mueller took over the existing Russia investigation and expanded the federal inquiry.

Mueller’s final report, released in 2019, found that Russia sought to interfere in the 2016 election through a social media influence operation and the hacking and release of Democratic emails. The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government.

The report also examined potential obstruction but did not make a traditional prosecutorial judgment on whether Trump committed a crime.

According to the newly released memos, the “Oxferd Comma” investigation was closed on April 9, 2019, as Mueller’s work neared completion.

Durham’s Review Reignited Questions About the FBI

The bureau’s handling of the Trump-Russia investigation later came under examination by special counsel John Durham, whom Attorney General William Barr appointed to review the origins of Crossfire Hurricane.

Durham’s 2023 report concluded that the FBI lacked sufficient factual grounds to open the full investigation and departed from its usual standards. His findings fueled renewed allegations that political bias shaped the bureau’s decisions.

Separately declassified material from an annex to Durham’s report also showed officials scrutinized intelligence alleging that Clinton allies planned to link Trump to Russian President Vladimir Putin in order to shift attention from Clinton’s email controversy.

“Raising the theme of ‘Putin’s support for Trump’ to the level of the Olympics scandal would divert the constituents’ attention from the investigation of Clinton’s compromised electronic correspondence,” the annex reads, according to Fox News.

The annex also included a 2016 message attributed to Leonard Benardo, an official with the Open Society Foundations network who had done business in Moscow in the 1980s.

“Julie says it will be a long-term affair to demonize Putin and Trump. Now it is good for a post-convention bounce. Later the FBI will put more oil into the fire,” Benardo wrote.

The appendix said “Julie” appeared to refer to Clinton foreign policy adviser Julianne Smith.

The newly disclosed “Oxferd Comma” memos add another striking chapter to the fight over the Russia investigation. They show that, after Comey’s firing, the FBI was not merely asking whether people around Trump had improper Russian ties. It was formally investigating whether the president himself was under Moscow’s direction and posed a threat to the United States.

Trump, DOJ Launch Supreme Court Bid To Wipe Out $83M Carroll Verdict

1
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The high-stakes maneuver could replace Trump as the defendant—and potentially kill the defamation case altogether.

President Donald Trump is taking his $83.3 million legal battle with E. Jean Carroll to the Supreme Court—and the Justice Department is joining the fight.

Trump’s personal attorneys and the DOJ, currently led by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, filed separate petitions asking the justices to overturn the staggering defamation award Carroll won over statements Trump made during his first White House term.

“Absent this Court’s intervention, the sitting President is facing nearly a hundred million dollars of personal liability for conduct that was well within the scope of his federal office,” Justice Department attorneys wrote, according to The Hill.

“That alone deserves this Court’s attention.”

Carroll’s attorneys declined to comment on the new filings.

Trump’s $83 Million Lifeline

The administration’s legal gambit hinges on the Westfall Act, a 1988 law designed to protect federal employees from personal liability for actions taken within the scope of their government jobs.

The Justice Department argues Trump was carrying out an official presidential function when he issued a White House statement and answered reporters’ questions about Carroll’s allegations in 2019.

If the Supreme Court agrees, the federal government could replace Trump as the defendant.

That would not simply shift the $83.3 million bill to taxpayers. It could wipe out Carroll’s claim because the Federal Tort Claims Act generally does not allow libel or slander lawsuits against the United States.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals explicitly acknowledged that consequence, writing that Carroll’s claims would be barred if the government were substituted as the defendant.

Two Appeals, Two Different Arguments

Trump and the Justice Department are traveling slightly different legal roads to reach the same destination.

Trump’s personal attorneys want the Supreme Court to rule that his 2019 statements were official presidential acts protected by immunity.

“Because accusations bearing on the President’s fitness for office are unquestionably matters of public concern, Presidential statements responding to press questions about such accusations are plainly official,” they wrote.

The DOJ does not need the justices to reach that broader constitutional question.

