Allegations have surfaced regarding the role of a former FBI agent in opening an investigation against former President Donald Trump in 2020.
An FBI whistleblower's records revealed that Special Agent Timothy Thibault, who allegedly held anti-Trump sentiments, played a critical part in starting the investigation, dubbed "Arctic Frost," against Trump, Breitbart reported.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley released these records during a Senate hearing for FBI director nominee Kash Patel. Reports indicate that officials improperly authorized the investigation, with accusations against Thibault, who was later dismissed for violating political ethics guidelines. Authorities officially launched the investigation, formally known as "Arctic Frost," on April 13, 2022.
Internal Bureau emails allege that Timothy Thibault linked Trump to the investigation concerning the events surrounding the 2020 election. These communications reveal that Thibault actively participated in the inquiry months before officials approved it. Notably, on February 14, 2022, he emailed a draft of the investigation’s initiation language.
Thibault's internal correspondence further highlighted his belief in the necessity to include Donald Trump as a key subject of scrutiny. On February 24, 2022, he communicated with prosecutor John Crabb to advance Trump's inclusion in the proceedings. He proposed involving Trump on the basis of "predication," referencing a discussion with the investigative team.
Michelle Ball, another FBI official, emailed Thibault after Trump was placed as a criminal subject, receiving approval with Thibault's concise affirmation in response. Despite lacking the authority to commence investigations alone, Thibault sought and obtained consent from senior authorities.
April 11, 2022, marked an approval phase where the initiation of "Arctic Frost" proceeded in earnest. This decision was ratified by the FBI's deputy director approximately two days later. The thorough involvement of the FBI hierarchy suggests coordination at various levels even prior to the formal initiation.
This disclosure prompted Senator Grassley to question Deputy Attorney General nominee Kash Patel about the depth of involvement of various DOJ and FBI officials in the decision-making process. Grassley expressed particular interest in identifying who added Trump to the investigation long after its inception. He interrogated the potential roles of officeholders beyond Jack Smith, adding a layer of complexity to the inquiry.
Chuck Grassley asked during a hearing, Was Trump still removed as an investigative subject? If so, which Justice Department and FBI officials — other than Jack Smith — later added him for prosecution?
Richard Pilger, from the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, was another figure involved in reviewing and clearing the investigation, enabling further criminal processes. Grassley recognized Pilger's involvement and released a 2021 report critiquing Pilger’s historical case handling, reaffirming his concerns with the recent developments.
In 2022, both Grassley and Senator Ron Johnson issued a caution regarding what they described as flaws in the preliminary stages of Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation. This critique formed part of a broader conversation on the conduct and impartiality of key investigators in high-profile cases.
Allegations concerning Agent Thibault highlight the potential for partiality within federal investigations. His later termination, attributed to breaches of the Hatch Act—intended to restrict partisan political activity among federal employees—adds weight to claims of misconduct during the "Arctic Frost" probe.
The issue raised by Grassley not only questions the validity of the investigation's origin but also scrutinizes the broader conduct and potential biases within the FBI and DOJ's framework. The unfolding situation underscores the complex web of actions leading up to and during the investigation's unfolding.
As scrutiny continues, revelations about senior officials’ roles and biases could impact ongoing and future inquiries. The full scope of the investigation's initiation and execution remains subject to intense public, legal, and political examination.
