FBI Raids Whistleblower’s Home, Search For Six Hours Seeking Sensitive Mueller, Clinton Foundation Documents

Clinton speaks to crowd while wearing black top.
Astrid Stawiarz / Getty Images

Agents under the jurisdiction of the FBI raided the home of a federally-protected whistleblower, the Daily Caller reports. As legal counsel for the whistleblower, Michael Socarras, details, FBI agents arrived unannounced at his client’s home in Union Bridge, Maryland, demanding that the whistleblower immediately hand over documents related to several high-profile scandals and investigations.

“The bureau raided my client to seize what he legally gave Congress about the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One,” Socarras recounted, pointing out that — since his client has been recognized as an official whistleblower by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz — the agency’s actions constitute a blatant and “outrageous” disregard for his client’s whistleblower protections.

Dennis Nathan Cain, a former FBI contractor in his own right, is the man whose home was raided, unannounced, on November 19. Despite having been met at the door by Cain, the lead FBI agent in charge of the search and seizure operation was unconvinced by Cain’s report that he had been afforded protection by the Inspector General.

The raid was lawful, inasmuch as it was allowed by a court order signed by federal magistrate Stephanie A. Gallagher in the U.S. District Court for Baltimore, according to exclusive reporting from the Daily Caller.

While being questioned by the primary agent present at his home during the raid, Cain reportedly told the agent that the information being sought had already legally been transmitted to the congressional committees responsible for reviewing sensitive information of this nature — namely the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. He immediately handed over the requested information, despite having already assured agents present that the data had already been transmitted to the pertinent actors.

This did not dissuade the FBI agents on the premises, as they continued to dig through his possessions in search of any other items or information that they could find.

“After asking and getting my approval to do so, DOJ IG Michael Horowitz had a member of his staff physically take Mr. Cain’s classified document disclosure to the House and Senate Intelligence committees… For the bureau to show up at Mr. Cain’s home suggesting that those same documents are stolen federal property, and then proceed to seize copies of the same documents after being told at the house door that he is a legally protected whistleblower who gave them to Congress, is an outrageous disregard of the law,” Socarras said to interviewers regarding the incident.

The documents in question contain information which shows that federal officials had previously failed to investigate potential criminal activity concerning then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her Clinton Foundation, and Rosatom. Rosatom is the Russian company that would eventually go on to purchase Uranium One, a deal that would see Russia hold the rights, via purchase of the Canadian Uranium One, to 20 percent of licensed uranium mining rights within U.S. borders, per the National Post. There is a question as to whether or not the mined uranium could even be legally transported beyond those borders.

Robert Mueller in profile, testifying before the House Judiciary Committee.
  Alex Wong / Getty Images

The same documents held by Cain go on to illustrate that Robert Mueller, now special counsel to the Russia investigation, which Trump and his allies have called a “Witch Hunt” multiple times on social media and in speeches, “failed to investigate allegations of criminal misconduct pertaining to Rosatom and to other Russian government entities attached to Uranium One,” per the Daily Caller.

The FBI is remaining tight-lipped on the matter.

“On Nov. 19, the FBI conducted court authorized law enforcement activity in the Union Bridge, Maryland area,” FBI spokesman Dave Fitz said to the Daily Caller. “At this time, we have no further comment.”