[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


               THE RISE OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM IN AMERICA

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM,
                         AND HOMELAND SECURITY

                                 OF THE

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                      WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2021

                               __________

                            Serial No. 117-7

                               __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

               Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
               
                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
45-652                      WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                
                      
                      COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                    JERROLD NADLER, New York, Chair
                MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania, Vice-Chair

ZOE LOFGREN, California              JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Ranking Member 
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas            STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,      DARRELL ISSA, California
    Georgia                          KEN BUCK, Colorado
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida          MATT GAETZ, Florida
KAREN BASS, California               MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York         ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island     TOM McCLINTOCK, California
ERIC SWALWELL, California            W. GREG STEUBE, Florida
TED LIEU, California                 TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin
JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland               THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington          CHIP ROY, Texas
VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida          DAN BISHOP, North Carolina
J. LUIS CORREA, California           MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania       VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
SYLVIA R. GARCIA, Texas              SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin
JOE NEGUSE, Colorado                 CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon
LUCY McBATH, Georgia                 BURGESS OWENS, Utah
GREG STANTON, Arizona
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
MONDAIRE JONES, New York
DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
CORI BUSH, Missouri

       PERRY APELBAUM, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
              CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Minority Staff Director 
                                 ------                                

        SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY

                    SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas, Chair
                    CORI BUSH, Missouri, Vice-Chair

KAREN BASS, California               ANDY BIGGS, Arizona, Ranking 
VAL DEMINGS, Florida                     Member
LUCY McBATH, Georgia                 STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania         LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania       W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida
DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island        TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin
TED LIEU, California                 THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky
LOU CORREA, California               VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas              SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               BURGESS OWENS, Utah

                   JOE GRAUPENSPERGER, Chief Counsel
                    JASON CERVENAK, Minority Counsel
                            
                            
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                      Wednesday, February 24, 2021

                                                                   Page

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, Chair of the Subcommittee on 
  Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Texas     2
The Honorable Andy Biggs, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on 
  Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of 
  Arizona........................................................     4
The Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Chair of the Committee on the 
  Judiciary from the State of New York...........................    40
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member of the Committee on the 
  Judiciary from the State of Ohio...............................    58

                               WITNESSES

Wade Henderson, Interim President and CEO, The Leadership 
  Conference on Civil and Human Rights
  Oral Testimony.................................................    60
  Prepared Statement.............................................    62
Malcolm Nance, Founder and Executive Director, Terror Asymmetrics 
  Project
  Oral Testimony.................................................    72
  Prepared Statement.............................................    74
Andy Ngo, Editor-at-Large, The Post Millennial
  Oral Testimony.................................................    77
  Prepared Statement.............................................    79
Michael German, Brennan Center for Justice
  Oral Testimony.................................................    84
  Prepared Statement.............................................    86

           STATEMENTS, LETTERS, MATERIALS, ARTICLES SUBMITTED

A document from Floyd Lee Corkins, II, Government's Sentencing 
  Memorandum, submitted by the Honorable Andy Biggs, Ranking 
  Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
  Security from the State of Arizona for the record..............     8
Statement from The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human 
  Rights, submitted by the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Chair of the 
  Committee on the Judiciary from the State of New York for the 
  record.........................................................    44
Statement from American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), submitted 
  by the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Chair of the Committee on the 
  Judiciary from the State of New York for the record............    51
An article entitled ``Review: Andy Ngo's New Book Still Pretends 
  Antifa's the Real Enemy,'' Los Angeles Times, submitted by the 
  Honorable Mary Gay Scanlon, a Member of the Subcommittee on 
  Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of 
  Pennsylvania for the record....................................   126
An article entitled ``Racist Black Hebrew Israelites Becoming 
  More Militant,'' Southern Poverty Law Center, submitted by the 
  Honorable Andy Biggs, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on 
  Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of 
  Arizona for the record.........................................   134
An article entitled ``Deadly Attack in New Jersey--Possible Link 
  to Black Separatist Movement,'' Southern Poverty Law Center, 
  submitted by the Honorable Andy Biggs, Ranking Member of the 
  Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from 
  the State of Arizona for the record............................   149
An article entitled ``Capitol Police Officer: Trumpist Rioters 
  Call Me the N-Word a Dozen Times,'' Daily Beast, submitted by 
  the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, Chair of the Subcommittee on 
  Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Texas 
  for the record.................................................   154
An article entitled ``Prosecutors: Capitol Rioters Intended to 
  `Capture and Assassinate' Elected Officials,'' US News, 
  submitted by the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, Chair of the 
  Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from 
  the State of Texas for the record..............................   156
A document entitled ``(U//FOUO) Black Identity Extremists (BIE) 
  Likely Motivated to Target Law Enforcement Officers,'' FBI 
  Counterterrorism Division, leaked FBI counterterrorism division 
  memo addressing the infiltration of white supremacy within law 
  enforcement, submitted by the Honorable Cori Bush, Vice-Chair 
  of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security 
  from the State of Missouri for the record......................   168
A document regarding Floyd Corkins' superseding indictment, Case 
  1:12-cr-00182-RWR, submitted by the Honorable Cori Bush, Vice-
  Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
  Security from the State of Missouri for the record.............   180

                                APPENDIX

An article entitled ``The False and Exaggerated Claims Still 
  Being Spread About the Capitol Riot,'' submitted by the 
  Honorable Andy Biggs, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on 
  Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of 
  Arizona for the record.........................................   200
A document entitled ``(U//FOUO) Black Identity Extremists (BIE) 
  Likely Motivated to Target Law Enforcement Officers,'' FBI 
  Counterterrorism Division, submitted by Wade Henderson, Interim 
  President and CEO, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human 
  Rights for the record..........................................   202
A document regarding Floyd Corkins' superseding indictment, Case 
  1:12-cr-00182-RWR, submitted by the Honorable Andy Biggs, 
  Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and 
  Homeland Security from the State of Arizona for the record.....   214

 
                     THE RISE OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM
                               IN AMERICA

                              ----------                              


                      Wednesday, February 24, 2021

                        House of Representatives

        Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security

                       Committee on the Judiciary

                             Washington, DC

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:23 p.m., in 
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sheila Jackson 
Lee [Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Members present: Representatives Jackson Lee, Nadler, Bass, 
Demings, McBath, Dean, Scanlon, Bush, Cicilline, Lieu, Correa, 
Escobar, Cohen, Biggs, Jordan, Chabot, Gohmert, Steube, 
Tiffany, Spartz, Fitzgerald, and Owens.
    Staff present: David Greengrass, Senior Counsel; Madeline 
Strasser, Chief Clerk; Moh Sharma, Member Services and Outreach 
Advisor; John Williams, Parliamentarian; Ben Hernandez-Stern, 
Counsel, Crime; Joe Graupensperger, Chief Counsel, Crime; 
Veronica Eligan, Professional Staff Member, Crime; Jason 
Cervenak, Minority Chief Counsel, Crime; Ken David, Minority 
Counsel; Andrea Woodard, Minority Professional Staff Member; 
and Kiley Bidelman, Minority Clerk.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. In this opening, as I call this 
Subcommittee to order, without objection the Chair is 
authorized to declare recesses of the Subcommittee at any time. 
Just as an aside: Technology will not defeat our work. So, we 
are gathered here, and I welcome everyone this afternoon to 
this afternoon's oversight hearing on ``The Rise of Domestic 
Terrorism in America.''
    Before we begin, I would like to remind Members that we 
have established an email address and distribution list to 
circulate exhibits, motions, or other written materials that 
Members may want to offer as part of our hearing. If you would 
like to submit materials, please send them to the email address 
that has been previously distributed to your offices, and we 
will circulate the materials to Members and staff as quickly as 
possible.
    I would also ask all Members, both those in person and 
those attending remotely, to mute your microphones when you are 
not speaking. This will help prevent feedback and other 
technical issues. You may unmute yourself any time you seek 
recognition.
    I would also remind all Members that guidance from the 
Office of Attending Physician calls for all Members to wear 
masks even when they are speaking.
    I will now recognize myself for an opening statement and 
emphasize the importance of this day.
    Over the course of the last four years, every corner of the 
United States has felt the impact of rise of domestic 
terrorism. Communities of faith, peaceful protesters, and even 
the United States Congress itself have been attacked by 
domestic terrorists. The Executive Branch has an array of 
statutory authorities to prevent attacks and bring charges 
against domestic terrorists, including those that are White 
supremacists.
    It is abundantly clear, however, that despite pleas from 
Congress and the American people, these tools have not been 
fully utilized nor implemented effectively and with the full 
force of law and all the available resources. We must focus on 
our Federal Government on the goal of eradicating those 
homegrown threats in communities across the country. Domestic 
terrorists pose a clear and deadly threat to the well-being of 
all Americans.
    During the past two years, this Committee has examined the 
federal response to domestic terrorists each time a horrific 
and tragic White supremacist attack has taken place. As just 
one sober example, in August of 2019, a shooting spree at a 
Walmart in El Paso, the home of our colleague, the Honorable 
Veronica Escobar, left 22 people dead and 24 more wounded, 
marking the third deadliest Act of violence by domestic 
extremists in more than 50 years.
    It is certainly troubling that the core of his hatred was 
based on language and ethnicity.
    It is so troubling that there have been so many shocking 
tragedies in recent years, from the deadly rampage at 
Pittsburgh's Tree of Life synagogue, religion, and immigration 
issues, to the 2012 White supremacist attack on the Sikh temple 
in Milwaukee. So sad that I have been on this Committee through 
all these horrific attacks. To the brutal murder of nine 
worshipers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in 
Charleston. Even our most hallowed houses of worship have 
become targets of violent and hateful domestic terrorists. The 
funeral for these precious souls was a powerful statement that 
we would not tolerate that violence and was taken to another 
level when President Barack Obama sang the song ``Amazing 
Grace.''
    For all of those who want to equivocate about the nature of 
these threats or make false comparison, take a moment to pause 
and reflect on that statistic. Over the last ten years, 75 
percent of all murders have--resulting from domestic terrorism 
have been the result of right-wing extremists. Attempts to 
equate White supremacy to anarchists, activists, and other 
groups who are opposed to White nationalism and other domestic 
terrorists, ring as hollow today as they did following the alt-
right protests in Charlottesville, Virginia. No, there are not 
good people on both sides.
    On January 6th, former President Trump directed a group of 
his followers, which included an array of hate-filled 
extremists, to attack the Capitol and Congress at a time when 
we were fulfilling our sacred constitutional duty in certifying 
electors. Our citizens have repeatedly seen and have been 
horrified by the images from that day, including police 
officers being beaten and bloodied, beatings which caused a 
death and serious lasting injuries.
    There are no both sides in this debate. We must not be 
misled by efforts to divert the attention and accountability 
for these acts of right-wing violence and terror. Any attempt 
to do so, for instance, says that the real problem is something 
called antifa, is irresponsible and belittles the seriousness 
of the threat of extreme right-wing violence and misidentifies 
who the perpetrators predominantly are in this community.
    As the FBI director said unequivocally, White supremacists 
are the most lethal threat for domestic violence in our 
country. Among domestic terrorists, White supremacy has no 
equivalent.
    I ask all the Members of the Subcommittee to join me today 
in denouncing domestic terrorism, including White supremacy, in 
all forms. I wish we would just take an oath or raise our 
hands.
    With this hearing today this Subcommittee comes together 
again to seek answers to why our Federal Government has not 
taken the steps necessary to address the rising specter of 
right-wing and White nationalist domestic terrorism. At the 
beginning of the last Congress, the Judiciary Committee held a 
hearing entitled ``Hate Crimes and the Rise of White 
Nationalism.'' During that hearing we heard from a diverse 
panel of witnesses who described both the rise of White 
nationalism and the shortcomings in the current enforcement 
regime.
    What was clear then and is clear now is that our current 
approach is not working. Enough is enough. It is time for the 
action. I look forward to hearing from today's panelists on 
what federal law enforcement must do to swiftly address the 
rise of domestic terrorism and how Congress can help.
    I believe that there are well-reasoned and measured steps 
that we can take, such as passing Representative Brad 
Schneider's Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act that would focus 
the Federal Government's resources on the continuing threats to 
terrorize and kill Americans. With domestic terrorism, our 
country has suffered horrendous and repeated attacks on our 
people and our democracy, attacks not from beyond our borders, 
but from within. As well, we saw on January 6th, those attacks 
have been on those innocent law enforcement officers standing 
in the gap to protect the citadel of democracy.
    The wounds are deep, but our resolve is strong. We must not 
allow this to continue. As we examine this very important time 
in our history, we must recognize the importance, the very 
importance of the work that we have to do. The nature of the 
domestic terrorist threats against our country must be 
examined. Let us do so today.
    As we proceed today, I would like to offer the words of 
Abraham Lincoln:

          The world will little note, nor long remember what we 
        say here, but it can never forget what they did here. 
        It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here 
        to the unfinished work which they who fought here have 
        thus far so nobly advanced.

    In this Committee, I hope that we will finish this noble 
work, and that we will not succumb to this kind of violence in 
America ever again.
    I yield back at this time.
    It is now my pleasure to recognize the Ranking Member of 
the subcommittee, of the subcommittee, the gentleman from 
Arizona, Mr. Biggs, for his opening statement.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is a pleasure for me 
to serve on this Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
Security. As this is the first hearing, my first hearing as 
Ranking Member of this esteemed subcommittee, I want to start 
out by saying how much I look forward to working with you to 
combat violent crime, keep our community safe, and stand by the 
men and women of law enforcement.
    Now, when you and I spoke before, I told you I did not 
intend to show a video. Something in your comments I think 
causes me to want to change my mind. I will show you in a 
second.
    Turning our attention to today's hearing on the rise of 
domestic terrorism in America, we must approach this subject 
with open minds and open eyes. We must acknowledge that all 
domestic terrorism is wrong and must not only be acknowledged 
but condemned. This includes domestic terrorism labeled as 
right- or left-wing.
    I fear that my colleagues on the other side will simply 
want to focus on right-wing domestic terrorism, and I hope that 
I am mistaken. However, I suppose that they would first need to 
admit that left-wing domestic terrorism exists. Just last year, 
for instance, Chair of the whole Judiciary Committee called 
antifa imaginary.
    I suppose our witness today, Mr. Ngo, was beaten and 
continually threatened by adherents to an imaginary group.
    Antifa laid siege to some of our cities much of last year. 
I hope that we can have a thoughtful and balanced discussion 
about the issue of domestic terrorism. I remain hopeful that, 
despite the fact that one our witnesses here today suggested 
that ISIS bomb a Trump property in Turkey. I cannot decide 
which is worse, that a retired naval non-commissioned officer 
made such a suggestion on Twitter, or that it was thought 
appropriate to invite him here today to discuss domestic 
terrorism.
    Ideologies that fuel domestic terrorism exist all along the 
political spectrum. In 2017, in Charlottesville, Virginia, 
during a Unite the Right rally, James Alex Fields drove his car 
into counter-protesters, killing Heather Heyer and injuring 28 
others. That was evil and unacceptable. Comments made today and 
other times since that point need to be put into perspective.
    With that, let's go with the video, if we may, Madam Chair.
    [Video played.]
    Mr. Biggs. Madam Chair, I would ask that we pause that for 
a second.
    Madam Chair, yeah, with the feedback, that I suggest maybe 
some people do not have their computers on mute. If they have 
their computers on mute, that will allow, should allow for it 
to proceed without feedback.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. You may proceed.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you.
    Please proceed with the video.
    [Video played.]
    Mr. Biggs. So, the point is this, the previous president, 
the former President Trump, called out neo-Nazis and White 
nationalists and said they should be condemned. I think there 
is no one in this room that would disagree with that statement.
    Earlier that same year we saw politically-inspired domestic 
terrorism that actually hit much closer to our home. As 
Republican Members gathered at Eugene Simpson Stadium Park in 
Alexandria, Virginia, to practice for an annual congressional 
baseball game for charity, James Thompson Hodgkinson, aged 66, 
fired at least 70 rounds from a handgun and rifle at the 
congressmen, staff, and others at the park. Five people were 
injured during the assault, including Republican Whip Steve 
Scalise, who was in critical condition and underwent multiple 
surgeries.
    The Commonwealth attorney for the City of Alexandria, a 
Democrat, concluded ``the evidence in this case establishes 
beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect, fueled by rage 
against Republican legislators, decided to commit an act of 
terrorism.'' He was a Bernie Sanders supporter.
    We also cannot forget the attack that took place in 2012 at 
the Family Research Council when Floyd Corkins attempted to 
``it was to kill as many people as I could'' at the Family 
Research Council center in Washington, DC. According to the 
sentencing memorandum, he told the FBI he wanted ``I wanted to 
kill the people in the building and then smear a Chicken-fil-A 
sandwich on their face.''
    He was inspired to attack the FRC because it had been 
identified on Southern Poverty Law Center's Hate Map.
    It was a different set of ideologies that inspired the 
attacks on West Coast federal buildings than those that 
inspired an attack on our Capitol. We have seen White and Black 
supremacist groups inspire domestic terrorist events.
    In 2015, in Charleston, South Carolina, Dylann Roof, 
harboring views of White supremacy, took the lives of nine 
congregants of the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church.
    In 2019, in Jersey City, New Jersey, David N. Anderson and 
Francine Graham shot and killed three people at a kosher 
grocery store in Jersey City, New Jersey. The shooters also 
wounded one customer and two police officers. A Jersey City 
Police Department detective was shot and killed by the 
assailants at a nearby cemetery just before the grocery store 
attack.
    David Anderson and Francine Graham, identified as Black 
Hebrew Israelites, which the Southern Poverty Law Center found 
that ``the extremist fringe of the Hebrew Israelite movement is 
Black supremacists.'' It also wrote that the Members of those 
groups ``believe that Jews are devilish imposters and openly 
condemn whites as evil personified, deserving only death or 
slavery.''
    I hope that our hearing and the outcome of today will 
address all forms of domestic terrorism, no matter which 
ideology inspires that terrorism.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. I would like 
to add the indictment and sentencing memo from the Family 
Research Council case to the record, if that is okay.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]
   