Instead, the department wants the Supreme Court to rule that the government can invoke the Westfall Act and replace Trump as the defendant, despite how late in the litigation the renewed request arrived.

Trump’s attorneys accused the appeals court of using “procedural contortions” to dodge the immunity question and argued that the case “cries out” for Supreme Court review, The Associated Press reported.

“This is the first case in our nation’s history in which a court has imposed damages liability on a president for his conduct in office,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

Bondi Started The Push—Blanche Is Carrying It Forward

Trump’s first-term Justice Department initially attempted to invoke the Westfall Act after Carroll filed her lawsuit.

Then-Attorney General Bill Barr certified that Trump had been acting within the scope of his office, setting off years of pretrial litigation over whether the United States could take his place in the case.

The Biden Justice Department abandoned that position in 2023.

After Trump returned to the White House, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi revived the effort in 2025 and issued a new certification supporting government substitution.

The appeals court rejected Bondi’s move, ruling that the government could not reverse course after the case had already gone to trial. It also concluded that Trump had forfeited his presidential immunity defense by failing to raise it properly at an earlier stage.

Blanche, who became acting attorney general after Bondi left the department in April 2026, is now leading the DOJ as it asks the Supreme Court to reverse those decisions. The department’s own website identifies Blanche as acting attorney general.

The DOJ argues that one administration’s decision to abandon a legal defense should not prevent a later administration from changing course—particularly when the defendant is once again the sitting president.

The department accused the appeals court of showing too much deference to the Biden administration’s decision and too little to the Trump administration’s renewed defense.

One Carroll Case Down, Another $83 Million At Stake

Carroll, a former Elle advice columnist, publicly accused Trump in 2019 of sexually assaulting her inside a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in Manhattan during the mid-1990s.

Trump has repeatedly denied the allegation and said he did not know Carroll. She sued him over his public response.

The Supreme Court already rejected Trump’s attempt to overturn a separate $5 million verdict Carroll won in 2023.

In that case, a civil jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll and later defaming her through statements he made after leaving office. The Supreme Court declined to review the verdict in June, and the money was subsequently transferred to Carroll’s legal team.

The current showdown concerns the much larger judgment from a January 2024 trial involving Trump’s 2019 statements.

That jury awarded Carroll $65 million in punitive damages, $11 million for a reputation-repair campaign and another $7.3 million in compensatory damages.

A federal appeals court upheld the award, although three judges later dissented when the full court refused to reconsider the case. Those judges argued that the Westfall Act should protect Trump and accused the majority of applying the law unevenly.

The payout has been delayed while Trump seeks Supreme Court review.

A Long-Shot With Enormous Stakes

The Westfall Act allows the government to replace a federal employee as the defendant when the attorney general certifies that the employee acted within the scope of the job.

Federal law, however, excludes libel and slander claims from the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity.

That makes the stakes clear: If the DOJ succeeds in substituting the United States, Carroll’s $83.3 million victory could disappear.

The Supreme Court accepts only a small fraction of the petitions it receives. The justices are expected to consider the requests during a private conference after returning from their summer recess.

But after refusing to disturb Carroll’s smaller verdict, the high court must now decide whether Trump’s return to the presidency—and the Justice Department’s extraordinary late intervention—gives the $83.3 million case a dramatically different ending.

Jim Jordan Demands DOJ Probe Jack Smith Over Trump Testimony

1

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan is calling on the Justice Department to investigate former Special Counsel Jack Smith, accusing the longtime prosecutor of misleading Congress about his pursuit of lawmakers’ private communications during the Trump election case.

Jordan sent a criminal referral Wednesday to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche after newly released Justice Department records appeared to conflict with testimony Smith gave under oath in December 2025.

The referral does not compel the DOJ to open an investigation or bring charges, but it formally places Smith’s testimony before federal prosecutors for review.

At the center of the explosive dispute are text messages involving members of Congress.

During a closed-door deposition, Smith was asked whether telephone records subpoenaed by his office included the contents of lawmakers’ calls or text messages. Smith answered “no” to both questions.

