Kash Patel’s Bombshell Accusations Against Jamie Raskin: FBI Director Uncovers “Bribery, Intimidation, and Lies” – Calls for Grand Jury in J6 Committee Scandal
In a bombshell revelation that’s sending shockwaves through Washington and igniting a political firestorm nationwide, FBI Director Kash Patel has accused Jamie Raskin, Co-Chairman of the January 6 Select Committee, of bribery, intimidation, and lies—uncovering a “treasure trove” of evidence that could dismantle the committee’s legacy and spark criminal charges. Patel, in a blistering statement Tuesday, declared Raskin’s actions “more than inappropriate—they’re criminal,” demanding a grand jury convene immediately to hear the case. If pursued, this could reshape narratives around January 6, expose deep-seated corruption, and divide the nation further in an already polarized post-election landscape.
Patel’s accusations came during a high-stakes press conference at FBI headquarters, where he laid out the findings from the J6 Unselect Committee Task Force—a special unit formed to probe the committee’s operations. “After much investigation, we’ve uncovered bribery, intimidation, and lies from none other than Committee Co-Chairman Jamie Raskin,” Patel stated, voice steady but eyes fierce. “His actions are more than inappropriate—they’re criminal.” The room fell into stunned silence as Patel detailed evidence allegedly showing Raskin pressuring witnesses, offering incentives for favorable testimony, and fabricating details to fit a narrative against former President Trump.
The “treasure trove” includes leaked emails, witness affidavits, and financial records purportedly linking Raskin to undisclosed payments and threats aimed at shaping the committee’s report. “This wasn’t oversight—it was orchestration,” Patel charged. “Raskin abused power to intimidate and bribe, all while lying to the American people.” Sources say the task force’s probe, launched under the Trump administration, has been building for months, with Patel now pushing for a grand jury to indict.
Raskin’s office fired back swiftly: “These baseless smears are partisan revenge from a politicized FBI. Congressman Raskin has always pursued truth with integrity.” Allies like Rep. Adam Schiff called it “McCarthyism revived”: “Patel’s witch hunt targets those who defended democracy.” But Republicans rallied: “Finally—justice for J6 lies,” tweeted Rep. Jim Jordan.
The fallout exploded online, with #RaskinCorruption and #J6Truth trending worldwide as clips amassed millions of views. Supporters of Patel cheered “expose the deep state,” while critics decried “authoritarian overreach.” The nation split sharply: MAGA voices demanded arrests, progressives warned of “democracy’s death.”
Legal experts say if evidence holds, RICO or obstruction charges could follow: “This could be Watergate-level if proven,” one analyst noted. “Bribery in congressional probes? Career-ender.”
As grand jury looms, Patel’s move—rooted in his “America First” ethos—feels like reckoning.
Kash Patel didn’t just accuse.
He demanded justice.
And Washington trembles.
Jamie’s “criminal” actions exposed?
The truth unfolds—and America watches.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