                        MR. BIGGS FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Mr. Biggs. Thank you.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Biggs.
    I am now pleased to recognize the distinguished Chair of 
the Full Committee, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Nadler, 
for his opening statement.
    Chair Nadler. I thank Chair Sheila Jackson Lee for holding 
this important and timely hearing.
    Domestic terrorism continues to be a serious and lethal 
threat to our country, and we must do more to stop it. Much of 
this threat is driven by racially-motivated hate and animus 
toward religious minorities. Sadly, many domestic terrorist 
attacks have taken place through mass shootings, such as the 
2019 mass shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, where a 
gunman targeted Mexican-American shoppers.
    This mass shooting joins other attacks perpetrated by 
domestic terrorists, including an attack at a Sikh temple in 
Oak Creek, Wisconsin, the massacre at Emanuel African Methodist 
Episcopal Church, and the mass murder at the Tree of Life 
synagogue that has already been mentioned, among a tragic list 
of others.
    Violent extremism also touched the halls of our Capitol on 
January 6th, resulting in death and destruction. It is clear 
that the mob that attacked us that terrible day included 
significant representation from White nationalists, among other 
hate-filled groups.
    We must ensure that our law enforcement resources and 
priorities are properly directed at this dangerous and growing 
threat. The FBI's annual Hate Crime Statistics Act report found 
in 2019, the last year that statistics are available, that 
there were 7,314 hate crimes, up from 7,120 the year before. 
These numbers, which hardly show the pain and anguish these 
attacks brought, is, sadly, near a record high.
    FBI Director Christopher Wray also testified that 2019 was 
the deadliest year for domestic extremist violence since the 
Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Senior FBI officials have noted 
that racially-motivated violent extremists are responsible for 
the majority of lethal attacks and fatalities perpetrated by 
domestic terrorists since 2000.
    To truly understand what is driving this increase in hate 
crimes and the link to violent extremists, we still need better 
and more comprehensive data. The FBI should simplify its data 
reporting, which must include reliable information from all 
jurisdictions. This information should be shared with Congress 
and the American people in a clear format, so that we can 
better focus resources on our domestic terrorist threats at 
hand.
    We also need to ensure that once informed by the proper 
data we dedicate resources towards addressing the greatest 
threats. That is why I support the Domestic Terrorism 
Prevention Act, a bipartisan measure introduced to do just 
that. This legislation, of which I am an original co-sponsor, 
would create offices within the Department of Justice, the 
Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI, to monitor, 
investigate, and prosecute cases of domestic terrorism. These 
newly created offices would be required to focus their 
resources based on the data collected on the most significant 
threats.
    Domestic violent extremism is not a new phenomenon, but it 
has become supercharged in recent years. We have seen a surge 
in hate-filled extremist groups, driven by conspiracy theories 
based on racism, misogyny, and xenophobia, which has been 
fueled by success at online recruiting and organizing. When 
combined with violence, they form a toxic stew that must be met 
with the resources necessary to address this threat.
    We must renew and reinforce our efforts against this 
scourge by marshaling the resources and authorities we already 
have so that we are more effective in this endeavor. I am 
particularly interested in hearing the recommendations of our 
witnesses today about how best we can do that.
    Madam Chair, I ask for unanimous consent to enter into the 
record two documents. The first is a letter from the Leadership 
Conference on Civil and Human Rights signed by 156 
organizations expressing their opposition to the expansion of 
terrorism-related legal authorities.
    The second letter, from the American Civil Liberties Union, 
highlights the perils that expanded terrorism authorities may 
pose to communities of color.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]
   

                      CHAIR NADLER FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Chair Nadler. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back the 
balance of my time.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentleman for his remarks.
    It is now my pleasure to recognize the distinguished 
Ranking Member of the full committee, the gentleman from Ohio, 
Mr. Jordan, for his opening statement.
    Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, let me 
congratulate Mr. Biggs, our colleague, as the new Ranking 
Member on our side for this, for his work that he will have in 
leading here on this important subcommittee.
    The violence of January 6th was as wrong as wrong can be. 
Every American has the right under the First amendment to 
peacefully protest, but political violence of any kind of 
unacceptable, and all of us must never tolerate it. We must 
denounce all forms of domestic terrorism. To discuss one kind 
of extremism and look the other way on another, as the 
Democrats are trying to do today and have been doing for almost 
a year, is, frankly, dishonest and it is wrong. I think the 
American people see through it.
    Republicans have been consistent in denouncing all acts of 
political violence: The violence that took place on the 6th of 
January 2021, and violence that took place across our country 
in major urban areas throughout the summer of last year. 
Unfortunately, Democrats have not. All last summer Democrats 
looked the other way as violent left-wing extremists used 
legitimate protests about policing concerns as a vehicle to 
incite riots and reap destruction throughout our country.
    While Americans watched their cities burn, some prominent 
Democrats in Congress downplayed the threat. Worse yet, some 
encouraged the violence. The current Vice President publicly 
supported the riots last summer, even asking her supporters to 
contribute money to raise bail funds for violent extremists 
arrested in the riots.
    The Democratic Chair of this Committee, this very 
committee, the Judiciary Committee, called antifa an imaginary 
thing, and antifa violence a myth that is only spread in 
Washington, DC.
    My guess is one of our witnesses today will have a little 
different story to talk about the violence of antifa.
    Another Democrat called for there to be ``unrest in the 
streets.'' While there was unrest in the streets you have a 
Democrat member of Congress calling for ``unrest in the 
streets.''
    Last July, when former Attorney General Mr. Barr urged this 
Committee to condemn mob violence and destruction of federal 
property, not one single Democrat spoke up. Last September we 
wrote to Chair demanding that we convene a hearing on left-wing 
violent extremism to confirm that it is not a myth as was 
claimed. We are still waiting on a response.
    Antifa and left-wing violence are certainly no myth. In 
fact, a recent study showed that attacks by left-wing violent 
extremists have more than doubled from 2019 to 2020. Violence, 
whether in Washington, DC, or Portland, Oregon, or any other 
place in this country should be condemned, all forms of it, all 
the time, by both parties.
    I hope we can have an honest and productive conversation.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentleman Mr. Jordan for his 
opening remarks.
    It is now my privilege to welcome all our distinguished 
witnesses. We thank them for their participation.
    I will begin by swearing in our witnesses. I ask our 
witnesses testifying in person to rise. I will stand with you. 
Also, I ask our witnesses testifying remotely to turn on their 
audio, make sure I can see your face.
    Wave your hand.
    I can see you alright. Raise your right hand while I 
administer the oath.
    Witnesses stand or unmute and raise your right hands.
    Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the 
testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best 
of your knowledge, information, and belief, so help you God?
    [Chorus of ayes.]
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you so very much. The witnesses have 
responded. Let the record show that the witnesses answered in 
the affirmative.
    Thank you and please be seated.
    To the Members, let me indicate that we are in the midst of 
four votes. We are going to attempt to hear at least one or two 
witnesses. I am keeping my eye on the calendar, the floor, as I 
know your staff are. Then we will recess and try to get back 
here as quickly as possible.
    Thank you, Mr. Biggs, for your indulgence and your 
cooperation.
    We will now proceed with the witness introductions.
    Mr. Wade Henderson currently serves as the Interim 
President of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human 
Rights. He previously served as President of the Leadership 
Conference for more than 20 years.
    Prior to joining the Leadership Conference, Mr. Henderson 
was the Washington Bureau Director of the NAACP; Associate 
Director of the Washington National Office of the ACLU; and 
Executive Director of the Council on Legal Education 
Opportunity.
    Mr. Malcolm W. Nance retired from the United States Navy as 
a Senior Chief Petty Officer. While in uniform, Mr. Nance 
worked in naval cryptology where the focus was on 
counterterrorism, intelligence, and combat operations.
    Following the September 11th attacks he served as an 
intelligence and security contractor in Iraq, Afghanistan, the 
UAE, and North Africa.
    He is Founder and Executive Director of the Terror 
Asymmetrics Project on Strategy. In 2016 he published two 
books: ``Defeating ISIS: Who They Are, How they Fight, What 
they Believe;'' and ``The Plot to Hack America.''
    Mr. Andy Ngo is a journalist who has written reports for 
the New York Post, Newsweek, and others. He is the author of 
``Unmasked: Inside Antifa's Radical Plan to Destroy 
Democracy.''
    Michael German is a fellow with the Brennan Center for 
Justice's liberty and national security program. He is a former 
special agent with the FBI. There he conducted undercover 
operations against White supremacists and far-right militia 
groups engaged in the manufacture and use of explosives and 
illegal firearms.
    In addition to his current role, Mr. German served as an 
Adjunct Professor of Law Enforcement and Terrorism at the 
National Defense University.
    Please note that each of your written statements will be 
entered into the record in its entirety. Accordingly, I ask 
that you summarize your testimony in five minutes. To help you 
stay within that time there is a timing light on your table or 
where you are virtually viewing it from. When the light 
switches from green to yellow or your clock starts to down the 
numbers to two minutes, one minute, you have one minute to 
conclude your testimony. When the light turns red it signals 
your five minutes have expired.
    Mr. Henderson, welcome. You may begin.

                  TESTIMONY OF WADE HENDERSON

    Mr. Henderson. Thank you. Chair Jackson Lee, full Committee 
Chair Nadler, Chair Biggs, and Full Committee Member Jordan, 
and Members of the Committee, thank you for holding this 
hearing today on the federal response to domestic terrorism. I 
am Wade Henderson, Interim President and CEO of The Leadership 
Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of more than 
200 national organizations working to build an America as good 
as its ideals.
    The hearing, this hearing in the wake of the January 6th 
attack on the Capitol is important. Last month's attack, fueled 
in part by White nationalism and antisemitism that has long 
thrived in our country and horrified us all. For those of us 
who represent marginalized people, the violence did not 
surprise us because, sadly, it is not new.
    We are all too familiar with the ways in which White 
supremacy has long thrived in our country. We also know that 
for too long the threat of White nationalist violence has been 
weaponized, not only by White supremacists, but also by laws 
and programs that target us rather than protect us.
    I would like to offer four recommendations today:
    First, Congress must pass the Domestic Terrorism Prevention 
Act, without any poison pill amendments, that would create a 
new charge, and demand that federal agencies show how they are 
fighting White supremacist violence.
    Federal law enforcement already has statutes and 
investigative powers to combat violence fueled by White 
supremacy, including over 50 terrorism-related crimes, and over 
a dozen other criminal laws. It has lacked the will to use 
them, and the DTPA would help address this.
    Importantly, the bill would not create new domestic 
terrorism charges or sentence enhancements that would 
ultimately harm our communities. Our nation's long history of 
misusing its mechanisms, including the use of COINTELPRO 
against Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the post-9/11 targeting of 
Arabs and Muslims, and the FBI's prioritization of Black 
identity extremists makes clear that new authority would be 
used to expand racial profiling, undermine due process, or 
target political opponents, all in the name of national 
security.
    Instead, we should use existing tools to combat White 
supremacy without enabling new abuses.
    Second, Congress must identify ways to address and 
dismantle White supremacy in law enforcement. We know most 
police officers report to duty every day determined to honor 
their mission. We also know that there are officers who have 
actively promoted White supremacist groups that incite or use 
violence.
    White supremacy infects so many of our institutions, but 
its impact on policing is especially devastating and makes us 
all less safe, including the police.
    Congress must demand a full accounting of what is being 
done to address White supremacy in law enforcement. The White 
Supremacy in Law Enforcement Information Act is a good first 
step. Congress and federal agencies must also identify ways to 
ensure that law enforcement officers who incite racist violence 
are no longer welcome.
    Third, Congress must pass legislation and appropriations to 
enhance the federal response to hate crimes. White nationalist 
violence and other hate crime terrorizes communities on a daily 
basis. We also know that we do not have the accurate data 
necessary to effectively address it.
    The Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act improves data and community-
centered responses. More must be done, including mandatory 
reporting and implementation by the National Incident-Based 
Reporting System.
    Finally, Congress must pass H.R. 40 to study the efficacy 
of reparations to African Americans and create a U.S. 
Commission for Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation. For 
over 400 years subjugation of Black people was a major factor 
in American economic growth. Yet, long after the end of 
slavery, Black people are still deprived of the benefits of 
that growth. If we are to address White nationalist violence, 
we must confront our history, including disinvestment in Black 
and brown communities because it still remains with us.
    Congress must pass H.R. 40 and reckon and account for our 
history. Reparations are owed, transformation is required. Now 
is the time to create a shared vision for a country as good as 
its ideals where all are valued. To do this, we must reckon 
with White supremacy that was present at our founding and 
persists to this day.
    Thank you for having me here today. I would be happy to 
take your questions.
    [The statement of Mr. Henderson follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. The gentleman's time has 
expired.
    Now, we recognized Mr. Malcolm W. Nance for five minutes of 
testimony.
    Mr. Nance, you are recognized.

                 TESTIMONY OF MALCOLM W. NANCE

    Mr. Nance. Thank you, Madam Chair and all the Members of 
this Committee.
    20-seven years ago, on April 19th, 1995, I was a U.S. Navy 
Cryptologic Intelligence Chief Petty Officer aboard a Los 
Angeles Class submarine carrying out operations in the eastern 
hemisphere. I was sitting in the radio communications space 
monitoring a report from our higher headquarters. One item 
dominated the unclassified significant events: ``truck bomb 
explodes in Oklahoma City. Dozens killed.''
    As a specialist in Middle East terror groups, I was 
convinced that one of our adversaries had infiltrated the 
American homeland and perpetrated a major Act of violence. I 
was so sure, that I bet an entire month's salary. I quickly 
lost that bet.
    The terrorist that conceptualized, built, and delivered the 
4,500-pound ammonium nitrate and fuel oil bomb at the Alfred P. 
Murrah Federal Building was a decorated U.S. Army veteran named 
Timothy James McVeigh. He conspired with two others, including 
his platoon leader Terry Nichols, to exact revenge against the 
government for the deaths of the Branch Davidian religious 
extremists in Waco, Texas. However, there was a larger 
ideological belief at play.
    McVeigh was a White supremacist who had self-radicalized. 
He came to believe that a race war was imminent in the United 
States. He used the 1978 fictional novel, ``The Turner 
Diaries,'' as a blueprint to ignite a civil war which would 
lead to a White domination of North America.
    ``The Turner Diaries,'' written by American neo-Nazi, 
William Pierce, describes America as a dystopia where Black and 
Hispanic crime runs rampant, 800,000 whites are mass-arrested, 
and guns are confiscated. The fictional Earl Tuner is a member 
of the terrorist group called ``The Order.'' In that book, a 
5,000-pound truck bomb is detonated at the headquarters of the 
FBI in Washington, DC, as the ``go sign'' for a war to 
overthrow ``the system.''
    ``The system'' which represented America was led by ``The 
Jews,'' the news media, Hollywood, and liberal government 
politicians. The Order carries out reprisal lynchings on 
liberal whites they call ``race traitors'' in ``the Day of the 
Rope.'' The book ends when the fictional hero dies in a 
kamikaze airplane bombing of the Pentagon. Then came real life: 
McVeigh copied the described bomb and just altered the target.
    Another White supremacist, Robert Mathews, a close 
associate of Pierce, formed a terror group of the same name in 
the 1980s to carry out robberies, assassination, bombings, and 
fund a network of White supremacist terror groups' terror 
training camps in the rural U.S. Mathews would later be killed 
in a shootout with the FBI.
    There is a long history of anti-government extremism in our 
nation. That mistrust is often based on myths, conspiracy 
theories, paranoia laced with a healthy dose of rebellion 
nostalgia. Most domestic violent extremists seek to protect and 
defend rights, not as they are written in the Constitution, but 
as they wish they had been written. They live in an alternate 
information space which bends them out of objective reality.
    Major violent extremist subclasses include the Ku Klux Klan 
and White heritage groups; neo-Nazi and fascist international 
groups; Christian identity movement groups; anti-tax 
extremists; anti-government militia groups; anti-abortion 
extremists; anti-immigrant macro-nationalists; clash of 
civilization groups; White ethnostate accelerationist groups; 
conspiracy theory-driven DVEs; and autocrat political cultist 
DVEs.
    The 2008 election of President Barack Obama would be a 
watershed moment that would start the consolidation of the 
disparate wings of the domestic violent extremist movements. 
The 2016 election of President Donald Trump gave them a tribal 
chieftain they can all rally behind.
    Most right-wing extremists have poorly formed cells with 
limited capacity or knowledge of terrorist operations. However, 
many veterans in the military could lend in-depth operational 
planning and improvised explosive skills to any group. These 
groups may be amateur but can demonstrate devastating 
capability if not detected in time.
    The former president's 2020 defeat has led to a completely 
new wave of DVE organizations and preparedness that could 
potentially realize their most violent fever dream fantasies as 
patriotic resistance fighters straight from the movie ``Red 
Dawn.'' If they do not understand there is a national rejection 
of their behaviors, then they may feel compunction to Act on 
that potential. We could see future attacks that make Oklahoma 
City bombing pale in comparison.
    Thank you. I look forward to answering your questions, even 
the silly ones.
    [The statement of Mr. Nance follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Members, there are 185 Members who have not voted. I am 
going to try and get through at least one more witness because 
we can vote on at least two votes and, hopefully, the third 
vote, and we can come back and not have any further 
interruptions.
    If there is a member that wants to leave for the floor now, 
please feel free.
    I would like to continue now with Mr. Ngo for his five 
minutes.
    Mr. Ngo, you are recognized for five minutes. Thank you 
very much.

