Retired FBI Agent John Nantz on the FBI, DEI, the Bidens and that Now Infamous FD-1023

Introduction

There is much hand wringing among some retired FBI officials citing public opinion polls showing that the FBI's reputation is not what it was just a few years ago. They point to the FBI's stream of unsavory news beginning when former director James Comey went public in 2016 with the details of Hillary Clinton's emails.

Others point to the FBI's overhaul post-9/11 under the leadership of Robert S. Mueller and later, his role as Special Counsel taking over the investigation into allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The reality is that over the years, the FBI has had its share of missteps and outrageous personnel incidents. What large organization hasn't? But it has always recovered from them because most people understand that personal failings or organizational stumbles will happen and what we do in response to them is what matters.

While all of the FBI's work in all of those more recent episodes has been thoroughly and exhaustively reviewed by the Department of Justice and two DOJ Inspectors General, resulting in one criminal conviction, some people, particularly some retired FBI agents, feel the need to constantly dredge up those events and the people associated with them, as examples of why today's FBI is, in their view, beyond repair.

Many appear on Fox News, or Newsmax, or write for the New York Post or Townhall--all right-wing media outlets--where their audiences await the latest drivel like hogs cavorting in slop. Those audiences have come to expect it, to demand it, lest they wander off seeking it elsewhere. And the "influencers" who provide the slop are constantly dishing it out. Everybody wins.

Only the truth suffers, but who cares about that? This is the dawning of the New Age. Truth is not something upon which we all agree. Hell no. Truth is what we choose to believe no matter what undercuts it.

One of these retired FBI agents-turned-pundit is John Nantz. What follows is my dissection of some of his recent essays including today's.

Nantz sat for an interview with Andy Andrews shortly after he retired in 2022. It is best to hear him in his own words. That interview can be viewed here.

Part One

Reired FBI agent John Nantz, Townhall columnist and anti-DEI crusader, took aim last week at FBI Training Division Assistant Director Jacqueline Maguire recent statement about FBI applicants. His opening line reads, “After the publication of the House Committee on the Judiciary’s report on the effects of DEI policy at the FBI, Assistant Director of the FBI’s Training Division, Jaqueline Maguire, penned a rebuttal.”

For someone who regularly offers his opinion about perceived FBI weaknesses, he might be a bit more cautious before assigning ownership of a “report” to a congressional committee which had nothing to do with its creation. It is titled, “Report on Alarming Trends in FBI Special Agent Recruitment and Selection.” It was submitted to two of the most partisan Republicans—and rabid FBI critics--in the House, Jim Jordan, (R-OH) and James Comer, (R-KY). It was produced by “A National Alliance of Retired and Active-Duty FBI Special Agents and Analysts.”

The report is an unsigned, unattributed collection of anecdotes solicited from current and former FBI employees during the period of July 8 through August 4, 2023. It is unclear to whom or how the request for information (RFI) was distributed, nor does the report provide a total number of RFI recipients. There were only 23 respondents to the RFI and in the absence of comprehensive sampling data, 23 out of a total workforce of roughly 37,000, is statistically meaningless. ??

Appendix C of this report provides the reasoning for this survey:

“Since 2000, there have been numerous publicized instances of illegal actions by senior FBI personnel and management of bias and claims of ‘weaponization’ of the FBI against well-known conservative political groups and leaders. These actions involve the entire range of conservative political and social activists, from former president Trump down to individual parents protesting curriculum or policy at school board meetings. These publicly acknowledged actions run the gamut, from acknowledgement of widespread misuse of FISA authorities46, to ‘doctoring’ records to secure a FISA warrant, to targeting citizens engaged in First Amendment protected activity with counter-terrorism authorities. Additionally, the FBI has consistently failed to manage and discipline its personnel in non-politically charged cases. The widespread violation by the FBI of existing law and DOJ policies was exhaustively documented in the public release of the Durham report, which clearly proves the weaponization of the Bureau against political opponents. [my emphasis added]

“Preliminary source reporting indicates the widespread nature of this abuse and mismanagement by the FBI may be reducing the number of high-quality candidates applying to join the FBI. If so, this poses a significant potential national security risk to the United States. The FBI is extremely reliant on recruiting highly qualified and skilled personnel to accomplish its mission as the lead intelligence and law enforcement agency in the U.S. for detecting, deterring, and disrupting national security threats to the United States and its interests. A failure to attract, recruit and retain only the highest caliber of applicants would directly and negatively affect the ability of the FBI to accomplish this vital mission."