Those answers were technically accurate when applied specifically to toll records, which generally contain information such as telephone numbers, dates and call durations—not the substance of communications.

But Jordan argues Smith left lawmakers with a deeply misleading impression.

Records recently released by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley indicate Smith’s team separately obtained the contents of text messages through a subpoena issued to the National Archives and Records Administration. According to Jordan, the material included communications involving dozens of lawmakers.

“The responses provided by Mr. Smith gave the impression that neither Mr. Smith nor his team had access to the content of Members’ privileged text messages. We now know this to be false,” Jordan wrote.

Smith’s attorneys fired back, accusing the Republican chairman of twisting their client’s words to manufacture a criminal allegation.

Peter Koski and Lanny Breuer argued that Smith answered the precise questions he was asked about toll records, which did not contain message content. They said Jordan was improperly conflating those subpoenas with a separate legal process used to obtain communications from another source.

“During his testimony, Mr. Smith provided truthful, responsive answers, and candidly discussed his work as Special Counsel,” the attorneys wrote in a letter to Jordan and Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin.

They characterized the referral as an effort to “weaponize the justice system” against a career prosecutor.

The Justice Department confirmed that it received Jordan’s referral and said it “will investigate all evidence of criminal conduct.” The department did not say whether it has formally opened an investigation into Smith.

Jordan alleges the former special counsel may have violated federal law by knowingly making materially false statements to Congress. Prosecutors must now determine whether Smith merely answered a narrowly worded question—or deliberately concealed the full reach of his investigation.

The referral opens another front in the long-running battle over Smith’s prosecutions of President Donald Trump involving classified documents and challenges to the 2020 election results.

Smith abandoned both cases following Trump’s 2024 election victory, citing Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president. He resigned shortly before Trump returned to the White House.

Bill O’Reilly Tells Trump To ‘Take The Next Month Off’

AI-generated image.

Conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly is urging President Donald Trump to step away from the White House for several weeks, arguing that the 80-year-old president has been stretched too thin by months of nonstop domestic and international crises.

Speaking on his “No Spin News” program, the former Fox News host said Trump should take time to rest after an intense stretch that has included the war with Iran, trade negotiations, immigration battles and high-profile diplomatic meetings.

“He needs a breather,” O’Reilly said. “Take the next month off.”

‘He’s exhausted’

O’Reilly argued that Trump’s demanding schedule appears to be taking a physical toll.

Throughout his presidency, Trump has maintained an unusually active public schedule, often holding multiple events, traveling and making major policy announcements in a single day.

According to O’Reilly, that pace has begun to show physically.

“Now, I’ve noticed that he is hunching over a little bit, and that’s normal,” O’Reilly said. “You get older, every malady in the world is going to visit you. I can’t even bore you with the stuff I got to deal with.”

O’Reilly said the changes are a natural part of aging but suggested they underscore the importance of slowing down. “I was actually feeling sorry for myself the other day, and I never do that,” he added.

WATCH:

Advice from a longtime ally

The comments stand out because O’Reilly has generally been one of Trump’s most reliable supporters.

Earlier this year, he warned Republicans they would be “slaughtered” in the midterm elections if they attempted to distance themselves from the president, arguing that Trump remains the party’s dominant political figure.

Rather than criticizing Trump’s agenda, O’Reilly framed his latest advice as a matter of endurance, saying the president should preserve his energy for the remainder of his term.

White House has shown no sign of slowing down

There is no indication the administration plans to scale back the president’s schedule.

READ NEXT: New Details Emerge About Trump Ally’s Moscow Trip

Scott Bessent Emerges As Top Contender For Lindsey Graham’s Senate Seat

[Photo Credit: The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is being encouraged to enter the suddenly open race for South Carolina’s U.S. Senate seat, a move that could place one of President Donald Trump’s most prominent Cabinet officials at the center of what is shaping up to be a closely watched Republican primary.

According to Politico, supporters reached out to Bessent on Sunday, urging him to run following the unexpected death of longtime Sen. Lindsey Graham.