                     TESTIMONY OF ANDY NGO

    Mr. Ngo. Thank you, Chair Jackson Lee, Ranking Member 
Biggs, and Members of the Committee.
    Being a journalist from Portland, Oregon, I know domestic 
terrorism well. Since 2016, I have witnessed how violent 
extremists from antifa, and others have made political violence 
on the streets of my home city banal. Local politicians turn a 
blind eye to the violence because they believed the extremism 
was a justified response to the surprise election win of Donald 
Trump. Local fellow journalists did the same in downplaying 
antifa's violent extremism.
    Today, I ask that you don't do the same.
    From 2016-2019, Portland and the surrounding areas suffered 
dozens of violent protests, mass street brawls, and riots that 
resulted in serious bodily injuries, arson attacks, and 
property destruction. By 2020, antifa exploited the anger 
around the death of George Floyd and others to launch an 
unprecedented, attempted insurrection in Portland. For more 
than 120 recurring days, antifa carried out nightly riots 
targeting federal, county, and private property.
    They developed a riot apparatus that included streams of 
funding for accommodation, travel, riot gear, and weapons, 
which resulted in a murder, hundreds of arson attacks, mass 
injuries, and mass property destruction.
    To put that into context for those here today, similar 
actions that occurred at the Capitol Hill riot on the 6th of 
January 2021, were repeated every night, months on end in the 
Pacific Northwest. In Seattle, antifa and far-left extremists 
seized six blocks of city territory that they said was 
``autonomous.'' It resulted in six shootings and two murders 
over a period of three weeks.
    In July 2020, then-DHS Deputy Secretary Ken Cuccinelli 
reported to Congress at a Senate hearing that at least 277 
injuries had been inflicted on about 140 federal agents 
protecting the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse in Portland. 
With my own eyes, I witnessed black-clad, masked militants 
setting fires to buildings occupied by people. The antifa came 
armed with homemade IEDs, guns, and knives.
    They blinded their targets with powerful lasers before 
throwing projectiles like rocks, glass, and frozen water 
bottles. Some of them even brought electric power tools to cut 
apart the fencing that was set up to protect the courthouse. 
Andrew Faulkner, one of the few federal suspects indicted over 
rioting charges, allegedly possessed pipe bomb components and a 
machete at the time of his arrest.
    The following month, a self-described antifa member hunted 
down a Trump supporter in downtown and shot him dead point 
blank before fleeing out of State and being killed by federal 
authorities the following week. He left behind a trail of posts 
on his social media indicating his desire for an armed conflict 
with the state, which he viewed as fascist.
    I am encouraged today to see lawmakers discussing the 
important subject of domestic terrorism. I am concerned that 
our representatives are increasingly viewing this through a 
partisan lens. This puts all Americans at risk.
    Those speaking before and after me can illuminate and 
educate us on far-right terrorism, a threat extremely well-
tracked by government agencies, non-profits, and journalists. 
Much less understood is the terrorism threat from the far left, 
particularly antifa.
    Far-left terrorism isn't new in the U.S. It has a long 
history in the second half of the 20th Century where groups 
like the Weather Underground, the Black Liberation Army, and 
the May 19 Communist Organization carried out bombings, 
robberies, and jailbreaks in the name of ``anti-racism.'' 
antifa are continuing that legacy today and use the cloak of 
``anti-fascism'' to shield themselves from criticism, and to 
fool well-meaning people into becoming allies.
    In September 2020, FBI Director Chris Wray told lawmakers 
that antifa is real and that the FBI investigates the threat 
coming from violent anarchist extremists who identify with 
antifa. We should heed his warnings.
    Domestic terrorism is not partisan. Both the far left and 
the far right seek to delegitimize and destabilize the 
republic.
    Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
    [The statement of Mr. Ngo follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you, Mr. Ngo. Your time has expired. 
Thank you so very much.
    Mr. Michael German, you are recognized for five minutes.
    Members, there are still more than 143 Members waiting to 
vote that have not yet voted.
    Mr. German, you are now recognized for five minutes.