I added the emphasis above because that specific text reads like it was lifted from talking points prepared by GOP political consultants. High praise is afforded to the Durham report which “clearly proves the weaponization of the Bureau against political opponents.”

While Trump, the MAGA GOP, and some retired FBI officials (maybe even some who are members of this alliance) anticipated bombshell results, the Durham probe ended with a fizzle. Even the conviction he claimed for Kevin Clinesmith’s document altering was first uncovered and documented by DOJ IG Michael Horowitz in December, 2019.

For a document allegedly prepared by a vast alliance of current and former FBI agents and analysts presumably quite experienced in preparing solid investigative reports, it is long on supposition and short on evidence. On that count it falls short. But as a political hammer, it delivers nicely for the FBI’s critics.

Yet Nantz relies on this report to bolster his DEI paranoia. He writes, “At least for now, the majority of FBI agents continue to work diligently to preserve civil liberties while aggressively pursuing the criminals who threaten American citizens and our national security — whether in the form of child predators, agents of foreign powers, or rabid terrorists bent on slaughter and destruction. The proof of that statement lies in the bold and powerful eyewitness testimony of an alliance of retired, active-duty FBI Special Agents, and analysts who represent 23 credibly documented instances of DEI policy adversely impacting recruitment, hiring, training, and job performance.” [Emphasis mine]

That “Alliance” provided 10 key findings sifted from 23 responses. One of them made me laugh out loud. It read, “An increasing number of lower quality candidates—described by one source as “breadcrumbs” because they were rejected by other federal law enforcement agencies—are applying to become FBI agents; and the FBI is selecting those candidates to become FBI Special Agents because they satisfy the FBI’s priority to meet Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) mandates.”

I’ve been called a lot of things, but now I can add breadcrumb to that list. You see, before I applied to the FBI, I had been rejected by the DEA and the NCIS. No knock on those two agencies, but I’m pretty happy about that.? ??

Nantz continues, “The House report contradicts AD Maguire’s statements, and provides direct evidence rather than the AD’s pliable metrics. Maguire touts, ‘on average, more than 50% of the new agents came from a military or law enforcement background, approximately 48% had advanced degrees, and the average age was 29.’

“Maguire cites statistics from 2022-23, which documents the graduation of nearly 2,000 new agents from the FBI academy—individuals which were selected from a pool of 48,000 applicants. Getting a seat at the FBI academy is an achievement few are able to realize. But, that is of small comfort to an onlooking population of citizens, and retired and current agents, who have all witnessed the undeniably atrocious antics of people like Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, and Lisa Page—a trio who have become emblematic of personal bias and government weaponization.

“What is far more illuminating are her statements like, ‘the last special agent class that graduated from Quantico was almost half women...’ — that is precisely the kind of analysis that concerns Americans about DEI policy. Of what relevance is the sex of a candidate to any merit based selection process? It also begs the question which stymied a recent Supreme Court nominee: what is a woman?”

Nantz describes Maguire’s recruiting statistics as “pliable metrics,” while including a gratuitous shot at Peter Strzok, Andy McCabe and Lisa Page. Yet he swallows whole the vague and unsubstantiated musings of an alliance of 23 unknown individuals. That’s pretty rich.

Here is AD Maguire in her own words, “Our classes are also more diverse because diversity—in its many incarnations—makes us better able to meet the challenges the Bureau faces in today’s world. In fact, the last special agent class that graduated from Quantico was almost half women. We also have more people of color and more people from different educational and experiential backgrounds. Diversity does not mean lesser; it means variety, and variety is what we need to operate in so many different places, across so many different populations, to address so many different threats.

“Did we lower standards to admit and graduate more women in our most recent class? Absolutely not. If you want to see the physical fitness standards, for instance, that a new agent must meet to graduate from Quantico, you can do so at this link. Think you can do it? Give it a try. This is just a guess, but many of our outside critics will never come close to meeting our standards. Our training is designed to be hard, and properly so. Very few people even make it to Quantico, and once here they must work exceptionally hard to graduate.”

Nantz is not alone in his views of DEI. He sought additional support from Chris Swecker, former Assistant Director of the Criminal Investigative Division. Nantz wrote, “Chris Swecker, told Townhall, ‘My sources inside the FBI are telling me that DEI policy is definitely affecting hiring and training standards. My sources are consistent with the report [House Judiciary] of the onboard agents. Diversity is essential…but when you start making subjective exceptions based on requirements to reach certain [DEI] goals, that tends to dilute excellence.’” [Disclosure: Chris and I served on the same squad in Oklahoma City. He is a brilliant investigator and a good guy. I just disagree with him on this and some other topics.]

