LightNews LightNews
alastairbowyer.bsky.social
@alastairbowyer.bsky.social
21 followers 79 following 0 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted
mmasnick.bsky.social
This is pretty fucked up in lots of ways.
Approximately one to two days later, Driscoll received a call from Mr. Paul Ingrassia, a White House representative who identified himself as the White House-DOJ transition liaison. Ingrassia, then 29 years old, had no experience working in the White House, DOJ, or FBI. Nevertheless, he identified to Driscoll that he was on the White House-DOJ transition team and wanted to conduct a vetting interview with Driscoll who, according to Ingrassia, was being considered for “a high-level position at the FBI.” Driscoll conferred with the FBI Newark Chief Division Legal Counsel to confirm it was legally appropriate to call Ingrassia back. After confirming it was proper to do so, Driscoll then called Ingrassia back and left a voicemail. The next day, on January 17, 2025, Ingrassia called Driscoll back and conducted a telephonic interview. Driscoll asked Ingrassia why he was being interviewed, to which Ingrassia replied that it was for “a high-level position at the FBI.” Driscoll responded that he was already serving in a high-level position in the FBI. Ingrassia did not elaborate any further. The following is, in summary and substance, a list of the questions Ingrassia asked Driscoll and Driscoll’s corresponding responses: Question 1: How would you define the most significant threats to the United States? Response 1: Cyber; terrorist; and counterintelligence threats posed by China; Russia; Iran; North Korea; Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (“ISIS”); ISIS-Khorasan and their affiliates with external operational capabilities; porous borders; fentanyl; and transnational organized crime, e.g., cartels. Question 3: Who did you vote for? Response 3: Driscoll refused to answer this question and stated that it was an inappropriate question with Hatch Act implications. Question 4: Do you agree that the FBI agents who “stormed” Mar-a-Lago, to include the rank-and-file, should be held accountable? Response 4: No; FBI personnel were doing their job in furtherance of court orders, legal warrants, and a properly predicated investigation. Question 5: What are your thoughts on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion? Response 5: [trimmed since running out of room but he gave a reasonable answer about the importance of diversity but not it being sole reason for hiring] Question 6: When did you start supporting President Trump? Response 6: Driscoll refused to answer this question. Question 7: Have you voted for a Democrat in the last five elections? Response 7: Driscoll refused to answer this question. 63. After this final question, Ingrassia ended the interview. 64. Later that evening, Driscoll received a call from Bove. Driscoll understood that Bove was expected to be named Acting Deputy Attorney General (“A/DAG”) of the United States following the inauguration. At the time of the call, Bove was a private lawyer who had been part of President Trump’s criminal defense team. Bove asked Driscoll what happened on the vetting call, to which Driscoll responded that he found Ingrassia’s questions to be highly inappropriate and political in nature and that he (Driscoll) was not supportive of serving in any leadership role in the FBI if it required him to pass a vetting assessment based on political views. Driscoll noted that he had never shared his political views, or even whether he had any, in his entire professional career. 65. Bove told Driscoll that he “failed” the vetting interview and that Ingrassia reported that Driscoll was combative and not “based out” enough. Driscoll interpreted Ingrassia’s report to
September 11, 2025 at 12:49 AM