                  TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL GERMAN

    Mr. German. Thank you, Chair Jackson Lee, Ranking Member 
Biggs, Chair Nadler, and Ranking Member Jordan, and Members of 
the Subcommittee for inviting me to testify.
    The failure to prepare for the January 6th attack on the 
Capitol is an indictment of the counterterrorism intelligence 
enterprise built since 9/11. The Justice Department prioritized 
international terrorism investigations, which in practice 
primarily target Muslims, over domestic terrorism 
investigations which do not.
    International terrorism investigations often involve 
resource-intensive monitoring and infiltration of Muslim 
American communities to preemptively identify and selectively 
prosecute individuals who have never committed an Act of 
violence.
    The Federal Government's domestic terrorism efforts, on the 
other hand, investigate and prosecute only a small percentage 
of the violent acts actually committed by White supremacists 
and other far-right militants, including violence committed at 
rallies all across the country over the last four years.
    It is unknown how much this violence has risen because the 
government [audio interference] that White supremacists and 
far-right militants kill far more Americans, including law 
enforcement officers, than any other group that the FBI 
categorizes as domestic terrorists.
    Fortunately, Congress has already provided federal law 
enforcement with all the tools needed to properly address White 
supremacist and far-right militant violence. I used these tools 
during domestic terrorism undercover operations as an FBI agent 
in the 1990s, seizing illegal weapons, solving bombings and 
hate crimes, and preventing acts of violence. They remain 
effective.
    The Justice Department records indicate it prosecutes twice 
as many domestic terrorism cases as international terrorism 
cases, using just one-fifth the investigative resources. There 
is no lack of authority. There are 52 federal crimes of 
terrorism that apply to domestic acts, and dozens of civil 
rights, organized crime, violent crime, and conspiracy statutes 
that prosecutors regularly use in domestic terrorism cases.
    The problem is that the Justice Department and the FBI 
choose not to prioritize the investigations and prosecution of 
White supremacists and far-right violence as a matter of policy 
and practice. They do not even collect accurate data regarding 
such attacks. Instead, the Justice Department and FBI use these 
terrorism authorities most aggressively against groups that 
rarely, if ever, commit fatal attacks.
    Targeting individuals or groups engaged in civil 
disobedience or property crimes as terrorists wastes resources 
and diverts investigators' attention.
    The Trump Administration's efforts to brand anti-fascism as 
a terrorist threat reportedly distracted the FBI from 
investigations into violence committed by White supremacists 
and far-right militants. Despite an aggressive push to 
investigate protestors as terrorists, federal prosecutors 
failed to link last year's protest arrests to antifa, according 
to reports.
    Giving the Justice Department more power without increased 
authority will lead to further abuse. Congress needs accurate 
data about how the Justice Department and the FBI utilize their 
domestic resources, but they have thwarted efforts to obtain 
this data. The Justice Department redacts docket information 
when it discloses non-sensitive prosecutor data to the public, 
making it impossible to cross-check claimed statistical 
accomplishments against case records.
    The Brennan Center is suing the Justice Department to 
obtain these docket numbers in terrorism prosecutions.
    The FBI also thwarted congressional demands for data 
regarding its domestic terrorism program. In 2019, Congress 
passed the National Defense Authorization Act which required 
the FBI to produce data by June 2020 that would allow Congress 
to determine if the FBI was disproportionately investigating 
groups that committed fewer fatal attacks. The Bureau has not 
produced it.
    The FBI also modified its domestic terrorism categories in 
a manner that could obscure how it uses its counterterrorism 
resources.
    Finally, the FBI regularly warns its agents that White 
supremacists and far-right militants they investigate often 
have active links to law enforcement. So, it isn't surprising 
that several police officers were among those arrested for 
breaching the Capitol, and many more remain under 
investigation.
    Oath Keeper Membership records reportedly included 
applicants claiming to be Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
officers, a Secret Service agent, and two FBI employees. Yet, 
the Justice Department has no national strategy to protect 
communities policed by these dangerously compromised law 
enforcers. The involvement of law enforcement and military in 
these groups makes them more dangerous.
    Congress should require the Justice Department to do what 
it has refused to do thus far: Properly prioritize these 
investigations by producing a comprehensive national strategy 
to combat White supremacists and far-right militant violence 
and the infiltration of law enforcement. Failing to do so 
undermines the Rule of law and the nation's security.
    Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
    [The statement of Mr. German follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Let me thank all the witnesses for their testimony at this 
time.
    Members, I will now call for a recess of this Committee 
hearing. I ask that Members pay attention to either staff 
notifications or their own electronic device. We will try to 
participate in all the votes on the floor, unless there are 
some irregularities that will occur. Then we will notify, I 
know that we will notify that we are returning while the 
irregularities are played out and the next series of votes that 
we have to participate in.
    The hearing is now recessed. Thank you.
    [Recess.]
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I will call back to order the ``Rise of 
Domestic Terrorism in America,'' the Subcommittee on Crime, 
Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
    We will now begin to start the questioning, which will 
allow each member to have 5 minutes for their questioning. We 
will proceed under the 5-minute rule, and I will begin by 
recognizing myself for 5 minutes.
    I would like to take this opportunity to address the 
suggestion that the domestic terrorism extremism during the 
1970s that has been recounted in this hearing was more deadly 
than the current surge of attacks. According to the Anti-
Defamation League's Center for Extremism, while the 1995 and 
the Oklahoma City bombing remains the deadliest year on record 
since 1970 for domestic extremism, 4 of those other 5 years--
deadliest years since 2015. I think that we have a roll call of 
those particular incidences.
    Again, let me indicate that this hearing is interwoven with 
White racism and White nationalism, the fomenting of White 
Nazism, which has generated into violence. It includes, of 
course, the obvious fact of January 6.
    Mr. German, I am going to come to you for the first 
question. Let me just, again, show a picture that has a police 
officer down and surrounded by the terrorists on January 6. The 
police officer is down.
    Let me also show to you one of the many symbols that was 
utilized on that day. I think all of America knows what this 
symbol is supposed to suggest. These, of course, were 
individuals allegedly protesting an election.
    In the words of Harry Dunn, who recalled the sickening 
events of January 6, he indicated that ``The Trumpist rioters 
called me the n-word dozens of times.'' He said the level of 
racial views that he suffered caused him to break down in 
tears, but I am glad that he also said, ``Y'all failed.''
    My question to you, Mr. German, is that it was reported 
that there was sufficient intelligence that the FBI had, and 
maybe other federal intelligence agencies, that said January 6 
was going to be a bad day. As testimony evidenced in a Senate 
hearing yesterday, individuals responsible relayed that they 
never got this kind of intelligence that individuals, 
insurgents, insurrectionists, people who were intending to do 
harm, violent harm, were coming to the Capitol to perpetrate a 
war.
    My question to you is two-fold. Why did that not happen? As 
well, why did the racial overtones seem to dumb down the 
interests of intelligence entities to give that information to 
the Metro Police, the Capitol Police, and anyone else that 
needed that to protect this citadel of democracy? If you would 
provide an answer, please.
    Mr. German. Thank you, Chair Jackson Lee. White supremacist 
violence, as you acknowledge, is a persistent problem that has 
been with us for decades. This isn't something new. The problem 
is the FBI and Department of Homeland Security and the network 
of law enforcement intelligence centers that we have built have 
been focusing on less lethal threats, and they set up a system 
that is constantly warning.
    So, it is warning about any potential that might happen 
somewhere in the future rather than focusing on events that 
actually occur. That is where I think it needs to change. They 
need to focus where there is actual violence, because much of 
the discussion yesterday was about one particular memo that was 
talking about something on social media where they didn't need 
that.
    Far-right militants attacked the Oregon State legislature 
just 2 weeks prior; two previous events in Washington, DC, that 
included Proud Boys engaging in violence at those rallies. So, 
even just following the public reporting about these groups, 
they should have been much better prepared for what was 
ultimately an event that was planned in plain sight.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Nance, given your experience as a leading expert on 
counterterrorism, how would you describe American law 
enforcement's response to domestic terrorism as opposed to 
Islamic terrorism and certainly, again, woven in with racial 
epithets and philosophy? Mr. Nance?
    Mr. Nance. This has gone on longer than decades. It goes 
back to the very founding of this country where people have 
used extremism for their own goals. I mean, we had the Shay's 
Rebellion up to the Civil War, and then the Ku Klux Klan was 
often a good place for ambitious young men to go into.
    Leading into the era that we are in now, law enforcement 
has always dragged its feet because the resources were never 
given to them. In the heyday period of the 1980s when the FBI 
was breaking up internal White supremacist groups within the 
United States, they still missed the Timothy McVeigh bomb plot.
    It wasn't just because they didn't have all the resources. 
It was also, as Mr. German said quite accurately, a lack of 
focus. They need to understand where the threat comes from, 
identify that threat, and then focus the resources to ensure 
that everyone in the Nation is safe, no matter what the 
ideology of the terrorist.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Nance.
    My time has expired. For the Ranking Member, I went over 50 
seconds. You have that opportunity. I yield back to the Ranking 
Member, Mr. Biggs.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Ngo, two of the witnesses testifying today did not even 
mention Antifa in their written testimony, which is shocking 
actually, given the amount of violence that Antifa has wrought 
over the past several years. Mr. Ngo, if we don't talk about 
Antifa, is Antifa going away?
    Mr. Ngo. No, they are not going away. Since the election 
night, for example, in Portland, Oregon where I am from, the 
National Guard was activated by the governor because dozens or 
actually more than 100 masked militants marauded through 
downtown destroying property. They vandalized a church that 
provides charity services on inauguration day in Portland to 
protest the inauguration of Biden and to destroy the 
headquarters of the Democrat Party.
    So, this perception that they only attack things on the 
right is wrong. They attack anything that they view as 
American, so that includes Democratic institutions, buildings 
that represent the Rule of law. Go ahead.
    Mr. Biggs. So, Mr. Ngo, one of your co-panelists has said 
of Antifa that, quote, ``Though often violent, they do not yet 
use terrorist tactics or acts.'' Based on what you have seen 
first-hand, do you agree with that statement?
    Mr. Ngo. So, I think the issue with the lack of 
understanding of Antifa's violence comes from the fact that 
there is not a lot of mainstream media coverage of it. A lot of 
people, lawmakers in DC, will get their media coverage from The 
New York Times or Washington Post. Sometimes those publications 
will send parachute journalists into the Pacific Northwest, but 
by and large, they don't have somebody on the ground every day 
as the riots were breaking out, let's say in Portland, or when 
CHAZ--the autonomous zone in Seattle.
    This is areas where people were bringing with them homemade 
explosives in their backpacks and distributing them to others 
to throw at the federal courthouse, bringing in electric tools 
to cut into the fence so that they could set the building on 
fire. They did set the exterior on fire multiple times.
    It is not just law enforcement that is inside. There are 
also civilian people who are working as staff who have had to 
flee for their lives as they did at the Justice Center. So, I 
think these acts, because they are targeted on facilities that 
have civilians inside, I think based on my understanding of the 
law that these do count as terrorist acts, that they are not 
being reported as such or perceived as such for political 
reasons.
    Mr. Biggs. One of your co-panelists has also said that 
Antifa's organizing principle is to confront the alt-right. Do 
you agree with that statement? Can you please explain?
    Mr. Ngo. That statement, in itself, is true. Antifa is 
label who they call alt-right or fascists applies very broadly. 
So, yes, it would include people who are actually on the far 
right, but it will also include people who are patriotic, who 
are holding an American flag. They will also assault and beat 
any and all law enforcement. Anybody who defends the 
institutions of this country they view as people who are 
fascistic in one way or another.
    If you dive into the ideology, look at the literature that 
they disseminate at their protests and riots and when the 
establish autonomous zones, you will see that they are calling 
for the overthrow of the American government. So, this whole 
label of antifascists that they are using is just essentially 
marketing and branding to mask what is a very extremist, 
radical agenda to destabilize the republic.
    Mr. Biggs. Another comment that was Tweeted out by one of 
your co-panelists said, quote, ``There are no laws defining 
domestic terrorism in the U.S.A.'' Is that correct, Mr. Ngo? 
Are there no laws defining domestic terrorism in the U.S.?
    Mr. Ngo. There are laws on the books. I think the problem 
right now is that the investigators are being pressured one way 
or another to pursue things for political reasons. I am not 
here to say that is no threat coming from the far right. That 
is not my area of expertise. I defer to those who have been 
giving testimony today.
    At the beginning, we heard that 75 percent of the deaths 
from domestic terrorist attacks have come from the far right. 
Well, does that mean that the other 25 percent doesn't deserve 
attention? I don't think so. It is about keeping all Americans 
safe, and that includes investigating all extremist ideologies.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Ngo.
    I will yield back, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman yields back.
    I will recognize Ms. Bass for 5 minutes. We will come back 
to Ms. Bass.
    I will recognize Ms. Demings for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Demings. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, 
the United States has experienced White supremacy and right-
wing extremist since its founding. From the rise of the Ku Klux 
Klan after the end of the Civil War through the insurrection on 
January 6, America has consistently experienced acts of 
domestic terror.
    I want to thank you, Madam Chair, for recognizing the brave 
police officers who were fighting to defend our democracy on 
that day and fighting for us and for our staff, and also, 
recognizing the Black officer who said he was called the n-word 
so many times that he burst out in tears and asked the 
question, is this America?
    Yes, we saw the attempted overthrow of the government on 
January 6, but those were former President Trump's supporters. 
Aren't we tired? Aren't we as a Nation exhausted? Haven't we 
had enough? Doesn't this issue deserve more than a political 
debate, a lackluster and half-hearted response?
    If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to 
keep score, you will lose. This history is young and this 
country is young, but its history is ugly and long. The FBI has 
been collecting statistics on hate crimes since 1930, and 
Director Wray testified before the Committee on Homeland 
Security that domestic violent extremists radicalized online 
are the greatest threat to our homeland.
    Mr. German, understanding this history and not being in 
denial and not asking the American people to not believe their 
lying eyes and lying ears, understanding this history, has the 
federal response to right-wing extremism and domestic 
terrorism--how has it evolved over the years? If you would 
please talk about the DOJ's policy of deferring to State and 
local authorities for the prosecution and prevention.
    Mr. German. Thank you very much. I appreciate that 
question. The FBI and the Justice Department have long de-
prioritized the investigation and prosecution of White 
supremacists and far-right violence, and they do this in a 
number of ways.
    One of the ways they do it is by breaking it into different 
program categories. So, if a White supremacist murdered 
somebody, that might be considered a domestic Act of terrorism, 
but it might also be considered a hate crime if the victim was 
part of a protected group.
    Most often the FBI, actually, I don't know most. Very often 
the FBI or the Justice Department, not the FBI, prosecutes 
White supremacists as gang Members in their Violent Crimes 
Program rather than as terrorists. The problem is, if they go 
down into these other categories with hate crimes, the Justice 
Department has a policy, a written policy, of deferring the 
hate crime investigations to State and local law enforcement, 
even though State and local law enforcement--at times there are 
poor states that don't have hate crime laws, and only 14 
percent of police agencies report that hate crimes occur within 
their jurisdiction.
    So that deferral goes into a Black hole where we are not 
actually tracking what violence is actually occurring or who is 
committing it.
    Ms. Demings. Mr. German, thank you so much for that. How 
convenient. It goes into a Black hole for the many people who 
have been victims of it.
    Mr. Henderson, we know the role that social media has 
played in the rise and reach of hate for ideologies, conspiracy 
theories, and White supremacy. You have called for civil rights 
audits. Could you please, Mr. Henderson, talk a little bit 
about those for us?
    Mr. Henderson. Thank you, Congresswoman. A civil rights 
audit is essentially a collection of data and an analysis of 
how a particular agency or institution has responded to the 
great challenge of ensuring that laws are equally enforced, 
particularly with regard to curbing violence.
    I don't think there is any question that White nationalist 
violence has been treated with less urgency and more benign 
than violence that is allegedly attributed to the left. Our 
country has a great history, which you have cited, which 
documents the acceptance of White nationalist violence as an 
ordinary part of our history.
    The Klan motivated, in 1870, the birth of the Department of 
Justice and a commitment by the Attorney General to respond to 
Klan-related violence interrupting the implementation of the 
13th, 14th, 15th Amendments to the Constitution. One hundred 
and fifty years--
    Ms. Demings. Mr. Henderson, I am sorry, but thank you so 
much. I am, unfortunately, out of time. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Henderson. No worries. Thank you.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentlelady.
    I now recognize Mr. Chabot for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Ngo, I will begin with you. First, I wanted to express 
my condemnation and rejection of the unlawful attack on the 
Capitol building that we saw back on the 6th of January. There 
is no excuse for it. Those who participated in that disgraceful 
display should and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of 
the law. That is in the process of occurring right now.
    I think everybody on my side and on the other side of the 
aisle agrees with that. However, there are some on the other 
side who continue to not see that the violence that occurred in 
our cities across the country over the last summer in 
particular, and is still going on in some cities is outrageous 
and it is domestic violence and needs to be stopped just as 
well.
    We saw property damage. We saw targeting of police, 
looting, targeting of public officials, targeting of public 
buildings, just like the Capitol building is a public building. 
It goes on both sides and needs to be rejected, and all the 
resources we have available to us, we need to stop that. We 
ought to be doing it in a bipartisan manner, but unfortunately 
too often that just doesn't happen around here.
    Mr. Ngo, will you agree that during the left-wing extremist 
violence last summer there were some prominent elected 
officials, Democrats for the most part--and much of the 
mainstream media that not only downplayed what was going on, 
but in many cases were apologists for that violence that we saw 
in America's cities and on America's streets last summer? Could 
you tell us what you observed with your own two eyes with 
respect to that?
    Mr. Ngo. Thank you for the question. Yes. So, the violence 
that occurred in Portland, which I know best, resulted in 
hundreds of injuries to federal and local law enforcement. I 
was shocked to see that the response from the local city 
council to the mayor and the senators and the governor were to 
describe those officers as an occupying force, as Trump's 
gestapo, as secret police.
    That type of rhetoric extremely inflamed the situation and 
brought in and encouraged other well-meaning protesters to come 
in, which unfortunately those people were then exploited and 
used as human shields. So, at the riots, particularly in July 
when rioters and Antifa and other extremist groups were trying 
to burn down the federal courthouse, they actually had the 
peaceful protesters up at the front, so a wall of moms, wall of 
vets, and wall of dads.
    They put these people at the very front so that law 
enforcement would be slow or hesitant to use tear gas or crowd 
control. Then, from the back, the rioters had a whole brigade 
of people using really powerful lasers, lasers that can cause 
permanent eye damage. They would center it on their target and 
then throw glass, rocks, concrete, and other projectiles to 
injure these officers.
    The response over and over from the media was to call these 
protests mostly peaceful, to the point it became a meme. It 
seemed like they were living in an alternate reality and not 
witnessing what was happening and not seeing the actual 
injuries that were occurring.
    I think the most egregious acts that were done in the later 
months as the riots went on in Portland was the targeting of 
police stations by rioters who set fires to these facilities 
when police officers were inside doing work and when civilian 
staff were doing work inside.
    Again, this did not get the condemnation that it needed, 
and, in fact, people frequently in positions of power were 
calling these racial justice protests, which was obfuscating 
what I view as--and it was Antifa themselves--an agenda for 
terroristic actions to intimidate the public into falling in 
line for their political agenda.
    Mr. Chabot. Thank you very much.
    Madam Chair, my time is about to expire. So, rather than 
going to somebody else, I will yield back at this time.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman has yielded back.
    It is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentlelady from 
Georgia, Ms. McBath, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. McBath. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    I want to thank all of you that are here today to discuss 
this really important issue. As your testimony has all noted, 
there is a relationship between hate crimes and domestic 
terrorism. There are many definitions for each of these, and 
they often overlap.
    At their core, hate crimes and domestic terrorism are 
attacks on who we are, where we come from, what we believe, and 
the democratic values that unite us as Americans. Like many of 
my colleagues, I come to this discussion with the attack of 
January 6 which is definitely very fresh on my mind.
    As we have this hearing today, I am also thinking of the 
lives lost at Charleston's Mother Emanuel AME Church and at the 
Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. I am thinking of the 
people we lost to the misogynist violence in Isla Vista and 
Tallahassee, the yoga studio there. Actually, one of my 
constituents was the person that was murdered.
    I am thinking of Ahmaud Arbery, who was chased and killed 
and called the n-word 1 year and actually one day ago. I am 
thinking about my own son, Jordan, and the world that I 
couldn't protect him from. Each of these incidents was 
motivated by hate. Each of these incidents involved taking a 
life, or many lives for that matter, and we can never get those 
lives back.
    What if someone had seen the signs of hate before the 
tragedy struck and been able to simply do something about it? I 
will soon be introducing the Federal Extremist Protection Order 
Act, a bill that actually gives families, neighbors, and law 
enforcement an additional tool to make sure that people who are 
a danger to themselves or to others do not have access to 
firearms.
    I think it is an important tool in responding to the 
imminent threats of violence that people are facing every day, 
but I also want to discuss how we can Act much earlier to 
combat hate and racial ideologies.
    The Washington Post recently reported on groups that work 
to de-radicalize people caught up in hateful movements, often 
with the help of those who were previously de-radicalized 
themselves, people like Chris Buckley, a Georgia veteran who 
turned to the Ku Klux Klan while experiencing drug addiction 
after his tour in Afghanistan. He was helped by of the Klan by 
another reformed extremist and now works with Parents for Peace 
to reach those that he describes as coming out of the military 
with hatred in their heart.
    Mr. Nance, the Post reported that groups like Parents for 
Peace and Life After Hate have been overwhelmed by requests 
from concerned family and friends following the January 6 
attack here at the Capitol. What do we know about how people 
can be de-radicalized and about the programs that we find like 
these that are helping people?
    Mr. Nance. That is an excellent question, and there are 
many groups and individuals who were brought into hate and who 
have found their way out by educating themselves and then by 
being around groups that have managed to show the way, that 
violence is certainly not the way.
    We need to expand these groups because oftentimes when you 
are dealing with ideologically-driven groups you find that the 
buy-in is so deep, and the social networks around them are so 
steep in creating--how do you put it? A culture of fear and 
shame if they leave these groups, principally fear that they 
are going to be not just left out but that they might be hurt, 
that they might be viewed as a snitch, and, in some instances, 
killed.
    The American neo-Nazis were famous for that threatening 
death to Members who went out. We need to show our Nation as 
patriotic Americans. We are greater as a collective than any 
one individual or groups. It is critical that law enforcement 
buy into this also. Do you want to have to really spend money 
doing surveillance on people or using your Joint Terrorism Task 
Force resources when we can start pulling individuals out of 
these networks and groups and using them as mouthpieces as well 
to de-radicalize individuals?
    It worked in the Islamic model in the Middle East. It can 
work in the United States.
    Ms. McBath. Well, thank you for that answer.
    Then also, very quickly, Mr. German, your testimony calls 
on the DOJ to create a national strategy to prevent White 
supremacists and far-right violence. What would you like that 
plan to include with respect to de-radicalization and 
preventing people from getting involved with hate groups in the 
first place?
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    Mr. German. I think we must be very careful to follow the 
science on this issue, and there isn't a clear connection 
between ideology and violence. The Justice Department should be 
focusing on violence and criminality, and there is enough there 
for them to focus on. It is for the rest of society to work on 
programs of socialization.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    Thank you very much.
    The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Madam Chair. We know on January 6 
there were an estimated, early on, tens of thousands, then 
100,000, some say hundreds of thousands. This week I was told 
there were an estimated 200 that got into the Capitol.
    Now, as a former prosecutor and law and order judge, I 
don't care what your party affiliation is or any other matter, 
if you commit violence, you are unlawfully committing violence, 
it needs to be punished. That was uncalled-for violence at our 
Capitol. It was outrageous, and the people should be punished. 
No question about it.
    One thing that has not been discussed--and we know that 
most of the people that were there that day were Trump 
supporters, and we know that most of the people that went into 
the Capitol were Trump supporters, and they should be punished. 
They had no business going into the Capitol.
    We don't need to completely ignore others that were in the 
Capitol, as my friends across the aisle seem to be wanting to 
do. It was reported and I am quoting, ``The Feds allege in a 
criminal complaint that Sullivan, John Sullivan, was actively 
