Catherine Herridge

We Obtain Internal FBI DEI Guide On Managing Unconscious Bias

Separately, as part of our investigation, recently retired FBI agents said they saw, firsthand, how law enforcement capabilities were compromised because merit took a backseat to DEI priorities. They dubbed the legendary FBI Quantico Training Academy the “Participation Academy” because of headquarter’s pressure to “push through” poorly performing candidates to meet their DEI objectives. The retired agents said FBI Director Patel inherits a workforce where standards dropped impacting physical fitness of agents, their firearms skills as well as professional qualifications, putting the FBI mission and safety at risk. DEEP DIVE More than a half dozen recently retired FBI agents agreed to speak with me on a confidential basis.  They said they feared retaliation for describing their experiences with the FBI’s DEI initiatives. While fiercely loyal to the bureau, they said they felt compelled to come forward, citing a dangerous reduction in standards that they believe endanger agents and the public. The group of retired agents was diverse.  It included male, female, Asian, Black and White agents from field offices in different parts of the country.  Their work experience covered multiple facets of the recruitment and training process. Everyone I spoke with offered a first hand account of DEI’s impact. FBI DEI Guide Defines “Unconscious Bias” The retired agents told me they valued diversity because it could strengthen the FBI mission but in recent years, the agents said FBI leadership took the attitude the bureau was “too White.”   The decline, they said, began under FBI Director Mueller who made the DC Headquarters his focus.  They said it accelerated under FBI Director Comey. They blamed Director Wray for standing by as the “train wreck happened.” “Ways To Manage Your Unconscious Bias” I was told that the physical fitness performance of candidates declined. The requirements include timed sit-ups (1 minute), timed 300-m sprint, untimed push-up maximum and timed 1.5 mile run. The retired agents described recruits who had an “attitude problem.” The recruits would quit the long distance run or claim injuries if they thought they would not pass a requirement.   The number of successfully completed push ups was routinely low because many recruits didn’t have the skill or strength to follow the required protocol (i.e bad form, not low enough.) What I learned about firearms training was also concerning.  I was told some recruits lacked the “mental toughness” to competently handle guns. Other candidates had documented mental health issues.  While their performance was poor, there was a “push them through Quantico attitude.” The backbone of FBI investigations is a witness interview summary known as a “302.”  In some cases, new agents lacked basic writing skills to complete a 302, in part, because work experience requirements had been relaxed.  Once poor performing recruits were “pushed through Quantico,” the hope was that FBI Field Offices would fix them. While the retired agents said diversity was valuable to the bureau it had taken precedence over merit. They said they looked up to the FBI when they joined and are hopeful Director Patel can restore and reverse this decline. These retired FBI agents are solution oriented and respectfully asked if Director Patel would be willing to meet with them because they understand where the change needs to happen internally. Describing how “woke broke the FBI,” one of the agents shared the wrenching personal decision to discourage their child from following in their professional footsteps. Something that would have been inconceivable during most of their time with the Bureau. FBI spokesman Ben Williamson said, ““Director Patel’s new FBI will be an entirely mission focused institution — working every day to get criminals off our streets, keep the American people safe, and let good agents be good agents. We are aggressively working to abide by any Presidential directive to root out politically motivated, social engineering projects — they have zero home here and never will as long as Director Patel is at the helm.” We are making this exclusive reporting free.   The full FBI DEI workplace guide is available to our subscribers.

Subscribe to our premium content to read the rest. Become a paying subscriber to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content. Subscribe to Catherine Herridge Reports

Digging for DEI Dollars: Watchdog Report Identifies 460 Programs Across 24 Federal Agencies

The Functional Government Initiative and the Center for Renewing America identify at least a trillion dollars’ worth of divisive, identity-based programs and policies among the federal thicket and make suggestions that could ensure they don’t come back.

On his first day back in office, President Trump issued an executive order to eliminate “radical and wasteful” Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) “programs and preferences” from the federal government. The Biden administration embraced this “woke” agenda and embedded it across the executive branch. Ensuring these programs do not make a comeback will take a sustained effort.

To help the administration in this task, and to help educate the public on the scope of the problem, the Functional Government Initiative (FGI) and the Center for Renewing America (CRA) have published DEI Spending in the Biden Administration. This report traces the Biden administration’s web of DEI programs and influence throughout the government, provides numbers on how much money these programs and initiatives wasted, and offers options for Congress to consider that could root out DEI ideology permanently.

A crucial guide to uncovering the myriad DEI expenditures, both small and large, were the “Equity Action Plans” (EAPs) that President Biden demanded across the government. The Biden administration claimed that these plans were designed to identify and remove barriers keeping federal resources from “marginalized” or “underserved” communities, particularly in areas like procurement, contracting, and grant opportunities. In reality, the systemic focus on DEI poisoned federal governance, contributing to the substantial increase in related spending and diverting resources toward controversial policies, away from agency missions. The Biden administration forcibly inserted the language of DEI into every corner of the executive branch.

The study identified 460 programs across 24 government agencies that diverted resources to DEI initiatives. At least $1 trillion was infused with DEI principles. Here are some examples taken from various EAPs:

• The Defense Department planned to “Integrate environmental/economic justice tools.”
• FEMA found the need to “Install equity as a foundation of emergency management.”
• The Department of Labor “must embed equity in a sustainable manner that recognizes the multiple and overlapping identities held by workers.”

President Trump’s swift actions and executive orders stopped these efforts. To ensure a future president can’t just reverse course upon taking office, Congressional action could banish DEI philosophies for good. Our report includes suggestions for lawmakers to consider for eliminating DEI and other radical ideologies—detailed legislative proposals that could prevent the resurrection of poisonous ideas and practices in our national government.

Wade Miller, Senior Advisor for CRA, issued the following statement:

“DEI is deeply rooted throughout all aspects of the federal government, and it needs to be eliminated completely. Thankfully, the Trump administration has already embarked on a vitally necessary complete audit of each and every government program. We offer, in this report, what we hope are additional resources and tools that the new administration and Congress can use to identify, destroy, and permanently remove DEI from the federal government.”

Roderick Law, spokesman for FGI, issued the following statement:

“The dual study could both expedite the elimination of DEI from the executive branch and show just how quickly pernicious ideologies can spread inside the government. The nature of DEI is both divisive and anti-American, so why force it onto the military, the Commerce Department, or the EPA? After President Biden lavishly funded and pushed these controversial principles into every possible area of government, our hope is that raising these questions and offering Congress and responsible executive branch officials tools and suggestions can keep it from happening again.”