The outreach immediately adds another high-profile name to the growing list of Republicans being discussed as potential successors to Graham, who represented South Carolina in the Senate for more than two decades.

Graham died Saturday at the age of 71. A preliminary autopsy determined that he died from an aortic dissection caused by arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease, commonly known as hardening of the arteries.

No indication Bessent plans to run

Despite the speculation, Bessent has given no public indication that he intends to launch a Senate campaign.

People close to the Treasury secretary told Politico that he remains focused on leading the Treasury Department, a position he had long hoped to hold. A Treasury Department spokesperson declined to comment on the reports.

Still, even the possibility of a Bessent candidacy could reshape the race.

A South Carolina native, Bessent maintains homes in Charleston and Washington. Before joining the Trump administration, he built a successful career as a financier and hedge fund manager. Since taking office, he has become one of the administration’s most visible public advocates for Trump’s economic agenda, defending the president’s tax, trade, energy, and tariff policies in frequent television appearances and public events.

A different kind of Senate candidate

If Bessent entered the race, he would bring a combination of political and financial advantages uncommon for a first-time Senate candidate.

His statewide roots, personal wealth, experience in financial markets, and close relationship with Trump would make him an immediate contender in a Republican primary expected to place a premium on loyalty to the president and the ability to quickly organize a statewide campaign.

Bessent has also developed a higher political profile than many Treasury secretaries.

Initially viewed primarily as a market-focused economic expert, he has increasingly become one of the administration’s most outspoken defenders, regularly making the case for Trump’s broader policy agenda in addition to his economic initiatives.

A difficult decision

Running for the Senate would require Bessent to give up one of the most influential positions in the federal government.

As Treasury secretary, he serves as the administration’s chief economic spokesman and plays a central role in shaping tax policy, tariffs, sanctions, financial regulation, and international economic negotiations.

Those responsibilities could prove more appealing than leaving for a rapidly unfolding Senate campaign.

At the same time, opportunities to seek a Republican Senate seat in a state as reliably conservative as South Carolina are rare. The GOP nominee would begin the general election as the clear favorite.

Race expected to move quickly

South Carolina officials are expected to move quickly to fill the vacancy.

Gov. Henry McMaster is expected to appoint a temporary replacement while the state prepares for a special nominating process ahead of the November election.

Several prominent Republicans are already being mentioned as possible candidates, including Rep. Nancy Mace, who is reportedly giving serious consideration to entering the race.

The addition of Bessent’s name, however, would introduce a nationally recognized figure with deep financial resources and direct ties to the White House.

It would also create a significant personnel decision for Trump.

A successful Bessent Senate campaign would give the president another close ally on Capitol Hill for years to come. But it would also require Trump to replace a Treasury secretary who has become a central figure in advancing the administration’s economic agenda.

READ NEXT: Hunter Biden Scores Massive Legal Victory

Trump Ties FEMA Funding To New Election Security Rules

DHSgov, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The Trump administration announced Friday that states will have to adopt a series of federal election security measures to receive certain Federal Emergency Management Agency grant funding, marking the latest effort to influence how states administer elections ahead of the 2026 midterms.

The Department of Homeland Security said recipients of FEMA-administered homeland security grants will be required to implement what it called “common-sense election security measures” before receiving funding.

“These new requirements for homeland security grant recipients will preserve election integrity and ensure that Americans can trust the results,” Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said in a statement.

Funding tied to election changes

According to FEMA grant guidance, up to 20% of funding under the State Homeland Security Program and the Urban Area Security Initiative may be withheld until states certify compliance with the administration’s election security requirements. The affected grant programs distribute roughly $1 billion annually for terrorism prevention, cybersecurity, emergency preparedness, and critical infrastructure protection.

Among the requirements are:

  • Verification of the citizenship of registered voters and election workers.
  • Documentation of election audits.
  • Plans to transition jurisdictions that rely on barcode- or QR code-based ballot tabulation toward hand-marked paper ballots.