participating in encouraging the siege around the Capitol.'' He 
helped one of the rioters scale a wall leading up to an 
entrance of the Capitol, an affidavit alleges.
    It says in another New York Post, ``John Sullivan founded 
Insurgence USA, a protest group for racial justice and police 
reform,'' and referred to himself as Activist John, filling his 
Twitter feeds with anti-President Trump rhetoric and posts 
supporting Black Lives Matter. I would like to--there is a 
picture of Mr. Sullivan's website, Insurgence USA, and you see 
he identifies with Antifa, it is hard to see those, but 
certainly not a Trump supporter.
    In fact, we have got two videos I would like to play very 
quickly. It might eat up my time trying to get it played. Well, 
there goes my time.
    [Video played.]
    Mr. Gohmert. Not sounding like a Trump supporter as this 
was before his violence and entry to the Capitol. I believe we 
have got one more, if it can be played quickly enough. This is 
him recording this.
    [Video played.]
    Mr. Gohmert. She is saying, ``You were right,'' because he 
had obviously planned on getting into the Capitol. He had told 
her they could get into the Capitol. This was planned in 
advance, and here they go through the Capitol.
    So, it is kind of hard to sit and listen that all of the 
problems were White supremacists when we know that last summer 
estimated $2 billion, many deaths, many injuries, deaths 
including David Dorn. They were just simply trying to protect a 
business and stop the looting and the violence there and he 
lost his life because of it.
    Our hearts go out to Officer Sicknick. Let me tell you, 
Democrats have never come to understand that one of the more 
inciteful things that they do is not only to misrepresent 
things as they did the Russia hoax, but then turn around and 
try to silence Republicans for opposing views; get them off the 
internet. When you seal up a pressure cooker and continue to 
taunt it, test it, heat it, it is not going to work out well.
    I deplore all violence. I condemn all violence. Let's work 
together toward a peaceful resolution instead of only seeing 
one side as the other side does. We on this side see there is 
problems on both sides.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Gohmert, I 
think all of us collaborate on our opposition to violence. I 
think we cannot ignore the penetrating White supremacy and 
White nationalism that has generated violence. Thank you for 
your remarks.
    Let me yield now 5 minutes to the gentlelady from 
Pennsylvania, Ms. Dean, recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you, Madam Chair. Can you hear me?
    Ms. Jackson Lee. We can hear you very well.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you so much. I thank you for convening this 
important hearing, timely hearing, on the rise of domestic 
terrorism here in America. It is something we simply cannot 
ignore; we cannot turn a blind eye to. We have to save lives.
    I would go right to some questions. I thank all our 
testifiers today. Mr. German, may I start with you, if you 
don't mind. In 2018--and some of you have referred to this--my 
home State of Pennsylvania was rocked by an Act of right-wing 
terrorism when 11 people were murdered at the Tree of Life 
synagogue in Pittsburgh.
    The perpetrator of that attack espoused antisemitic, anti-
immigrant beliefs. It was a shock to that community, to our 
society, to the whole Commonwealth. We should not have been 
surprised. Nearly a third of right-wing attacks since 2007 have 
targeted religious institutions, most of them Jewish or Muslim.
    Mr. German, in your testimony, you highlighted the threat 
that right-wing extremism poses to religious, ethnic, and other 
minority groups. In fact, you pointed out that our Nation's 
domestic terrorism policy was founded to address the White 
supremacist Ku Klux Klan. With that context in mind, can you 
tell us, what role does antisemitism play in domestic terrorist 
ideology, recruiting, and violence?
    Mr. German. Thank you very much for the question. In my 
experience working undercover in these groups, antisemitism is 
a primary driver. Often, they use bias against other groups as 
a way to grow their organization, particularly post-9/11, and 
using the bias against Muslim Americans was a way that they 
could grow their organization as even our military and law 
enforcement were being trained with Islamophobic training 
materials, counterterrorism training materials, and the 
nativism that also comes out of it.
    So, we saw many groups, militia groups, pivot to this idea 
of being a border militia and somehow working in tandem with 
law enforcement at the border rather than antagonistic to law 
enforcement, as they obviously are.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you for that answer. We know that 
antisemitism, for example, or anti-Islam is not native just to 
our country. We know that other countries, in Europe for 
example, struggle with this as well, historically have 
struggled with it. Do American right-wing extremists draw from 
antisemitic groups in Europe? Are they in any kind of 
coordination or borrowing or learning worst practices or worst 
notions?
    Mr. German. Absolutely. The FBI sometimes even just using 
the language ``domestic terrorism'' when they talk about White 
supremacy is a way of de-prioritizing it. White supremacy has 
always been an international ideology, an ideology that 
respects national borders. So, there has always been 
collaboration with groups in Europe and across Canada, other 
foreign countries. It has always been part of what these groups 
have been doing.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you for your work and your testimony.
    Mr. Nance, if I could pivot to you. Again, thank you for 
your input and your work. From the racist attack at Mother 
Emanuel Church in Charleston to the storming of the Capitol by 
an insurrectionist mob, a theme has persisted in right-wing 
terrorism in America and that theme is guns as the weapon of 
choice.
    There is no surprise, given the language emanating from the 
NRA, quote, ``Our founding fathers understood that the guys 
with the guns make the rules.'' Or even from former President 
Trump, quote, ``If you don't fight like hell, you are not going 
to have a country anymore.''
    Can you tell us, what is the relationship between gun 
rights extremism--not normal gun rights under the 2nd 
Amendment, but gun rights extremism and right-wing anti-
government extremists in the United States?
    Mr. Nance. The entire myth of the 2nd amendment being a 
tool to overthrow a government that is violent, a government 
that is oppressive, that is a relatively new thing that was 
created by the NRA in the 1970s. I know, I was a member of the 
NRA. I am a gun collector, and I remember quite clearly when 
they went crazy with every mailing showing that you needed more 
guns to protect yourself from the government. It was Black 
helicopter stuff.
    That is pervasive, and it is dangerous because, as ISIS and 
Al-Qaeda have admitted, the easiest thing you can do in the 
United States to carry out a terrorist Act is get a gun. That 
does not prohibit Americans who are carrying them legally, 
lawfully, and using them professionally, but it is a notional 
point that we need to understand. That is the preferred weapon 
system of these terrorists and extremists.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you. I see my time has expired. Thank you 
so much, Chair, and to all our testifiers.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentlelady for yielding back 
and acknowledging her time.
    I would now like to yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin, 
Mr. Tiffany for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, I denounce all 
extremism, and I started doing that years ago, but in 
particular when it happened in Wisconsin with the State Street 
riots in Madison and then went on to Kenosha. I denounced that 
all the way back in June as well as the January 6 riots.
    I would just ask, Madam Chair, last summer did you the 
extremism that was going on in our cities across America?
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Is the gentleman posing a question? I 
would be happy to use up his time to respond.
    Mr. Tiffany. So--
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentleman.
    Mr. Tiffany. You mentioned Milwaukee in your statement. As 
far as I know, a Black man who was shot in cold blood, 
execution style, they have still not found out who the killer 
is. That Black man, Bernell Trammell, was a Trump supporter, 
wore a Trump shirt every day out on the streets, gunned down 
execution style. That is the kind of extremism that is going on 
in our country.
    I am so glad the Chair brings up President Lincoln, because 
President Lincoln was the first Republican president. What he 
believed in was equal justice for all, and that is exactly what 
we stand for. That is what we stand for is for equal justice 
for all, regardless of your race, creed, or color. If you are 
going to engage in political violence to harm our country, you 
should be held to account.
    Mr. Nance, why did more minorities vote for President Trump 
in this election?
    Mr. Nance. I am sorry. Is that a legitimate question?
    Mr. Tiffany. You don't have to answer it if you don't want 
to. There were more minorities that--
    Mr. Nance. No. I am just--
    Mr. Tiffany. --voted for President Trump in this election.
    Mr. Nance. Are we stipulating that is a fact? Because I am 
not quite sure that is a fact.
    Mr. Tiffany. We will stipulate that.
    Mr. German, the man in that video, John Sullivan, he was 
paid $35,000 by both CNN and NBC for his footage of the Capitol 
riots. Do you think that is a good thing for the peace of our 
Nation? When someone--you saw his words. You saw his actions in 
the Capitol. Two major networks paid him $35,000 each. Is that 
a wise thing for them to be doing?
    Mr. German. Thank you for the question. I don't know the 
factual circumstance you are talking about, so it is difficult 
for me to reply in any thoughtful way. Sorry.
    Mr. Tiffany. No, no. Thank you, Mr. German. So, CNN and NBC 
paid him $35,000. Do you think the money is being funneled to 
Insurgence USA? Two major networks, supposed to be respectable 
in our country, paying a rioter $35,000.
    So, I really appreciate that Mr. Nance and Mr. German, and 
including the gentlelady from Florida, brought up the FBI. You 
said they lack focus. They have the tools. The gentlelady from 
Florida said it is a Black hole. Maybe if the FBI spent their 
time and money on these things that you are all talking about 
and I have great respect for what you are all saying--that 
these dollars that are precious of the taxpayers of the United 
States of America that are going to the FBI should be spent in 
an appropriate manner. Instead, they followed the myth of the 
Russia collusion.
    Shouldn't James Comey, Andrew McCabe, and others be held 
accountable for all the time and effort that they spent chasing 
the Russia collusion, which by the way Mr. Mueller showed that 
there was nothing chargeable there, or anything like that. 
Maybe if they spent the money in an appropriate fashion, we 
would be able to get to the bottom of more of these extremist 
activities.
    The final thing that I would mention, Madam Chair, is that 
it is unfortunate I am not able to get to environmental 
radicalism and terrorism that is going on across this country 
also. I hope those of you that have organizations that are on 
the call today that you will take a look at that also, bombings 
at our major universities, hassling our hunters when they are 
legitimately exercising their right to hunt, fish, and trap. 
Hopefully, sometime, we will be able to dig into that also.
    Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman's 
time has expired.
    Let me stipulate for the record that every person in this 
room, but at least all the Democrats, abhor violence, hope that 
everyone who perpetrates violence, such as those domestic 
terrorists who attacked the democratic citadel, the House of 
Representatives, will be held accountable. Certainly, I want to 
recognize Kyle Rittenhouse, who walked through the streets of 
Wisconsin without impunity, without being arrested, and killed 
two individuals in the street under the auspices of being a 
supporter of right-wing ideology.
    With that, I want to yield to the gentlelady from 
California, Ms. Bass, for 5 minutes. Unmute.
    Ms. Bass. I am so sorry. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you 
for holding this really important hearing, and for your 
leadership on this issue.
    When domestic terrorists stormed the U.S. Capitol on 
January 6, they were not just protecting to take back the 
people's house, but rather to overthrow our elected government, 
they were incited by wild conspiracy theories championed time 
and again by the former President and several of his followers.
    The origins of these groups are well-known, and I wasn't 
surprised at all, sadly, that some were police officers and 
some were in the military, involved in White supremacist 
organizations that have terrorized this country and terrorized 
African Americans for a couple hundred years.
    Capitol Police officers, as you know, were called the n-
word, and I think you said that in your opening statement. What 
we have found over the years is that many times when there were 
White supremacists in the south and in other parts of our 
country that terrorized African Americans, sometimes they 
covered themselves in hoods, but oftentimes they were law 
enforcement. This is nothing new.
    I very much want to see laws against domestic terrorism, 
but I will tell you that I am concerned about, if we pass laws 
against domestic terrorism, that those laws will be turned 
against the very communities that have been terrorized.
    The COINTELPRO has been discussed, initiated by J. Edgar 
Hoover. Under this program, while the KKK was terrorizing 
people in the south, COINTELPRO and FBI targeted civil rights 
leaders, like Martin Luther King, and it was commonly 
understood that the FBI abused its surveillance power in a 
manner to suppress a peaceful movement. Given this history, it 
is not a leap to recognize the need for scrutiny of FBI 
activities in Black and African American communities.
    Just recently--if anybody is confused about this, watch a 
new movie that just came out called ``Judas and the Black 
Messiah,'' that talks about the assassination of a leader of 
the Black Panther Party. Regardless of what you think of the 
Panthers, I don't know that anyone deserves to be executed 
while they are asleep.
    There is a police officer that on his deathbed just the 
other day had a death-bed confession that as an African 
American member of the New York Police Department that he was 
involved--and the NYPD was involved--in the assassination of 
Malcolm X.
    So, my concern is that if we entertain legislation on 
domestic terrorism, how can we be sure that it will be targeted 
and not be used to groups that are not involved in terrorism? 
In August of 2017, the FBI intelligence assessment entitled 
``Black Identity Extremists Likely Motivated to Target Law 
Enforcement Officers''--and I asked over and over again, give 
me an example of a Black extremist organization; tell me about 
one.
    I know earlier in this hearing an organization was 
mentioned that I think is ludicrous to be considered a 
terrorist organization, and that is the Black Hebrew 
Israelites.
    Madam Chair, I want to ask the Committee for something. I 
would like to have a classified briefing, so that the FBI can 
come in and tell us about Black terrorists, Black extremist 
organizations, because I am not aware of one. Now, if you want 
to talk about 30 years ago, we can talk about 30 years ago. I 
want to talk about 2021. Tell me about Black terrorist 
organizations.
    Our Vice President was referenced earlier in terms of 
supporting riots. I want to associate myself with the Chair of 
this Committee who said that none of us support violence. What 
the Vice President was saying--at the time she wasn't vice 
president; she was Senator and she was saying, and I have said 
as well, that I support the protests, peaceful protests.
    I have been very clear about that from day one, because 
frankly, if hundreds of thousands of people weren't out 
protesting police abuse and the murder of George Floyd, we 
would have never been able to pass the Justice in Policing Act, 
because the murder of George Floyd was nothing new in this 
country. The only thing that was new was that he was killed and 
tortured on video, and everybody watched his execution.
    I also want to mention that I am concerned that White 
supremacists and other violent far-right extremist groups are 
using human trafficking disinformation to recruit their new 
Members.
    So, in February of 2021, by Polaris, an organization well-
known to address trafficking, they found that 41 percent of 
people believe that politicians and celebrities are involved in 
a global pedophile ring, a narrative that is at the core of the 
conspiracies driven by QAnon. So, the point is that the people 
promoting QAnon use a real issue, like human trafficking, as a 
way to get people involved.
    So, from the panelists, I would like to know, can you tell 
me how we can do--
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    Ms. Bass. Oh. I don't have time for it. Okay.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I am sorry.
    Ms. Bass. Okay. Thank you.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I will be happy to have you on a second 
round if we are able. Let me, first, thank you for that very 
astute recommendation, and I can assure you that is something 
that I think is very important and should be done.
    The gentlelady's time has expired.
    Mr. Biggs. Madam Chair? May I have a Point of Oder? She 
referenced something I said in my opening statement. I want to 
clarify because I can read exactly what I said.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. What is the Point of Order, sir?
    Mr. Biggs. I think my words have been mischaracterized. I 
would like to clear them up.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Can you just give us a moment?
    Mr. Biggs. Yes.
    Participant. That is not a Point of Order.
    [Pause.]
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Out of the outright fairness of this 
Chair, I am going to give the gentleman 30 seconds to clarify 
his point.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to make sure 
that the gentlelady didn't mishear me. When I was referring to 
the Jersey City, New Jersey, case of Anderson and Graham, and I 
referenced the Black Hebrew Israelites, and I didn't say--I 
thought I said the Southern Poverty Law Center found that, I 
said quote ``the extremist fringe of the Hebrew Israelite 
Movement,'' closed quote, is Black supremacist. That is what I 
said.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the--
    Ms. Bass. I think you need to see an updated version of the 
Southern Poverty Law Center, because I am not sure that 
characterization is up-to-date.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Our Committee will seek to find that 
document. Thank you, Ms. Bass. Thank you to Mr. Biggs.
    Let me now recognize the gentleman from Utah, and that is 
Mr. Owens, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Owens. Thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking Member and 
Witnesses. Let's first get a little history taken care of 
because we are hearing a lot about the KKK, now.
    For those who don't know our history, the KKK began in the 
Democratic Party. It was actually eliminated in 1880 by 
President Grant, who went down and had those guys running to 
the hills. It was brought back again in 1915 by President 
Woodrow Wilson. Within 5 years, 20,000 KKK Members were 
marching in DC, Democrats. Forty-seven hundred people were 
lynched by the Democrat KKK. Thirteen hundred of them were 
White Republicans, Italian, and Catholics.
    If we look at where--I just want to make sure--you are 
talking the KKK. Just remember what party that they began with, 
and they made sure the Republicans had no part in the south.
    Ms. Bass. Will the gentleman yield? Will the gentleman 
yield?
    Mr. Owens. No. I am sorry. Let me just finish up. I am 
sorry. Not now. Okay?
    I will also, for our witness--I am kind of a little 
surprised you are not aware of the $35,000 paid by CNN, or 
whoever it was, media. There was a Utah BLM insurgent who was 
in the Capitol encouraging everybody to tear it down. He came 
from Utah. I am surprised you didn't know about that.
    So, I just wanted to make those quick points. By the way, 
18 percent of Black men voted for Republicans, an all-time 
high, twice the percentage of women, highest percentage of 
Hispanic, Asians, and gay. So, no, there is something happening 
where people and Americans are waking up and they are moving 
toward the light. I am just very happy to make that note.
    Over the last 2 years, Congress has held over seven 
Committee hearings on domestic terrorism. The topics they 
covered were important, but the vast majority were topics such 
as confronting White supremacy. However, what has been lacking 
to me is a specific hearing on the violence from the left-wing 
extremists that destroyed so many Black lives and businesses 
over the summer of 2020.
    Twenty-five people were killed, murdered, last summer as a 
result of left-wing violence that was called many times 
peaceful protests. The estimate is over $2 billion of damage 
that caused by looting and other criminal behavior.
    The horrible riots occurred in inner cities--Minneapolis, 
Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Chicago, and earlier, a couple years 
ago, Ferguson, and Baltimore. Some of the greatest casualties 
of these violent rights have always been minority businesses, 
inner cities, that most is historic forever.
    By the way, we do condemn all violence, and that has been 
the message we have been giving across the board. It doesn't 
matter which side it is, left, hard left, or hard right. When 
people are put into misery, they are being bullied, we should 
all stand against it immediately, not months later.
    Mr. Ngo, in light of the damage done by the violent 
protests last summer, where is the damage to inner city and 
minority businesses, communities trying to find the American 
way, trying to make a living, where has this damage been mostly 
done? Mr. Ngo?
    Mr. Ngo. So, in Portland, there is one example that stands 
out a lot. There was a black-owned cafe, Heroes Cafe, in 
southwest Portland. The business has photographs of first 
responders and law enforcement and some of the proceeds they 
have donated to some pro-law enforcement organizations.
    That business got put on a list by one of the Antifa groups 
in Portland. Then after the statue of Abraham Lincoln was 
toppled last autumn, that same night somebody shot through this 
business several times and someone using a melee weapon smashed 
up some windows.
    So, this is like the real on-the-ground damage of what the 
campaign of terrorism does. They do it in an organized manner 
under groups, on Twitter, on social media, and we have been 
naming anecdotes left and right of mass shootings and killings 
that have happened in the U.S. perpetrated by the far right.
    I just want to State for the record that in August of 2019, 
after the shooting in El Paso, Texas, in Dayton, Ohio, there 
was a far-left extremist who killed nine people and injured 27 
others. His social media, before it was taken down, he showed 
his affiliation for Antifa. Somebody had recognized something 
when he had gone to Antifa protests previously.
    In January, the FBI recently arrested a suspect in Florida 
who had gone to Syria, and on his social media has a long 
history of posts in support of espousing support for Antifa.
    So, I hope that, you will allow me because we can entrust 
you to move beyond the which side is worse than the other and 
start talking about how do we come up with laws to keep all 
Americans safe.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time has expired. Thank 
you.
    Mr. Owens. I yield back. Thank you.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I am now pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
gentlelady from Pennsylvania, Ms. Scanlon.
    Ms. Scanlon. Thank you, Chair Jackson Lee, for calling this 
important and obviously timely hearing. The threat of domestic 
terrorism and White supremacist extremism has been a growing 
concern for decades, but of course we have an immediate and 
tangible example of this threat in the attack on our Capitol 
just on January 6.
    As we investigate the failures of systems and leadership 
that contributed to the January 6 tragedy, it is important that 
we also work to prevent future tragedies, because many of the 
forces that were weaponized to cause the violence on January 6 
are obviously still with us.
    Some basic steps are obvious. Political leaders should not 
promote conspiracy theories and false equivalencies and must 
unequivocally reject extremist views just as we would expect 
international leaders in other countries fighting the spread of 
extremism. It does appear to be past time that our federal 
agencies need to take a more global view of the threat of 
domestic terrorism and understand the ways to stop it.
    I am very aware of the challenges inherent in protecting 
individual civil liberties, such as free speech, while ensuring 
our security. Right now, I am really interested in what we can 
do to stop the next domestic terrorism action.
    Mr. German, you have talked about the need for a federal 
approach to domestic terrorism. In particular, you spoke about 
the fact that the Department of Justice has focused on 
international terrorism while deferring to State and local 
authorities to address hate crimes, White supremacy, and other 
forms of domestic terrorism.
    In this minute, it feels like the rise of social media is 
fueling extremism and allowing domestic terrorists to organize 
across jurisdictions. So, in the weeks between the November 
election and the January 6 attack on the Capitol, I saw social 
media posts from people in my region of Pennsylvania recruiting 
and organizing travel to Washington, DC, for the January 6 
rally, and saw comments from people in other states 
recommending that they bring guns and other military equipment.
    How can our federal agencies approach this radicalization 
and coordination across State lines?
    Mr. German. Thank you very much for the question. I think 
it is very important for law enforcement to focus on the 
violence and the crime. There are far more people who say 
things online that sound scary or who join groups that we might 
find abhorrent who don't actually engage in crime, and it is a 
wasted effort to be investigating them when there actually is 
violence that is being perpetrated that law enforcement needs 
to focus their resources on.
    The homicide clearance rate is historically low. We need to 
make sure that we are focusing law enforcement resources on law 
enforcement issues. When we talk about the debate about ideas, 
we need to have that outside the law enforcement sphere. There 
is enough for law enforcement to do focusing on the violence.
    Ms. Scanlon. So, do you have any specific recommendations 
on how we can coordinate across jurisdictions when so much of 
this activity, which actually has resulted in attacks on 
people, whether it is synagogues or mosques or whatever, has 
crossed State lines now?
    Mr. German. Oh, it always has, and that is the problem. 
Congress has made it very explicitly clear that it has an 
interest in addressing White supremacists and far-right 
violence. They passed 52 domestic terrorism laws. They passed 
five federal hate crime statutes, organized crime statutes, and 
conspiracy statutes. So, the laws are all there. It is just 
that law enforcement is not--and the FBI and Justice 
Department, in particular, are not documenting acts of violence 
committed by these organized groups and treating it as 
organized criminal behavior.
    That is the big part of the problem is they are looking at 
every single instance as if that is standalone when they 
actually bother to look for it. So, the problem is the lack of 
collection of this data, and the lack of accountability for 
their programmatic use of their authorities.
    Ms. Scanlon. Thank you.
    Mr. Henderson, I understand that the collection of a lot of 
data can impact, as Mr. German suggested, folks who are just 
spouting off or just talking. So, what can we learn about 
previous efforts to ensure that civil liberties are protected 
as we fight against these violent threats?
    Mr. Henderson. Ms. Scanlon, thank you for your question. 
Certainly, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights believes 
in the importance of protecting civil liberties of all persons 
in the United States. I think Mr. German is underscoring a 
point that I attempted to make earlier, which is that White 
nationalist violence is often viewed as less urgent and more 
benign than other forms of hate crime activity here in the 
States.
    The fact that the crowd that we saw on January 6 engaging 
in insurrection here at the Nation's capital was not met with 
the kind of police response that we have seen, for example, at 
Lafayette Square here in Washington in June last year with 
teargas and other high-impact forms of intervention by law 
enforcement.
    It really is a testament to that. I think no one questions 
the fact that had that mob largely been African American or of 
color the results would have been far more individuals who had 
been maimed, shot, or killed, during that insurrection.
    So, I do think certain concrete steps are needed. First, I 
am pleased to see that Lloyd Austin, Secretary of Defense, and 
hopefully soon-to-be-confirmed Merrick Garland as Attorney 
General, have each made a commitment to root out violence, 
White supremacist activity, in the military and in law 
enforcement at the federal level.
    Secondly, I believe that an investment in public education 
is certainly needed as a way of helping to address what we know 
are problems with a number of groups, and recognizing--
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Henderson, your time has expired. 
Thank you so very much.
    Mr. Henderson. Thank you.
    Ms. Scanlon. If you wouldn't mind submitting the rest of 
that, I would appreciate it.
    Chair--
    Mr. Henderson. Of course.
    Ms. Scanlon. Could I just seek unanimous consent to 
introduce the February 8, 2021, article from the Los Angeles 
Times entitled ``Andy Ngo's New Book Still Pretends That Antifa 
is the Real Enemy.'' With that, I yield back.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]
  