Nantz concludes his piece with this, “Regardless of AD Maguire’s protestations to the contrary, common sense and the eyewitness testimony of highly credible, subject matter experts aver that the Biden administration’s DEI policy is, and will continue to be, widely destructive.”

AD Maguire concludes her message with this: “Some people—including some within our organization—find change unsettling. But the mere fact that something is different than when they graduated from Quantico does not make those changes bad or wrong. Does the FBI look different than we did in 1970? We sure do. In fact, women were not even allowed to be special agents in 1970. Changing with the times is smart and necessary.

“But some things have not changed, and never will—including the high quality of the men and women who raise their hands and take the oath to do difficult and dangerous work as FBI special agents.”

Thank you, AD Jacqueline Maguire.

Part Two

On July 23, 2023, John Nantz published another rant against Joe Biden. It was titled, “FBI Document Indicates Joe Biden Is A Corruptocrat.” It’s as if Nantz is on the MAGA GOP payroll. But hey, free speech is free speech, right?

This is the opening paragraph: “Joe Biden is a liar. Joe Biden is corrupt. And, Joe Biden is really, really stupid. So, what else is new? Anyone awake since 2020 has already assessed that the man who currently occupies the White House and claims the title of “president” is an imposter — an obvious decrepit who makes everyone nervous when he walks.”

By the fourth paragraph, Nantz blows his familiar dog whistle by referring to “Barrack Hussein Obama” before blaming Biden for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine—a familiar claim from the hard right.

But it is in the fifth paragraph where Nantz settles into describing the alleged corruption swirling around the President and his ill-behaved son, Hunter.

Enter the FBI’s FD-1023, “Confidential Human Source Reporting Document.” After months of wrangling and demands from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Rep. James Comer (R-KY), House Oversight Committee Chairman, FBI Director Chris Wray provided them with a redacted copy of the FD-1023. And Grassley immediately released it to the public.

Nantz wrote, “The recent release of an FBI FD-1023 document, though in itself anecdotal, is a bombshell. In it, an unnamed Confidential Human Source (CHS) claims to have had several conversations with the CEO of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky. Both Hunter and Joe Biden are alleged to have received five million dollars each to provide influence favorable to Burisma. Zlochevsky is said to be in possession of 17 recorded conversations with Hunter and Joe Biden, which directly implicate both of them in influence peddling in Ukraine and abroad.

“The FD-1023 is a type of FBI document that contains raw reporting, meaning that the information has not been verified. However, the document indicates that the CHS had been reporting since 2017. That’s a strong indication the CHS is considered to be reliable and credible.

“This week, the country will hear from Devon Archer, Hunter Biden’s one-time best friend. Archer claims to be able to verify everything we’ve seen thus far from the FD-1023, and more. As evidence combines in mountainous proportions, the question becomes — what of it all? Former President Donald Trump has a track record of getting things done. I’m hoping it’ll be up to him and his new appointees at DOJ and the FBI to make things right.”? ?

Unfortunately for the MAGA GOP, its supporting cast of right-wing pundits and media outlets, and the handful of retired FBI people who consistently trash the Biden Administration while waiting for their false prophet, Donald Trump, to deliver them from evil, the FBI in Los Angeles last week ruined their vision.

The FBI CHS at the center of the FD-1023 that caused the rabid right, Nantz, and others to salivate with expectation was himself indicted for lying about the information that he has provided about the Bidens. Gee, imagine that.

As for the other false prophet, Devon Archer, whom Nantz described as being able to verify everything in that FD-1023 “and more,” his testimony was as revealing as the contents of Al Capone’s safe. Another key witness proven useless.

Nantz should have abandoned this topic after he wrote, “The FD-1023 is a type of FBI document that contains raw reporting, meaning that the information has not been verified.” Instead, his anti-Biden bias overruled his FBI training and experience as a former counterintelligence investigator.

The FBI, the present-day FBI with all of its problems and imagined DEI weaknesses that hinder its ability to perform its mission, continues to do what it has always done—investigate violations of federal law, while supporting and defending the Constitution. ?

?