The administration has argued that election infrastructure is part of the nation’s critical security framework and that stronger safeguards are necessary to bolster public confidence in election results.

States question federal authority

Election administration has historically been handled by states, and several state officials and election law experts have questioned whether the executive branch has the legal authority to condition homeland security grants on changes to state voting procedures.

The announcement follows a series of recent actions by the administration aimed at reshaping election administration, including Justice Department letters requesting voter registration records from all 50 states and President Donald Trump’s removal of the remaining commissioners of the bipartisan U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

Legal challenges expected

The new FEMA conditions are expected to face legal scrutiny.

Courts have already blocked portions of previous Trump administration efforts to impose nationwide election rules through executive action, with judges finding that the Constitution grants states broad authority over the administration of elections absent congressional action.

Whether the administration can ultimately enforce the new grant conditions may depend on future court rulings. In the meantime, states seeking the affected homeland security funding will have to decide whether to comply with the new requirements or challenge them in court.

READ NEXT: Felon Opens Fire, Is Shot Back Twice By Intended Victim

Report: Patel Cancels Trip, Heads To West Wing Following Luxury Travel Allegations

White House image via Wikimedia Commons

FBI Director Kash Patel was summoned to the White House on Friday after abruptly canceling a planned trip to Chicago, fueling fresh speculation about his standing inside the Trump administration as questions continue to mount over his alleged use of government resources for luxury perks.

According to a report by MS NOW, Patel had been preparing to depart Friday morning for a trip that included a visit to the FBI’s Chicago field office and an appearance by his girlfriend, country singer Alexis Wilkins, at a local music festival. However, senior administration officials instructed him to report to the West Wing instead. The outlet, citing unnamed sources, said officials had grown frustrated by recent controversies surrounding the FBI director — including an ongoing feud with the network that includes a lawsuit filed by Wilkins last month over reporting on her use of Patel’s security detail.

The White House and FBI quickly disputed that the West Wing meeting was a reprimand. An FBI spokesperson said Patel was there on “official business,” while White House Communications Director Steven Cheung dismissed the report as “fake news” and actively defended Patel’s right to mock the media.

Questions continue to grow

The White House meeting came as Patel faces increasing bipartisan scrutiny over his management of the bureau. Earlier this week, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) requested records showing whether Patel reimbursed the government for personal travel aboard FBI aircraft and pressed him on the bureau’s unusual purchase of luxury BMW vehicles instead of traditional Chevrolet Suburbans. (RELATED: Grassley Seeks Records On Kash Patel’s Travel, Vehicle Purchases)

The scrutiny intensified after reports surfaced about a separate letter from congressional Democrats citing whistleblower allegations. According to those reports, Patel allegedly directed FBI field offices to arrange taxpayer-funded leisure activities during official travel, including a helicopter tour, a VIP snorkeling excursion over the wreckage of the USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor — where more than 900 sailors and Marines remain entombed — and a jet ski outing.

The U.S. Navy later confirmed to ABC News that the previously undisclosed Pearl Harbor snorkeling expedition had, in fact, taken place.

Patel has denied wrongdoing, and the FBI maintains that all flights comply with policies requiring the director to use government aircraft for security reasons.

Patel pushes back

Hours before reports of the White House meeting surfaced, Patel publicly mocked the scrutiny on X, sharing a screenshot of an article criticizing his lifestyle.

“Nah, my jet ski is gold plated… dumbass,” Patel wrote. “Your job is to lie. Mine is to protect the American people, and business is good!”

Neither the White House nor the FBI disclosed what was specifically discussed during Friday’s meeting. While there is no indication Patel’s position is in immediate jeopardy, the sudden cancellation of his Chicago trip to answer to the West Wing has intensified attention on his leadership at a time when congressional oversight of the bureau is rapidly escalating.

READ NEXT: Charlie Kirk Vote Sparks Ugly Democratic Fight

Trump Sends Powerful Message By Refusing To Sign Housing Bill

President Donald Trump holds a press conference with Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on Friday, June 27, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

President Donald Trump is making a political statement without stopping one of Congress’ biggest bipartisan victories.