                       MS. SCANLON FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman from Ohio, the Ranking 
Member, Mr. Jordan, is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Ngo, I want to go right to your testimony. In the 
middle of your testimony, you said, ``Actions that occurred at 
the Capitol on January 6, 2021, were repeated every night''--
and you emphasized ``every night months on end in the Pacific 
Northwest.''
    Then you define those actions. Antifa carried out nightly 
riots targeting federal, county, and private property. They 
developed a riot apparatus that included streams of funding for 
accommodation, travel, riot gear, and weapons. This all 
resulted in murder, hundreds of arson attacks, mass injuries, 
and mass property destruction.
    How many days in a row did all of that take place in your 
hometown of Portland?
    Mr. Ngo. Consecutively, approximately 120 days.
    Mr. Jordan. One hundred and 20 days. So, what people on 
Capitol Hill lived through one day you, your neighbors, and 
people in Portland, Oregon, lived through for 120 days 
straight. Is that accurate?
    Mr. Ngo. That is correct, sir.
    Mr. Jordan. One hundred and 20 days straight, and yet I 
don't recall, don't remember the Democrats condemning what was 
going on in Portland. That is the part that--a little earlier 
we had the Chair of the Committee say that she abhors violence. 
Last summer when the Attorney General of the United States, the 
chief law enforcement officer of this country, was in front of 
this Committee and asked the Democrats, why wouldn't you 
condemn the violence going on in Portland and other big cities, 
complete silence from the Democrats.
    So, Mr. Ngo, I don't know if you are Republican or 
Democrat. I don't know what your party affiliation is, if any. 
What I do know is you are consistent. You are condemning all 
political violence; is that right?
    Mr. Ngo. That is right, sir.
    Mr. Jordan. Whether it happened on January 6 or whether it 
happened in the summer of 2020, right?
    Mr. Ngo. That is right.
    Mr. Jordan. Whether it happened at the Capitol of the 
United States or whether it happens in your hometown, it is 
wrong; is that right?
    Mr. Ngo. That is correct.
    Mr. Jordan. You know first-hand what it is like, right? You 
have lived it. I think you said in--
    Mr. Ngo. That is right.
    Mr. Jordan. --opening paragraph you said, ``I know domestic 
terrorism well.'' Can you tell us what happened to you back in 
2019?
    Mr. Ngo. Yes. I was hesitant to share this again. In 2019, 
while working as a journalist covering one of the many protest-
turned-riots involving Antifa and their other far-left allies, 
they taunted me and beat me severely. Masked militants punched 
me repeatedly on the head, in the face, and I ended up in the 
hospital with a brain bleed, and I nearly died from that.
    Mr. Jordan. They targeted you because--
    Mr. Ngo. Ever since--
    Mr. Jordan. Excuse me. I am sorry. They targeted you 
because--
    Mr. Ngo. Ever since then, it continues to escalate death 
threats against me.
    Mr. Jordan. Yeah.
    Mr. Ngo. I had to leave my home.
    Mr. Jordan. They targeted you because you had the courage, 
as a journalist, to accurately portray what they were doing and 
what kind of tactics they engage in and the harm and violence 
that they cause; is that right?
    Mr. Ngo. That is what I believe, yes.
    Mr. Jordan. Well, I appreciate it. I mean, look, we need 
consistency. We need to condemn all violence. Republicans 
condemn the violence that took place on the 6th. We condemn the 
violence that took place for 120 straight days in Portland when 
Antifa was laying siege to the federal building.
    While that was happening, we had our colleagues talk about 
that they needed more unrest in the streets at the very time 
unrest was happening in the streets. We had our colleagues say 
that the organization that tried to end your life, and that for 
120 days had violence happening every single day in Portland, 
that that organization was a myth.
    Look, this is so important. I appreciate Mr. Ngo's 
willingness to talk about the consistency that is needed from 
everyone, from both sides of the aisle, to address this problem 
and get violence out of our political process.
    Madam Chair, with that, I would yield back.
    Mr. Biggs. Mr. Jordan?
    Mr. Jordan. Oh, no, excuse me. I have got to yield--I 
wanted to save time for the Ranking Member. I yield to the 
Ranking Member.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you. Madam Chair, without objection, I 
would like to introduce into the record an article from August 
29, 2008. It is a report from the Southern Poverty Law Center 
about the Black Hebrew Israelites entitled ``Racist Black 
Hebrew Israelites Becoming More Militant,'' and also a 2019 
SPLC article describing the New Jersey attack and the militancy 
of the Black Hebrew Israelites.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]
   

