The FBI withdrew its controversial Richmond Catholic memo in February 2023. Work on it continued afterward, according to a newly released Justice Department report.

The records describe an analyst revising the document more than a month after the public uproar, internal disputes over its premise, and investigations of two priests that uncovered no wrongdoing.

Friday’s release puts the underlying documents in public view:

The Justice Department report traces the memo from its January 23, 2023, publication inside the bureau through the fallout after it leaked on February 8. The document attempted to connect a subset of traditionalist Catholics with racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism.

After the memo was removed, an analyst wrote in a March 17 email that work on the draft was continuing. The proposed revisions included changes to terminology and analysis, though the correspondence acknowledged that leadership support would be needed before formally pursuing the product.

ADVERTISEMENT

That distinction matters: the records show continued internal work, not proof that the withdrawn memo was formally reissued. They also show that objections to its reasoning came from inside the FBI itself.

The bureau’s counterterrorism specialists questioned the claimed connection between the religious community and violent extremism. The report describes concerns about unsupported conclusions and reliance on outside material, including Southern Poverty Law Center claims, without adequately assessing its credibility.

The document’s treatment of Catholic beliefs has also drawn criticism from Catholics who attend the traditional Latin Mass:

The case began with a man accused of real violence-related conduct, rather than church attendance alone. According to the report, investigators found weapons-related material and evidence involving Molotov cocktails; he later received a prison sentence exceeding eight years.

But the existence of that threat did not establish wrongdoing by the priests he encountered. One priest said the man had attended only a few catechism classes, was not a Catholic parishioner and had not gone to confession.

The priest rejected the man’s racist views and wanted to consult a lawyer before further discussion with investigators. The report says the bureau also examined another priest related to him, including records involving travel, communications and finances.

Neither priest was found to have done anything wrong. That is the central question raised by the records: how an investigation of a violent individual widened into scrutiny of clergy and religious practice.

In its accompanying release, the Justice Department said its Weaponization Working Group reviewed more than 1,800 documents. Attorney General Todd Blanche said the people who developed the Richmond product were no longer with the department, while FBI Director Kash Patel said public disclosure was part of holding the bureau accountable.

The supporting records also contain a finding that limits claims about motive. The FBI’s earlier Inspection Division review found poor judgment and failures to meet standards, but did not find evidence of malicious intent or an improper purpose.

ADVERTISEMENT

Disciplinary responses included admonishments, additional training and heightened review requirements. The new report also documents favorable annual evaluations and messages from Richmond leaders defending staff, although some evaluations expressly recorded the memo’s deficiencies and the resulting admonishments.

The record is therefore more specific than a claim that everyone escaped consequences or that every investigator acted from proven religious hostility. It shows a flawed intelligence product, scrutiny of two priests without findings of wrongdoing, and an internal response that deserves examination on those documented facts.

Federal agents have a duty to investigate credible threats of violence. Americans also have a right to practice their faith without having ordinary religious beliefs treated as a substitute for evidence.

With the emails and review records now public, withdrawing the memo is only part of the account. What happened before and after that withdrawal is available for Congress and the public to examine.

 

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.