Part Three

In his piece today on Townhall, Nantz asked, “Who Are The Kansas City Parade Shooters, And Why Don’t We Know?” In what is an otherwise tragic news story about the murder of three first responders, Nantz chose to focus on how a small online news source in Minnesota, Alpha News, was able to scoop all the others in confirming the identity of the alleged killer. That’s great reporting and it’s not unusual for a small news outlet to uncover important facts about an event before the media “big guns” do.

Nantz buries that detail in the eleventh paragraph after devoting the first ten to his usual whining about how the Left and CNN conspire against conservatives, the Republican Party, and its constituents.

Then Nantz diverts from his topic to explain how an image of an individual unrelated to the shooting went viral. Here’s how he describes that episode in his piece today: “Early on in the evolving story of the Kansas City Shooting, a Chiefs fan, Denton Loudermill, was misidentified as one of the shooters and mischaracterized as an illegal immigrant. Loudermill was handcuffed by Kansas City P.D. at the scene, but was only guilty of public intoxication and refusing to comply with police directives to vacate the crime scene. The moral of that story is, don’t conduct yourself as a drunken, disorderly buffoon and you’ll likely not have an unflattering picture circulating on social media. [Emphasis mine]

“Furthermore, Biden’s criminal neglect of the southern border doesn’t need yet another example of importee violence to make the moral argument against his deplorable policy any more strident.

“We don’t know more about the two Kansas City Shooters, not because they’re juveniles, but because the Democrat narrative isn’t supported by yet another incident of minority violence. The truth is becoming the exclusive purview of citizen journalists, who are not beholden to the corporate interests of Democrat party donors. The truth will come out, but it’ll be late on a Friday when nobody’s looking. Then, the discredited, outdated legacy media outlets will pat themselves on the back for doing the right thing, when the time for that has long since past[sic].”

What Nantz fails to mention here is his part in pushing that erroneous image by publishing it on his LinkedIn account. As bad as it was implicating an innocent man, Nantz took the additional step of adding politically charged language to it. And judging by some of the comments he generated with it, his audience was quick to jump on the bigot train.

Above the photo, Nantz wrote, “Here’s why you’re hearing zero about the Kansas City Chief’s parade shooters—at least one of them is an illegal alien, aka, a Joe Biden importee.”

Why I added the emphasis above.

Even though Denton Loudermill was wrongly accused of having a role in the shooting—an accusation that Nantz gleefully compounded—he had to take a cheap shot at him in an effort to salvage some of what he wrote in that pathetic LI post. He refers to Loudermill as a “drunken, disorderly buffoon” and blames that for having his “unflattering picture circulating on social media.” That from a guy who regularly pounds the media for “getting it wrong.”

When that post appeared in my feed, I immediately scoured news sites to find where this had been reported. I found nothing. I did find lots of stories citing the Kansas City Police Chief indicating that there was no information yet on the identities of the shooter(s).

I placed a comment below that image on Nantz’s LI page. I asked him to please provide a source for his apparent speculation about the individual in the photo. ?

After a few hours without a response, I posted another comment on his LI page. In it, I provided a news story that cited police officials had not provided any information about any suspect(s).

Much later Nantz did provide a link to a Fox News story about the incident, but that story reinforced my suspicion that Nantz’s original post was all BS. It said absolutely nothing about the identity of the suspect(s).

Sometime later, Nantz posted a tweet from Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN). Burchett wrote: “It has come to my attention that in one of my previous posts, one of the shooters was identified as an illegal alien.? This was based on multiple, incorrect news reports stating that. I have removed the post.”

Nantz added to Burchett's post, “Here’s a representative with integrity! I’ve followed suit.”

OK, it’s rare—and commendable--that a politician admits a screwup. Give Burchett points for that. But here is a more complete report on Burchett’s behavior. Yeah, not so pure.

Meanwhile, after bestowing a bright halo of integrity on Burchett, Nantz looks to bask in its glow as well, dim as it is, by boldly stating, "I've followed suit."

Sorry, no profile in courage will be forthcoming for either Nantz or Burchett from this sorry episode. You could have waited for official information, but instead you push a loaded comment with a prejudicial image to an audience already primed to accept it without question.

And some wonder why the FBI's reputation has slipped.

Jacqueline Maguire, Peter Strzok , Andrew McCabe , Lisa Page, and yes, the FBI—none of you deserve having to endure this kind of nonsense from someone who proudly bows at Donald Trump's feet while praying for his return to the White House.

That, more than anything else, explains a lot.?

?

?

?