                        MR. BIGGS FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Ms. Jackson Lee. I am going to introduce into the record, 
without objection, Daily Beast article ``Capitol Police 
Officer: Trumpist Rioters Called Me the N-Word Dozens of 
Times,'' and Exhibit Number B, physically showing the visible 
surrounding of an officer on January 6 who is down, and a 
noose, Exhibit C, placed by the domestic terrorists on January 
6.
    [The information follows:]


                     MS. JACKSON LEE FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Ms. Jackson Lee. We have the ability now to recess very 
briefly for the last two votes. So, I am going to recess the 
Committee and ask Members for their patience to come back; and 
to the witnesses, if you would continue to be available for us, 
we will conclude our hearing once we complete quickly these two 
votes.
    Thank you very much. The Committee will stand in recess.
    [Recess.]
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I call the Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
Security Subcommittee to order on the topic of the rise of 
terrorism, domestic terrorism in America. I am very pleased to 
yield to the distinguished Chair of the Full Committee, Mr. 
Nadler of New York, for five minutes.
    Chair Nadler. Well, thank you very much.
    Mr. Henderson, the Biden Administration will soon have a 
new attorney general. What advice would you give him to deal 
with domestic terrorists more effectively and, in particular, 
white-supremacist violence?
    Mr. Henderson. Well, thank you, Chair Nadler, for the 
question. We have asked the attorney general to pursue making 
the attention to extremism one of the top issues of his tenure 
as attorney general. He has announced his intent to do that.
    Secondly, we have asked him to explore processes to address 
the problem of extremism in law enforcement. As you know, there 
were a number of law enforcement officials who were identified 
as part of the group of insurrectionists that struck the 
Capitol on January 6. We hope that the attorney general will 
pursue that suggestion in a vigorous way, similar to what Lloyd 
Austin has announced for the Department of Defense.
    Thirdly, we have asked that resources to address hate-crime 
violence and appropriations be requested by the Department, 
that they make more of an issue of this than has been done, and 
we think the attorney general will do that. I am quite 
confident from the announcement the Attorney General-Elect 
Garland has made, he intends to make addressing White 
nationalism and extremism, hate crime violence, a major 
provision of his Administration, and I think that will be a 
very good step to take.
    Chair Nadler. Well, thank you.
    Now, Mr. German, even if you believe a new domestic 
terrorism statute isn't necessary, and that the Justice 
Department has other legal authorities to address White 
supremacists and far-right militant violence, can you explain 
the harms in providing the FBI and federal prosecutors with one 
more tool to address domestic terrorism?
    Mr. German. Thank you for the question. I think there are 
two harms. First, that these new authorities would be used as 
their current authorities are used, abusively to target groups 
that are not engaged in criminal violence to the nature that 
the White supremacists groups are. Second, that it misdiagnoses 
the problem.
    The problem is not a lack of authority, it is a 
longstanding problem of policy and practice within the FBI and 
within the Justice Department to deprioritize these crimes. 
Until we change that the way that these institutions look at 
this issue, we won't actually, even if more laws are passed 
won't actually be attacking the problem.
    Chair Nadler. Thank you.
    Now, Mr. Nance, what role do international White supremacy 
and extremism organizations play in influencing American 
domestic terrorism?
    Mr. Nance. There are many groups. We saw in the run-up to 
the Charlottesville protest, there was a lot of international 
coordination between the disparate groups that created the 
Unite the Right movement and some that were operating, 
principally the Germany, Pegida, which is an anti-immigrant, 
fascist base group which actually has very deep ties to United 
Russia; the Nashi. The New Dawn organization, another right-
wing fascist group from Greece--they have all of these networks 
that operate throughout Europe and they were using an actual 
game communication platform to help coordinate.
    One of the things that we mistook about the Charlottesville 
protest or that led to the riots there and the fighting there, 
is that this was not sort of an end State of the American alt-
right or as they call themselves the neo-Nazis, these neo-
Confederates; it was a coming-out party. It was where they were 
actually coming together to show themselves as a unified source 
under a White supremacist banner bringing together all these 
disparate groups, they do have international support.
    Some of the people you wouldn't imagine. David Duke had an 
apartment in Moscow. Richard Spencer, the head of the neo-
Nazis, his wife was the chief translator for Aleksandr Dugin, 
Vladimir Putin's ideological philosopher. She is an ethnic pro-
Moscow Ukrainian. They have ties. These are things that we are 
going to have to see because their message even today is being 
amplified by foreign powers.
    Chair Nadler. Thank you. Do you agree with what Mr. 
Henderson and Mr. German said?
    Mr. Nance. Oh, absolutely. I absolutely agree with 
everything they said, and particularly Mr. German's comments. 
One of the problems that we have with designating domestic 
violent extremists as terrorists isn't so much a question of 
the laws, it is how the laws can be focused so that it really 
goes after terrorists and not people who are carrying out civil 
unrest or civil disobedience.
    In some definitions, based on what Mr. Ngo said today, we 
would have to have arrested just about everyone who violently 
protested or violently rioted at a Super Bowl party or a State 
championship. The definition needs to meet the tactics. Do the 
tactics involve explosive bombings? Timothy McVeigh was not 
charged with domestic terrorism. He was charged with use of a 
weapon of mass destruction and 186 counts of murder. We may 
need to focus that a bit more.
    Chair Nadler. Thank you. I yield back.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman yields back. I now yield to 
the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Steube, for five minutes.
    Mr. Steube. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank you for the 
opportunity today.
    Today, in a hearing entitled, The Rise of Domestic 
Terrorism in America, all I have heard from the Democrats on 
this Committee and from their witnesses is White supremacy and 
far-right extremism, while completely ignoring the riots, 
destruction, and violence of Antifa and BLM we saw all last 
year, and it continues.
    All forms of domestic terrorism are criminal, but to 
properly address the threats we need to talk about all types of 
domestic terrorism, including Antifa and BLM. The Democrats 
have chosen to either ignore, condone, or even embrace this 
violence from Antifa and Black Lives Matter. The Democratic 
majority and Democratic Members of this Committee have 
downplayed Antifa's violence and status as domestic terrorist 
organizations. They have claimed that Antifa keeps, quote, 
``protestors safe when a lot of other folks won't,'' and stated 
that Antifa is, quote, ``false issue,'' and quote, ``a myth.''
    The term domestic terrorism is defined in federal law as, 
quote, ``involving acts dangerous to human life that are in 
violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any 
State and appear to be intended to intimidate, coerce a 
civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by 
intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a 
government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.''
    At this time, I would like to play a video.
    [Video played.]
    Mr. Steube. Thank you. Mr. Henderson, after watching that 
video and listening to the reading of my definition under 
federal law of what domestic terrorism is, I ask you, do you 
believe that what you saw on that video meets the elements of 
domestic terrorism, yes or no?
    Mr. Henderson. I will respond simply by saying we can all 
condemn violence, sir.
    Mr. Steube. I am asking you to answer the question yes or 
no.
    Mr. Henderson. I will not. No, I will not answer it yes or 
no because I don't think--
    Mr. Steube. Okay, I will take that as a no.
    Mr. Henderson. --it states the definition appropriately.
    Mr. Steube. Mr. German. This is my time.
    Mr. Henderson. I don't think it states the definition 
appropriately.
    Mr. Steube. Mr. German, the video that you just watched, do 
you define that--would you call that domestic terrorism, yes or 
no?
    Mr. German. Again, unless it involves--
    Mr. Steube. It is very easy. You just watched the video of 
what occurred. Yes or no? Do you determine that under the 
federal law of domestic terrorism, yes or no?
    Mr. German. Are you calling that video violent act?
    Mr. Steube. Yes or no?
    Mr. German. That is your problem. You are showing a piece 
of video--
    Mr. Steube. I will give Mr. Nance--
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman is not allowing the witness 
to answer the question.
    Mr. Steube. No, I gave a question which is yes or no. That 
is how they can answer.
    Mr. Nance, yes or no? You are on mute.
    Mr. Nance. No. It is civil disobedience. We have codes for 
that.
    Mr. Steube. Oh, so that is civil disobedience.
    Mr. Nance. --never, ever, ever have--
    Mr. Steube. Burning down, creating 80 billion dollars' 
worth of damage across our country that is civil disobedience, 
but what occurred here on January 6th was domestic terrorism. I 
yield back.
    Mr. Nance. That was expression.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The gentlelady from Missouri is recognized, Ms. Bush, for 
five minutes.
    Ms. Bush. I thank you, Madam Chair, for convening this 
timely hearing. I first want to start by addressing some of 
what has been said. It is easy for us to talk about protests 
from the lofty halls of Congress, but I want to talk about 
these realities from my own experience as an activist on the 
front lines.
    I spent more than 400 days in the streets of Ferguson and 
during that time, while a lot of you all speaking were nestled 
sweetly in your beds looking and reading articles and looking 
at pictures and videos and you have actually no clue what 
really was happening on the ground, what actually happens in 
protests. I am just trying to think if I ever saw any of your 
faces show up for Black lives on the streets of Ferguson. I 
don't remember seeing your faces and we were out there for more 
than 400 days fighting for Black lives.
    So, while you are putting your mouth on people, where were 
you? I am one of those Black Lives Matter activists you are 
talking about. I saw Oath Keepers into our neighborhood that 
heavily armed. They came equipped with military-grade weaponry. 
These militias were on buildings in sniper gear. Their presence 
was a threat. I am also aware of defenders for Black life, for 
people of all walks of life uniting for justice.
    We cannot equate White nationalist violence with what my 
colleagues on the right stated is left-wing extremist violence. 
Equating a righteous movement for justice with hateful and 
racist White nationalism is outright ignorant and disingenuous 
on your part. For White supremacy, in which you benefit, we 
would not be in the streets demanding to be heard. We are 
demanding to be heard to save lives. Let me say this, had you 
fixed it before now, we wouldn't be here. There are not fine 
people on both sides. There is simply no comparison. White 
supremacy is deeply entrenched in our nation's DNA, so much so 
that we have a wealth of history to rely on as we respond to 
this latest iteration of violence.
    Here are the facts as I see them. White nationalist groups 
have infiltrated federal and local law enforcement agencies, 
and I can say that because I know, because the protestors that 
I rocked with, the protestors I am with, we have gone out and 
pulled those undercover officers, those folks that were 
infiltrating the protest movement causing destruction, we 
pulled them out and we gave them back to their police. As a 
matter of fact, you can look up an officer who just won five 
million dollars because he was beaten because they thought that 
he was actually a protestor. He was really an undercover cop.
    So, but don't take my word for it. You can read the leaked 
FBI counterterrorism division memo if you need some more 
information. By expanding the legal authority of law 
enforcement agencies without addressing the infiltration of 
White supremacy within law enforcement, we are expanding the 
capacity of White supremacy itself. It is no wonder then that 
domestic terrorism laws have historically targeted Black 
freedom fighters, indigenous environmentalists, and immigration 
activists.
    Just last week, on the anniversary of his assassination, we 
mourned the loss of Malcolm X, a human rights activist who was 
surveilled and criminalized while fighting for justice and 
Black liberation. Had we had our liberation, he wouldn't have 
had to fight. It is because of this treatment that I am 
committed to holding White supremacists accountable and forcing 
my colleagues and our country to reckon with our violent 
history.
    So, Mr. German, you have argued that the Justice Department 
and FBI's failure to properly address White supremacist 
militant violence is not from a lack of legal authority but a 
matter of policy and practice. Why are those policies and 
practices as they exist not targeting White supremacy?
    Mr. German. I think that there is a multifaceted answer to 
that, but part of the problem is that the FBI remains a mostly 
White organization and that structural racism is still a 
problem within the FBI. So, when those agents go home at night, 
they don't look out on the horizon and see a threat to their 
families from White supremacy.
    Ms. Bush. Yes, exactly. Thank you, Mr. German.
    Our reliance on the police State is entirely misplaced. 
Federal law enforcement officers already have the legal 
authority to go after White supremacy. So, Mr. Henderson, how 
can we hold White supremacy accountable without expanding the 
legal authority?
    Mr. Henderson. We have--thank you for your question. We 
have many statutes on the books, over 50 terrorism-related 
statutes that can be used to prosecute individuals who are 
engaged in violent activity. We do not need another statute to 
simply be used as justification for moving against those who do 
harm to our country. So, I will stop there. Thank you for your 
question.
    Ms. Bush. Thank you, and I yield my time.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The FBI document that you held up 
regarding BLM, do you want to enter it into the record?
    Ms. Bush. Yes.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Without objection, so ordered. Thank you.
    [The information follows:]