Rather than signing the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, Trump is allowing the sweeping housing package to become law automatically, using the moment to protest the Senate’s refusal to advance his preferred voter ID legislation.

“I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT,” Trump wrote on social media.

Housing bill takes effect anyway

Trump’s decision doesn’t derail the legislation. Under the Constitution, a bill becomes law if a president neither signs nor vetoes it within 10 days, excluding Sundays, while Congress remains in session.

The bipartisan package is considered one of the most significant housing reforms in decades. Among other provisions, it seeks to increase home construction, speed up environmental reviews, expand financing opportunities, encourage manufactured and modular housing, and curb certain institutional purchases of single-family homes.

Lawmakers approved the measure by overwhelming margins — 85-5 in the Senate and 358-32 in the House — giving it more than enough support to survive a veto.

Election integrity remains Trump’s priority

Trump has made clear that his focus remains on the SAVE America Act, which would establish nationwide voter ID and proof-of-citizenship requirements for federal elections.

Although the House approved the bill, it has stalled in the Senate, where Republicans do not have enough votes to break a filibuster.

The president previously canceled a White House signing ceremony for the housing legislation, calling it a “big yawn” compared with the push for election integrity.

A message to Congress

Behind the scenes, Trump’s move reportedly caught Republicans off guard. Many had hoped to showcase the housing bill as a marquee accomplishment before the 2026 midterm elections, only to see it overshadowed by the president’s renewed push for voter ID legislation.

Instead, Trump chose a different strategy. By letting the bill become law without his signature, he avoided a veto fight while keeping public attention on his demand that Congress move forward with nationwide voter ID legislation.

The episode underscores Trump’s determination to keep election reform at the forefront of the national debate as Republicans head into the final stretch of the 2026 midterm campaign.

READ NEXT: Netanyahu Reveals One Big Succession Secret — And Keeps Another

Grassley Joins Democrats Seeking Answers On FBI Director Kash Patel’s Spending, Travel

The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

WASHINGTON — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is pressing FBI Director Kash Patel for answers about his spending, travel, and use of government resources, giving Democrats an influential Republican ally as lawmakers intensify oversight of the bureau’s finances.

In a letter to Patel, Grassley (R-Iowa) requested records related to the FBI director’s travel, security costs, and vehicle purchases, saying Congress has a duty to ensure taxpayer dollars are being spent appropriately.

Grassley Demands Travel Records

Among his requests, Grassley asked Patel to account for any personal use of FBI aircraft.

“For each trip where you used an FBI aircraft for personal travel, have you reimbursed the FBI as required by law? If yes, please provide the records,” Grassley wrote.

The senator also called for an “independent and objective review” of Patel’s travel practices and questioned procurement decisions made under his leadership.

Grassley specifically asked the bureau to explain why it “decided to purchase BMW vehicles instead of Chevy Suburbans,” signaling that his inquiry extends beyond travel expenses to broader spending decisions.

Democrats Raise Similar Concerns

Grassley’s letter follows similar requests from Senate Democrats, who have questioned Patel’s travel, security expenditures, and use of government resources.

As Mediate reports:

Patel’s personal jet travel as the head of the FBI has also raised concern with critics. Officials have said Patel reimburses travel that is personal, which equates to what he would fork over typically for commercial travel.

Democratic lawmakers specifically noted a “VIP snorkel” trip Patel reportedly took. According to a report based on government emails purportedly obtained by the Associated Press, Patel took an “exclusive excursion” around the sunken USS Arizona battleship, a Pearl Harbor memorial during a trip to Hawaii.

“Your VIP snorkeling experience in Hawaii was not an isolated incident,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) wrote in a letter. “You frequently demand special perks on ‘official’ trips around the globe, such as a taxpayer-funded helicopter tour during your multi-country jaunt across East Asia and other recreational activities like jet skiing.”

