The FBI’s investigation into the 2017 congressional baseball shooting was a shameful failure, swept under the rug to hide the gunman’s clear anti-Republican motives. A scathing House report released Tuesday exposes how the agency mishandled evidence and misled the public about an attack that left six people wounded.
As reported by NY Post, in June 2017, James Hodgkinson opened fire on a Republican congressional baseball practice in Alexandria, Virginia, injuring six, including House Majority Whip Steve Scalise. The FBI’s initial probe concluded Hodgkinson sought “suicide by cop,” a claim now debunked by congressional investigators. This misstep ignored evidence pointing to a targeted political attack.
The House Judiciary Committee, alongside the Intelligence Committee and its Oversight & Investigations Subcommittee, uncovered the FBI’s blunders. Their report, based on 3,000 case file documents, reveals a pattern of negligence and obfuscation. It paints a picture of an agency more concerned with narrative than truth.
A handwritten note found on Hodgkinson listed several Republican lawmakers as targets, yet the FBI downplayed this bombshell. At the time, agents noted a sheet of paper with six congressional names but failed to elaborate. This omission buried the gunman’s clear political motivations.
The FBI’s early briefing labeled the attack a desperate act, not a calculated strike against Republicans. Congressional investigators found the agency hid evidence contradicting this “suicide by cop” theory. Such suppression erodes faith in institutions meant to protect the public.
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, didn’t mince words about the FBI’s failures. “The guy had a hit list in his pocket,” Jordan said. His frustration reflects the outrage of hardworking Americans tired of elitist cover-ups.
The report outlines three glaring FBI errors that tainted the investigation. Agents neglected to interview key victims and witnesses, leaving critical perspectives unheard. This oversight alone calls into question the agency’s commitment to justice.
The FBI also failed to construct a comprehensive timeline of the 2017 shooting. Without this foundation, the investigation lacked clarity and coherence. Such sloppiness is unacceptable for an agency entrusted with national security.
Compounding these errors, the FBI improperly classified parts of the case files. This misstep hindered transparency and accountability. It’s a stark reminder of how bureaucratic overreach can obscure the truth.
In 2021, the FBI abruptly reclassified the attack as domestic violent extremism. This shift came without new evidence to justify the change. The House report questions the agency’s motives, suggesting a pattern of agenda-driven conclusions.
Jordan pointed to a deeper issue with the FBI’s leadership. “Comey, McCabe, Wray, they all knew it was domestic terrorism, but that didn’t fit their narrative,” he said. His words resonate with Americans skeptical of entrenched power structures.
The FBI’s mishandling of the 2017 shooting investigation isn’t an isolated incident. Jordan highlighted other unresolved cases, stating, “This is the same FBI that can’t tell us who planted the pipe bomb.” His critique underscores a broader distrust in federal institutions.
The suppressed handwritten note, listing Republican targets, should have been a focal point of the investigation. Instead, the FBI buried it, prioritizing a flawed narrative over facts. This betrayal stings for those who value honesty over political gamesmanship.
The report’s findings demand accountability from an agency that’s lost its way. Failing to interview victims or build a timeline isn’t just incompetence—it’s a disservice to the American people. Faith and family-driven communities deserve better.
The 2017 congressional baseball shooting was a wake-up call, and the FBI hit snooze. This House report lays bare an investigation marred by bias and error, leaving justice unserved. It’s time for reform to restore integrity to our nation’s law enforcement.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is shaking up the Pentagon with a bold move to slash top military ranks. On Monday, he issued a directive to reduce four-star generals and admirals by at least 20%, aiming to cut through bureaucratic bloat and refocus resources on America’s warfighters. This decision signals a return to leaner, more effective military leadership rooted in practical priorities.
According to CBS News, Hegseth’s order, outlined in a concise one-page memo, targets senior Pentagon leadership. The directive was made public on the Defense Department’s website, ensuring transparency. It also gained attention through a video Hegseth posted on X, where he emphasized redirecting resources to frontline troops.
The memo mandates a minimum 20% reduction in four-star generals and admirals, alongside a 10% cut in all flag and general officers. Additionally, at least 20% of general officers in the National Guard face elimination. These cuts aim to streamline operations and eliminate redundant positions that burden the military.
Currently, the military has 38 four-star generals and admirals, according to Defense Department data from March 31, 2025. Hegseth has long questioned the need for such a high number of top officers. His directive reflects a push to prioritize efficiency over entrenched bureaucracy.
In a February town hall at the Pentagon, Hegseth highlighted a stark contrast in military leadership. He noted that during World War II, the U.S. operated with just seven four-star generals, compared to 44 today. This historical perspective underscores his skepticism about the necessity of so many high-ranking positions.
“We won World War II with seven four-star generals,” Hegseth said at the town hall. “Today we have 44.” He questioned whether all current positions directly contribute to warfighting success, urging a review to ensure alignment with mission-critical goals.
Hegseth’s memo, first reported by CNN, emphasizes removing unnecessary layers that hinder military effectiveness. “To drive innovation and operational excellence, the military must be unencumbered by unnecessary bureaucratic layers,” he wrote. This approach resonates with those who value a military focused on strength, not paperwork.
The Defense Secretary did not specify a timeline for implementing the cuts. However, he stressed that the reductions would be carried out “expeditiously.” This urgency reflects a commitment to swift reform in a system often slowed by inertia.
In his X video, Hegseth doubled down on redirecting resources to those who matter most. “We’re going to shift resources from bloated headquarters elements to our warfighters,” he declared. This pledge aligns with traditional values of supporting troops over desk-bound elites.
Hegseth’s focus on cutting top ranks addresses long-standing concerns about Pentagon bloat. His comparison to World War II highlights a time when America achieved victory with a leaner command structure. Today’s oversized leadership, he argues, risks diluting focus on core military objectives.
The 20% reduction in four-star generals and admirals will impact the military’s highest echelons. With 38 officers currently holding this rank, the cut could affect at least seven or eight positions. This move signals a shift toward a more agile, mission-driven force.
National Guard general officers also face significant reductions under Hegseth’s plan. The 20% cut in their ranks aims to mirror the efficiency sought in active-duty forces. These changes prioritize readiness over administrative excess.
The broader 10% reduction in all flag and general officers further amplifies Hegseth’s reform agenda. By targeting every level of senior leadership, the directive ensures comprehensive streamlining. This approach challenges the status quo in a Pentagon often criticized for its top-heavy structure.
Hegseth’s memo avoids vague promises, offering a clear plan to optimize leadership. His call for “operational excellence” rejects woke distractions and refocuses on what makes America’s military strong. This resonates with Americans tired of bloated institutions that prioritize image over substance.
As the Pentagon moves to implement these cuts, Hegseth’s leadership sets a tone of accountability. His directive is a step toward a military that serves the nation’s warfighters and taxpayers, not entrenched elites. This bold reform could redefine how America’s armed forces operate for years to come.
Brazilian authorities have uncovered a chilling plot to attack Lady Gaga’s concert in Rio de Janeiro with explosives and Molotov cocktails. The scheme, orchestrated by an online hate group, aimed to sow chaos at a free performance attended by 2.1 million people. Police also charged a third individual with terrorism for planning a “satanist ritual” involving the murder of a child during the event.
As reported by Fox News, the Civil Police of Rio de Janeiro arrested two suspects who planned to target attendees at Gaga’s Copacabana beach concert on Saturday. This was Gaga’s first performance in Brazil since 2012. The operation, dubbed “Operation Fake Monster,” successfully disrupted the plot before it could unfold.
The suspects, posing as “Little Monsters”—the term for Gaga’s fans—recruited vulnerable young people, including teenagers, online. Their goal was to gain social media notoriety through coordinated attacks using improvised explosives. The hate group promoted vile content, including hate crimes, self-harm, and pedophilia.
The group worked to radicalize youth through the “deep web,” according to Specialized Police Chief Andre Neves. Police served 15 search and seizure warrants across nine addresses in Brazil. Two warrants stemmed from tips provided by the U.S. Consulate, which flagged potential threats.
The alleged leader of the group was arrested for illegally possessing a firearm. A teenager linked to the plot was also detained for possessing child pornography. These arrests highlight the dangerous influence of online extremism targeting impressionable youth.
In a separate but related development, a third suspect faced terrorism charges for planning a horrific act during the concert. This individual allegedly intended to kill a child or baby in a “satanist ritual.” Police officer Maria Luiza Machado stated the man justified his plan by claiming Gaga was a satanist.
The man planning the ritual faced charges of terrorism and inducing crime. His searched residence was among the nine targeted by police. Authorities conducted their operation with discretion to avoid public panic.
Lady Gaga’s team was unaware of any threats before or during the concert, according to her spokesperson. The spokesperson noted that Gaga’s team worked closely with law enforcement to ensure safety. No safety concerns were reported during the event itself.
The concert drew an estimated 2.1 million people, surpassing the 1.6 million who attended a Madonna concert at the same venue in May. Rio’s state and city governments, along with private sponsors, funded the massive event. Gaga described the show as a “historical moment” on Instagram.
Gaga recently criticized those filled with “hatred and ignorance,” urging them to learn from the queer community’s love and kindness.
Police Chief Neves reassured the public that ongoing intelligence work monitors such groups. He emphasized that those involved in hate crimes or religiously motivated attacks will face justice. The operation’s success demonstrates Brazil’s commitment to countering extremism.
Police conducted searches and arrests with precision to avoid distorting information or causing alarm. In the past three weeks, authorities have thwarted multiple crimes planned on the deep web. This vigilance underscores the growing threat of online radicalization.
Gaga’s Instagram post reflected her emotional connection to the Brazilian audience, noting their “vibrant” culture. She expressed gratitude for sharing the massive event with fans. Yet, the foiled plot reveals a darker undercurrent of hatred beneath the spectacle.
The incident raises questions about the influence of celebrity culture in amplifying social tensions. While Gaga’s performance was a triumph for her fans, it also attracted dangerous elements exploiting her platform.
Brazil’s swift action likely prevented a tragedy, but the episode serves as a sobering reminder of the challenges facing open societies.