The lawmakers cited a source who told them Patel told field office personnel in a meeting, “If you have golf, hockey, fishing, or hunting and beautiful sights, you’re going to see a lot of me.”

Democratic lawmakers have sought records detailing official travel costs, transportation expenses, and whether taxpayer-funded assets have been used exclusively for government business.

While they have not accused Patel of criminal wrongdoing, they argue Congress has a responsibility to review the bureau’s spending.

FBI Yet To Respond Publicly

The FBI has not publicly responded to Grassley’s latest requests.

Agency officials have previously maintained that travel by the FBI director is driven by operational and security requirements and that associated costs are consistent with those incurred by previous directors.

It remains unclear when the bureau will provide the documents requested by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Bipartisan Oversight

Grassley’s involvement gives the issue added significance because he has long been one of Congress’ most outspoken Republican advocates for oversight of the FBI and Justice Department.

Throughout his Senate career, Grassley has frequently scrutinized administrations from both parties, arguing that transparency is essential to maintaining public confidence in federal law enforcement.

His latest letter suggests that questions surrounding Patel’s management of the bureau are attracting bipartisan attention.

Pressure Mounts On FBI Leadership

Whether Grassley’s inquiry will uncover any significant issues remains unclear.

But his requests add to the growing scrutiny of Patel’s leadership, as lawmakers in both parties seek a clearer accounting of how the FBI has used taxpayer resources under his tenure.

READ NEXT: Trump Wants Immediate Supreme Court Do-Over

Trump Jokes About Keeping NYSE Bell For White House Ballroom

1
President Donald J. Trump hosts a Rose Garden Club dinner in honor of Police Week in the White House Rose Garden, Monday, May 11, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump joked Monday that he planned to keep the New York Stock Exchange’s ceremonial opening bell for display in his new White House ballroom, prompting criticism from opponents and renewed attention to the administration’s ongoing renovation projects.

Trump became the first president to ring the NYSE opening bell remotely from the Oval Office during an event marking the launch of the administration’s new “Trump Accounts” investment program for eligible children.

After ringing the bell, Trump quipped, “I’m not giving it back,” before later repeating the remark during a White House luncheon.

‘They’ll Have To Fight Like Hell’

Speaking to guests in the Rose Garden, Trump again pointed to the bell and joked about making it part of the White House.

“There’s the bell right there. It’s so beautiful, I’m not giving it back. I don’t know if it’s supposed to go back, but they’re gonna have to fight like hell to get it back,” Trump said.

It was not immediately clear whether the president was speaking entirely in jest, and there has been no indication that the NYSE bell will remain at the White House.

Latest In Series Of Similar Jokes

The remark follows several similar episodes in recent months.

Last month, Olympic speed skating champion Jordan Stolz placed one of his gold medals around Trump’s neck during an event in Wisconsin. Trump joked that he was “keeping it” before returning the medal.

He made a similar quip after FIFA President Gianni Infantino brought the FIFA World Cup trophy to the White House ahead of next year’s tournament, later saying FIFA had permitted the trophy to remain on display.

Ballroom Project Draws Renewed Attention

Trump’s latest comments also focused attention on the White House ballroom project, one of the administration’s most ambitious renovation efforts.

The ballroom, originally projected to cost about $200 million, has since grown substantially in scope. Recent reports indicate estimated costs have risen to roughly $600 million, though the administration disputes claims that taxpayers will bear a significant portion of the expense.

The White House has said the ballroom will provide a secure venue for large state functions and official events.

Critics Question Costs

Democrats and preservation groups have continued criticizing the project, arguing the administration understated its expected cost and failed to adequately explain how construction will ultimately be financed.

The White House has maintained that private donors are funding much of the project and has defended the renovation as a long-overdue modernization of the executive mansion.

Whether Trump’s comments about the NYSE bell were serious or simply another off-the-cuff joke, they quickly became the latest flashpoint in the broader debate surrounding the president’s efforts to reshape the White House during his second term.

READ NEXT: Former Democrat Star Arrested On Drug Charges