                        MS. BUSH FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me now yield to Mr. Cicilline of Rhode 
Island for five minutes.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this 
very important hearing, and thank you to our extraordinary 
witnesses.
    What is viewed as White nationalists have existed since the 
founding of this country and only gotten worse in recent years. 
In fact, the assistant director for counterterrorism at the FBI 
stated, and I quote, ``racially motivated violent extremists 
are responsible for the majority of lethal attacks and 
fatalities perpetuated by domestic terrorists since 2000,'' end 
quote. A sentiment echoed by the FBI director as well. So, this 
is a fact this is a serious problem facing our country.
    My first question, Mr. German, is for you. In most states, 
people who have been convicted of a violent hate crime would 
still pass a background check to purchase a firearm because 
federal law currently prohibits only individuals convicted of 
felonies from possessing firearms. I am going to be 
reintroducing the Disarm Hate Act, which would close this 
loophole so that people convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, 
including a misdemeanor assault hate crime, would be prohibited 
from purchasing and possessing firearms.
    I just wondered if you would speak to the relationship 
between firearms and domestic violent extremists and how 
keeping guns out of the hands of violent White supremacists 
before they are able to engage in deadly violence is a key 
strategy to respond to this pandemic.
    Mr. German. Thank you for the question. Yes, illegal 
firearms transactions are one of the primary ways that these 
militant groups obtain weapons, so enforcing the federal 
firearms laws is an effective way to address their crimes.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you.
    Mr. Nance, I would like to ask you what role that social 
media has played in the resurgence of extremists and White 
nationalists and, particularly, in radicalizing violent 
extremists and in weaponizing them against or to target 
minorities. Kind of what has been the role of social media, and 
if you could tell social media companies to do three things to 
reduce the spread of domestic terrorism and White supremacist 
propaganda what would that be?
    Mr. Nance. Well, first, it has been an explosion since the 
rise of social media. Even as far back as ten years ago, people 
had to communicate through very hard methodologies. If some of 
you will recall back in the 1960s, there was a group called the 
John Birch Society. If you wanted to hear any of their crazy 
rantings, you literally had to receive a mimeographed copy 
mailed to your house or find it on a street corner. The same 
thing with the rise of militia groups in the 1980s and the 
1990s. Now, any one individual can have the communications 
power of the New York Times to spread any method of violence.
    The one thing that is happening right now is the 
deplatforming of many of these groups. I know it upsets our 
conservative Members of this Committee to understand that 
private companies do not need the legal liability of allowing 
people to advocate hate, death, and destruction. They can 
deplatform anyone, including leftist groups or whichever 
groups, so long as they remain within the terms of service.
    What's going on, and I monitor it every day, I read their 
Telegram channels, Parler, Instagram, whatever, they actually 
plot terror on these channels. What we need to do--by 
deplatforming them, they still have their freedom of speech, 
they can say anything they want, they just don't have the right 
to go out and coordinate acts of domestic violence or 
threatening violence using private platforms.
    They want to create their own, allow us to channel that 
streamline our intelligence collection against them, awesome, 
but they don't have the right to use civilian, private 
companies' platforms. Deplatforming is exactly what we did to 
ISIS and Al-Qaeda and that is precisely what needs to happen to 
these militia groups and terrorists.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Henderson, it is great to see you. We know that White 
supremacists and far-right domestic extremists are the most 
significant domestic terrorist threat to our country. How does 
Congress best to ensure that resources are properly allocated 
to address the immediate and real danger these White supremacy 
groups pose to our domestic security, while also ensuring that 
the same authority is not later used to disproportionately 
target communities of color?
    Mr. Henderson. It is a great question, Mr. Cicilline. I 
think we follow the data. I know that both the FBI and the 
Department of Homeland Security have designated White supremacy 
and extremism as the number one national security threat facing 
our country from internal sources. We need to provide resources 
to those agencies to address the problem as they have outlined 
it in their research and findings.
    The fact that we oppose, that is the broad civil rights 
community, the creation of a new domestic terrorism statute is 
based on the fact that we know it will be used against the very 
communities that are most vulnerable now to that extremism and 
we are deeply concerned about it.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Henderson.
    With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time has expired.
    It is Mr. Lieu? Mr. Lieu is recognized for five minutes, 
the gentleman from California.
    Mr. Lieu. I thank you, Chair Jackson Lee, for holding this 
important hearing. I condemn all political violence. I am 
pleased that my Republican colleagues can say that same 
sentence, but their words ring hollow if they can't say this 
following simple, truthful statement, the election was not 
stolen. Because it is that big lie that fueled the rage that 
caused domestic terrorists to attack our Capitol on January 
6th. It is that same big lie that results in National Guard 
troops still being deployed outside our Capitol in body armor. 
I hope my Republican colleagues will tell the truth and reduce 
the risk of further political violence.
    I also note that at the beginning of this hearing, the 
Republicans played a video of the former President saying that 
there were very fine people on both sides in Charlottesville. I 
found that video deeply offensive. The reason is, because if 
you attended that rally of White supremacists and participated, 
you are no longer a very fine person. I don't care if you love 
puppies or if you give to charities, if you go participate in a 
rally where people are holding Nazi flags, wearing swastikas, 
and waving Confederate flags, you are no longer a very fine 
person, and it is wrong for my Republican colleagues to somehow 
whitewash that statement. The former President was wrong then, 
he is wrong now.
    It is that same false equivalence that we see again today 
in other aspects of this hearing. We know--and domestic 
terrorists, if we look at the data that White supremacists 
groups simply are far more lethal. You don't have to trust me. 
You can trust Ken Cuccinelli, the former acting deputy director 
of Department of Homeland Security who basically said, if you 
look at the data, per people incidents of violence, White 
supremacist groups are far more lethal.
    Chad Wolf, the former acting secretary of Homeland Security 
basically said the same exact thing. Then Christopher Wray, the 
FBI director, also said that when you look at extremist-
motivated domestic terrorist incidents, it is the White 
supremacist ideology that forms the largest portion of that.
    So, stop with the false equivalences. There is one group, 
or groups, it is White supremacist ideology that is causing the 
major problems across America. Unfortunately, we have seen the 
former President use statements such as, there are very fine 
people on both sides. He told the Proud Boys to stand by. He 
uses racist phrases like kung-flu that has resulted in 
increased attacks against Asian Americans during this pandemic.
    So, my question is to Mr. Nance. What happens when the 
leader of the free world uses racist phrases? Does that give 
these White supremacist groups more license to go do their 
violent acts?
    Mr. Nance. Well, absolutely. It is a very simple reason 
why, because a lot of people like to say that what we are 
seeing here is in the White supremacist movement is really an 
Act of patriotism or politics. No, this is tribalism at its 
rawest form. President Trump pretty much promised, in nebulous 
terms, of course, that he was their tribal leader and that he 
would not allow for the e pluribus unum component of our 
government, ``from many, one,'' to take place.
    He was really promising ``unum tribus dominus,'' one tribe 
will dominate the rest. He led for only 45 percent of the 
country and almost ignored 65 percent of the country. They 
think he is their lord. Groups that support him, they actually 
refer to him as god-emperor of the United States. I wish I was 
making that up, but that is true. They view him as a person 
befitting of being the first dictator of the United States.
    One of the reasons why we have a lot of heartburn with what 
happened with the insurrection on the Capitol and why it is not 
equivalent to the protests in Portland or Black Lives Matter, 
which was civil disturbance, was the fact that they came to 
overthrow the government and to install a President as a 
monarch, as a dictator. That is the difference here. It has 
never happened in American history. Even the South attempted to 
use the tenets of the Constitution for secession. Not here. So, 
they believe their tribal chieftain.
    Mr. Lieu. Thank you. I also note that in the last four 
years, we have seen a disturbing rise in antisemitic attacks 
and attacks on the Jewish American community. So, I will just 
close on Mr. Henderson, if you can give your thoughts on how we 
can start mitigating those attacks.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time has expired. I will 
let the gentleman answer just very briefly, please. The 
gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Henderson. Thank you, Mr. Lieu.
    Antisemitism is a huge problem in this country and globally 
and we need to address it as we address other serious hate 
crime activity. I hope the Department of Justice will explore 
expanding its hate crime-related education programs and 
enforcement. I think that is the best way to address 
antisemitism.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentleman very much. The time 
has expired on Mr. Lieu, and I am delighted to recognize Ms. 
Spartz, the gentlelady from Indiana, for five minutes.
    Ms. Spartz. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just I have a quick 
couple questions. I first wanted to make a quick comment. It is 
important discussion what we have, but I also wanted to make 
sure that we also have a freedom of people to exercise their 
First amendment rights and the rights of protest, of peaceful 
protest. We have to be careful when we create rules where some 
people might be just afraid to go to a peaceful protest, to say 
something there, because it could be some violent people out 
there. I think it is important as part of a free society that 
our freedom for peaceful protest is not infringed.
    I know several of my constituents called me and they were 
very surprised when they had FBI calling their houses. They 
were not even here on January 6th. Some people showed up in 
their houses and people are literally afraid. So, I grew up in 
a very bad country with strong communist government and people 
were afraid to protest, so we can never forget that. We want to 
make sure that we have a right framework, legal framework, if 
people truly create crimes, cause crimes, and they will be 
properly punished.
    So, my question is for Mr. German. We are discussing about 
domestic terrorism, and a lot of this, a lot of things people 
just really are criminals and such that create harm, so we have 
a criminal code. I am not an attorney so I am a common person, 
right, but our laws should be written in the ways that common 
individuals should understand.
    So, my first question, is there anything in the code, any 
type of crimes that are not addressed by already crimes 
existing in the code? We have hate crimes, we have murders, we 
have people creating a different type of violence and assaults. 
So, are there any type of crimes that are not there, or if the 
crimes are there but we want to have some enhanced penalties, 
potentially, if there is some domestic terrorism, then it goes 
to the question, is our definition of domestic terrorism should 
be revisited or you believe it truly reflects what it needs to 
be?
    So, I have three questions. Are there any crimes, about the 
penalties, and the third question about the definition?
    Mr. German. Thank you very much for that question and I 
will try to keep them in order. Yes, there are plenty of crimes 
on the books that the domestic terrorism prosecutors at the 
Justice Department actually use. What our report looked at were 
the instances where these multitude of statutes were actually 
used in domestic terrorism prosecutions.
    So, there are plenty of federal laws, plus the way the 
Justice Department has established its counterterrorism program 
is through joint terrorism task forces where they also take 
advantage of State and local laws, so if there was any gap 
because of the circumstances of a particular crime, State and 
local law enforcement prosecution could follow through. So, 
there are more than enough laws on the books.
    You are right, I want to make sure that law enforcement is 
focused on the violent acts and not on speech or attendance at 
a protest or association. With the White supremacists and far-
right militant groups, there is a lot of violence that these 
groups commit that falls through the cracks because of the 
Justice Department's policy of deferring hate crimes to State 
and local investigators who may not have hate crime laws that 
can be effectively applied, or just treating it as violent 
crime, which is a local law enforcement problem rather than a 
federal problem and therefore the data about those crimes isn't 
collected.
    So, it is a matter of holding these agencies accountable 
and we want to make sure that we have enough public 
accountability over the way the FBI uses these authorities to 
hold it responsible when it does use them to target people who 
are just expressing themselves or associating with people we 
might find odious.
    Ms. Spartz. So, just to follow-up, so what about it--
because a lot of enforcement tools are really in the local 
jurisdictions that exist. So, what other things you can have 
and ideas, because it is really a matter not of us really doing 
something with the code but enforcement issues. Do you have 
some ideas to make sure people do enforce the law? Because it 
is important for us for public safety, and we had that 
discussion the same this summer.
    A lot of mayors were not, and a lot of businesses were 
destroyed and nothing was done and mayors, a lot of mayors, 
they hire the police. It is a local jurisdiction issue and 
where does a State even look? What can we do as a state, or is 
the State able, and what ideas do you have?
    Mr. German. So, number one, in many of those protests, 
there were literally hundreds of people arrested so it is not 
as if there wasn't enforcement action being taken. It is just 
that what those prosecutions showed was that there was no 
organized effort to engage in those acts, so--according to what 
the charges that were actually prosecuted.
    To your question, again these agencies work hand in glove 
with the joint terrorism task forces. There are law enforcement 
intelligence fusion centers that are supposed to be sharing 
this information, but too often they are focused on issues that 
don't have to do with actual acts of violence. That is the 
problem, is there is so much false information and 
misinformation going through these networks that when a real 
warning passes through, it is not paid attention to because--
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentlelady's time is up. The witness 
wrap-up his statement. Thank you very much.
    Let me very clear, Ms. Spartz, that we are all committed to 
civil liberties and civil rights and to not have anyone's First 
amendment rights violated. So, thank you for your comments.
    I am now pleased to yield to the gentleman from California, 
Mr. Correa, for five minutes.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank you 
very much for holding this most important Committee hearing and 
the topic is very, very important.
    I remember three years ago, after the Charlottesville, 
Virginia, incident, hate crime incident--Heather Heyer was 
killed, 34 people were injured--I called on the House Homeland 
Security Committee to hold hearings on this growing threat. My 
words, my request fell on deaf ears, and I am glad that 
Congress is finally figuring out these issues, the dangers of 
domestic terrorism and White nationalism.
    I say this because I think back to my weekends at home on 
Main Street. I do a lot of work with our veterans. I go to the 
VFW/American Legion Halls. I look at our veterans, some that 
are dreamers that just came back from serving, our World War II 
veterans, and these World War II veterans are looking at me and 
saying, we fought against Nazi Germany, against the swastika, 
and now I see them on TV. They ask me, Lou, what are you doing? 
What is happening to our country?
    I would propose to you this White supremacist, this hate, 
is a cancer on our nation. Why? Because our armed services 
today are so diverse, you have people from all over the world 
defending and serving our country. Just last year, we had a 
couple of Vietnamese Americans promoted to generals in our 
nation. Yesterday, I cosponsored, I co-authored a resolution 
speaking out against recent increase in hate crimes against 
Asian Americans. We are a country made up of people from all 
over the world. This is why White nationalism racism is a 
cancer in our society.
    Mr. German, I want to ask you, 9/11, after 9/11 our focus 
of this country was against foreign terrorists. For almost 20 
years, we looked the other way. We focused all our efforts on 
there, not here. Wake wake up today and we have lost more lives 
now to domestic terrorism than to foreign terrorism.
    You said that the FBI has chosen not to prioritize domestic 
terrorism. January 6th, you said, a complete intelligence 
failure. Silos in our backyards, we have our county 
governments, our local police departments operating in silos; 
therefore, we don't have the data we need to paint a complete 
and accurate picture of domestic terrorism.
    Sir, Mr. German, what do we do? Where do we go from here? 
You keep saying we have the laws that we need to prosecute to 
put a stop to White nationalism, to this kind of hate and hate 
crimes. Where do we go from here, sir?
    Mr. German. Thank you very much for the question. First, we 
have to get the data. Congress had passed the National Defense 
Authorization Act. This data is well overdue, and without data 
about how the FBI and the Justice Department are actually using 
the--
    Mr. Correa. Does it take that long to get that data or is 
there a systematic denial that that situation exists and 
therefore the data is not presented to us?
    Mr. German. It is a systematic denial. In the case of the 
Justice Department prosecutions, the docket numbers are public 
information, but they take them off their prosecuted reports so 
that you can't match up a case they are claiming as the 
terrorisms to an actual case.
    With the FBI, yes, this is information that they have in 
their files that they could put out at any time, right? This is 
just basic data about how many investigations they open against 
these--in these categories, so it is data that is easily 
available.
    Mr. Correa. So, Mr. German, is it time that we police the 
FBI to be looking at independent research and data collection 
to get a solid picture of what is going on out there?
    Mr. German. Absolutely. Whether it is through the 
Government Accountability Office or other means, if the FBI is 
refusing to provide data that Congress needs to serve its 
policymaking function, then Congress has robust tools to compel 
that information. I think we have to get tough with these 
agencies now because--
    Mr. Correa. Mr. German, thank you very much. I am running 
out of time, but I just wanted to say that I want to go back to 
Main Street, want to go meet with our veterans, both Democrats 
and Republicans, Independents, and when they ask me, Lou, can 
you bring back the country I fought for that I laid it all on 
the line for, I want to have a good answer for them. Thank you 
very much.
    Madam Chair, I am out of time. I yield.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentleman from California, and 
we join him in wanting to tell those veterans that our America 
is back.
    With that, I want to yield five minutes to the gentlelady 
from Texas, Ms. Escobar, five minutes. Thank you.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I want to 
express my gratitude to you for having this very important 
hearing. I would like to thank our panelists as well for being 
with us today. I also want to express my gratitude, Madam 
Chair, to you and to Chair Nadler for recognizing the attack on 
El Paso on August 3, 2019, in your opening remarks, and for 
understanding the pain and trauma that my community has gone 
through as a result of that horrific attack.
    My interest is in preventing the kind of pain and trauma my 
community is still enduring and ensuring that no other American 
community has to live through what we lived through which was 
horrific violence at the hands of a domestic terrorist. I think 
to do that, to prevent this from happening, we have got to 
understand, number one, the root causes that fuel the violence; 
number two, the tools that are used by domestic terrorists to 
inflict that violence.
    When it comes to El Paso, we know what the root causes 
were. The root causes were anti-immigrant, racist, xenophobic 
hatred that the domestic terrorist confessed fueled his ten-
hour drive to El Paso. He drove to my community because he 
confessed to wanting to slaughter Mexicans and immigrants.
    He published a screed online shortly before walking into 
that Walmart, and that screed used the same language, anti-
immigrant, hateful, dehumanizing language that Donald Trump had 
used from the loudest bully pulpit in the world, from the 
office of the presidency. I wish I could say that with the 
election we no longer have to deal with that kind of xenophobic 
awful hate, but, unfortunately, it is being invited back into 
Washington, DC.
    My Republican colleagues have invited Stephen Miller, who 
is a White nationalist, to come brief them. They have also 
invited Mark Morgan, who is a member of a hate group, an anti-
immigrant organization recognized as a hate group, he is being 
asked to brief them as well. This is because we on the House 
Democratic side would like to pass immigration reform. So, 
unfortunately, while I wish I could say that the attack on El 
Paso had provided a lesson, a profound lesson against the use 
of anti-immigrant hate, and a playbook rooted in xenophobia, I 
wish that a lesson had been learned; unfortunately, it has not.
    I would call on my colleagues to repudiate that hate and to 
disinvite Stephen Miller, Mark Morgan, Tom Homan, and others 
who perpetuate that hate. I would ask them to please rescind 
their invitations, or to not show up. In addition to 
understanding root causes, we have got to understand the tools.
    Mr. Henderson, Ms. Scanlon had asked you to talk about 
prevention, but she ran out of time and so you were in the 
middle of talking to us about what we in Congress or we in the 
Federal Government can do to prevent more of these attacks. I 
am going to ask you to finish your thoughts.
    Mr. German, among the tools also are guns, frankly, and 
would love for you to comment quickly, after Mr. Henderson 
finishes his thoughts, on what background checks can do to help 
combat domestic terrorism.
    Mr. Henderson?
    Mr. Henderson. Ms. Escobar, thanks for the question. Our 
hearts go out to you and your constituents for their losses in 
August of 2019. I think one of the first things and one of the 
best things that can be done is for our country to really take 
an inward look at where we are and how we got there. There is a 
resolution under consideration in the House sponsored by 
Congresswoman Barbara Lee to establish a national convention on 
truth, racial healing, and transformation. I think that would 
be one of the most important steps that might be undertaken to 
look at the totality of circumstances that brought us to the 
point today. I will stop with that.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much.
    Mr. German, background checks.
    Mr. German. So, as I stated earlier, illegal weapons 
trafficking is one of the routine crimes that these organized 
militant groups engage in. So, background checks are very 
helpful, both to identify people who are prohibited from owning 
weapons and prevent them from getting it, but also because it 
shows where these groups will go to obtain the weapons they 
want, but can't go through legitimate processes. So, it is very 
effective.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the gentlelady from Texas and her 
time has expired.
    It is now my pleasure to yield to the gentleman from 
10nessee, Mr. Cohen, for five minutes.
    Mr. Cohen. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. It has been a 
very interesting hearing, and the sad part of it is some people 
still don't recognize that we went through the most horrific 
experience that the United States of America has ever been the 
victim of from within, an attempt to overturn our Constitution 
and our government. Yes, while a majority, 57 to 43, felt 
Donald Trump incited that, in public opinion that is pretty 
astonishing, including seven Republicans. He went out on the 
Ellipse and he said, if you don't fight hard, you are not 
strong, you won't have a country.
    Mr. Henderson, you heard people in the '60s and '70s and 
whenever, Ku Klux Klan's people encouraged their people to go 
and do violence. Did you take Mr. Trump's words, you won't have 
a country, to be racial in nature and to be a dog whistle?
    Mr. Henderson. I thought it was certainly a dog whistle, 
Mr. Cohen. I thought it was beyond a dog whistle. I thought it 
was a foghorn. I thought that the effort to inflame passions on 
January 6th that ultimately led to the insurrection at the 
Capitol, the failed coup detat as I saw it, indeed, had been 
inflamed by those words. Yes, I agree completely with your 
observations.
    Mr. Cohen. Mr. Nance, did that ever--I tell you, it didn't 
come to me until, really, I watched a couple of movies that 
were Chadwick Boseman, the Jackie Robinson and the Thurgood 
Marshall. While they were movies, they depicted the society of 
the '40s and the hate and the enmity that White racist 
Southerners had towards integration, and troublemakers like 
Thurgood Marshall, good troublemakers, but they weren't seen 
that way. It hit me that was racial when Trump said you won't 
have a country.
    Mr. Nance, did you see that as well?
    Mr. Nance. Yes. It is disturbing mainly in the sense that 
the bully pulpit of the President of the United States was used 
as a cudgel and a cudgel which was essentially handed off to a 
mob with near-explicit instructions to go up and stop the 
constitutional process of certifying an election.
    This is why I took issue with what Mr. Ngo said earlier. 
For whatever you want to say about what happened in Portland 
and Seattle and Kenosha, those were not acts of terrorism. They 
were not domestic terrorists. They were acts of civil 
disobedience and protests. We've seen equal vigor at Super Bowl 
protests. We have seen fire and fights, and I am from 
Philadelphia.
    What we saw on the 6th of January was literally an 
organized attempt which was backed by 40,000 protestors and as 
many as 3 to 5,000, according to the Park Service's estimates, 
smashing in to destroy your building to stop the democratic 
process. To literally stop democracy in its tracks, they were 
willing to kill. As Officer Fanone said when he was being 
beaten and his pistol belt was being grabbed, someone said kill 
him with his own gun. It was only the fact that he begged them 
that he had children that the protestors got in between them.
    They fully intended to commit this violence. They thought 
they were taking back a country from what it is. They don't 
believe in e pluribus unum. They really wanted to create their 
own imaginary State with Donald Trump as leader.
    Mr. Cohen. It was a sad, sad day, the saddest day in the 
history of our country and some people aren't accepting it. 
Now, I want to say I didn't approve of some of the Antifa 
actions of coming to Washington and breaking windows and doing 
some of the things they did after Trump was inaugurated, and I 
said that.
    Some of the thing--but that is not the issue. It doesn't 
compare. It is like comparing a forest fire to somebody with a 
match or setting the--it is just there is no comparison. The 
fact is, what we experienced was horrific and people need to 
accept it and not try to defend it.
    Somebody here said there were only 200 people that went 
into the Capitol. That is absurd. There were way more than 200 
policemen, and they were overrun. Two hundred people would not 
have overrun our Capitol police. That is just false. When we 
had hearings, I told the committee, try to say Boogaloo. Can 
you say Boogaloo? Nobody could say Boogaloo. I went on the 
floor, and I say, can anybody here say Boogaloo? They couldn't 
say it. Their lips were locked.
    It was Boogaloo that killed the officer in Oakland who they 
tried to claim was part of the unrest and they even brought 
the--
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time is expired.
    Mr. Cohen. --to Fort McHenry and make her look like it was 
somebody else. Get real. We have got to fight against the White 
extremists and make our country safe again. I yield back the 
balance of my time.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Thank you very much to Members. We have a few points that 
we would like to clarify and so I am going to yield five 
minutes at this time to Mr. Biggs, the Ranking Member of the 
subcommittee, five minutes.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Mr. German, you wrote a book called ``Disrupt, Discredit, 
and Divide: How the New FBI Damages Democracy,'' right?
    Mr. German. Yes.
    Mr. Biggs. If I can cite--I haven't read your book, just 
read some summaries of it. One of the things that it said, it 
chronicles how the FBI transformed itself after 9/11 from a law 
enforcement agency famous for prosecuting organized crime and 
corruption to, arguably, the most secretive domestic 
intelligence agency the country has ever seen.
    Mr. German. Yes.
    Mr. Biggs. Is that a fair statement?
    Mr. German. It's fair.
    Mr. Biggs. Yes, I don't disagree with that premise. I have 
actually--I don't know if I am going to buy your book, but I 
might check it out at the library to read it because I agree 
with that premise. That leads me to a couple things that I 
would like you and Mr. Ngo to each respond to, if you would, 
please.
    Do you think the FBI has the necessary tools to investigate 
domestic terrorism while ensuring constitutional rights are 
protected, especially in light of the abuse of FISA authority 
which we have seen over the last couple years? So, I will go 
first to Mr. Ngo then to you too, Mr. German.
    Mr. Ngo?
    Mr. Ngo. Thank you for the question. I am not an expert on 
FBI and federal capabilities to investigate, so I will have to 
defer to my co-panelists for the answer. I am sorry.
    Mr. Biggs. That is all right. Thank you.
    Mr. German?
    Mr. German. So, thank you very much for the question. Part 
of the problem after 9/11 was the reduction of criminal 
predicates. So, after the Church Committee investigation, the 
attorney general guidelines were issued to create a requirement 
that an agent have a reasonable indication based on articulable 
facts that the person they want to investigate is engaged in a 
federal crime or will engage in a federal crime.
    This is a very low standard. Most FBI agents I knew woke up 
pretty suspicious. The problem is, removing those standards 
allowed the FBI to investigate people not based on any evidence 
of wrongdoing but, rather, based upon the agent's own bias or 
the agent's own belief that something that might happen in the 
future. That is a big part of the problem, both in the way the 
electronic surveillance authorities were changed with the 
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the PATRIOT Act, and 
with the way the attorney general guidelines were changed.
    So, if we can restore those criminal predicates that will 
require the FBI agents to actually be working from articulable 
facts rather than bias.
    Mr. Biggs. Sure. So, with that, dozens of states from New 
York to Nevada have their own antiterrorism laws. Can you 
comment on whether these State laws have been effective to 
investigate and prosecute domestic terrorism?
    Mr. German. I haven't done any kind of comprehensive study 
of those. I am concerned about the use of terrorism in the law, 
in federal law as well as State and local law. The way we 
worked when I was undercover in the early '90s was we were 
investigating the criminal activities some of the people within 
these groups were engaged in and that separated it from the 
ideology.
    Terrorism is a politicized term, so it is not surprising 
that when we talk about it, there is a political element to how 
we interpret it. So, my advice is to focus on the violent 
crimes and the actual violations of the criminal statutes and 
not expand this use of terrorism. Learn the lessons from the 
inappropriate and harmful acts we took after 9/11 so we can 
actually work against people who are engaging in violence 
rather than focusing on what their ideologies may or may not 
be.
    Mr. Biggs. So, my last question, and it is for you, Mr. 
German, because you said earlier you were focusing on groups. 
For instance, 18 U.S.C. 2331(5), which defines domestic 
terrorism, it doesn't require that anybody have a conspiracy or 
any group. It just requires the elements of that crime to be 
met and there are three elements. I don't want to get into all 
of them, but you recognize that any individual in and of 
themselves can be a domestic terrorist without being part of a 
group.
    Mr. German. Exactly. The reason I point to the 
organizations and the groups is because there are 17 to 18,000 
homicides every year; 40 percent almost go unsolved, right. 
That is far more unsolved homicides than the hundred or so 
crimes that might happen that are related to what we call 
terrorism.
    So, if we are trying to focus on reducing the impact of 
terrorism, understanding how the organized groups operate to 
perpetuate this violence is the key to working these groups in 
a way that will reduce the violence. Trying to imagine every 
single individual out there who might do something harmful and 
prevent it is not an effective strategy, but unfortunately that 
is the one that we have been following with regard to a lot of 
these acts. Thank you.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you. My time has expired and I thank the 
Chair. Thank you.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the Ranking Member. We made this 
agreement with Mr. Biggs and myself to clear up the record and 
for me to be able to have the opportunity to say what enormous 
appreciation this Committee has for the time that these very 
excellent witnesses have spent answering the questions and 
concerns of Members, because our challenge, of course, is to be 
legislators and to be able to speak the language that 
Congressman Correa said to those veterans, who wore the uniform 
for this great country that this Nation is back. So, let me say 
that if we had expanded the language of this title of this 
hearing, we might have said the rise of domestic terrorism in 
America that violently caused deaths of many people.
    I want to acknowledge again, Officer Sicknick tragically 
lost his life out of the actions of January 6th, two other 
officers who we understand had committed suicide, and others 
who died on that day. They died, and so it is important to 
frame what we are doing here and the violence of the record of 
the Anti-Defamation League, 75 percent of all murders from 
domestic terrorism have been the result of right-wing 
extremists.
    Mr. Ngo, would you give me the leaders of the Antifa 
movement? What are their names, please?
    Mr. Ngo. If you read any of my reports, you will know that 
there are no single leaders. They are organized into autonomous 
cells that are connected by network.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Ngo.
    So, in fact, as the FBI says, this is an ideology. These 
are ideologues and you can evidence that in the actions that 
they promote across the nation. They show up and they do create 
havoc. As one of our Members indicated, though we all abhor 
violence, we recognize civil protests but in the midst of civil 
liberties and civil rights.
    So, I want to pose these questions to you gentlemen as we 
try to clear up the facts. First, one member was here today, we 
appreciate him, and he is trying to label the history of 
America in the context of Republicans and Democrats. White 
racism, White Nazism does not come in party affiliation. Let us 
put on the record that the freed slaves were Republicans 
because Abraham Lincoln freed them.
    As we went through, those who hung around to see Black 
people hung, I don't know their affiliation. They were White 
and they were filled with hatred. At the same time, he claims 
that they were Democrats. If they were, I find them abhorrent 
and will reject their behavior. So, we cannot put party labels, 
and I am glad Mr. Biggs has extended his hand in friendship. 
Let's find a way to address this question because it is 
dastardly and ugly.
    So, let me pose this question to you, Mr. German. Isn't it 
key that we understand Antifa's ideology, but that out of White 
racism and White extremists come death and violence in many 
instances? If you keep your answer short, I want to get to all 
the gentlemen on this Committee before I have to close. Mr. 
German?
    Mr. German. Yes, exactly. What we need the FBI and the 
Justice Department to do is focus on the White supremacist, far 
right militant violence, actual violence that has happened, and 
recognize that the Capitol attack was not a standalone event. 
It was the culmination of many attacks before that.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
    Mr. Henderson, thank you for acknowledging H.R. 40 as also 
a reparative and restorative legislation that we filed time 
after time after time. Would you admit to the fact that from 
the perspective of hatefulness and actions that African 
Americans, Black Americans have experienced violence throughout 
the 20th century, and that, in addition, to hangings that 
occurred in the early 1900s, we went into the civil rights 
movement, and we had the Mississippi Boys, the Birmingham 
Bombing.
    Those individuals, as we understand it, were White 
Southerners motivated by hatred and White racism. That is 
terror. That is now the modern terminology of alt-right. Would 
you say that plays into why we have to address this question of 
domestic terrorism?
    Mr. Henderson. There is absolutely no question, Madam 
Chair, that you have described circumstances as they exist. The 
history of the African American experience in this country and 
in the 20th century underscores your point quite effectively. 
In fact, later this year, we will celebrate the centennial, or 
acknowledge the centennial anniversary of the Tulsa Massacre, 
in which over 300 African Americans and the most prosperous 
business center of Black people in the country was destroyed; a 
century ago, this year.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. Thank you very much for that.
    Mr. Nance, African Americans, Hispanic Latinx, and now, of 
course, the community of Asian Americans, whether it is Sikh 
Indians or whether or not it is Asian Pacific or whether or not 
it is Southeast Asians, provoked by language but results in 
violent acts.
    So, how should this Committee respond to finding a way, 
besides the cultural changes of attitude, harmonious coming 
together, recognizing the unity of this nation, but how can we 
get to that core which winds up with people dying? That is why 
we had this hearing about the rise in domestic terrorism, 
because it is about people dying. That has to stop. How do we 
work that through the present laws and going forward?
    Mr. Nance. Well, first off, as this hearing is very, very 
beneficial for the Nation is to understand that the very fact 
that there is a national threat which is not just congealing 
from all these small disparate groups, they are organizing 
themselves under a political ideology and that ideology is 
intended to Act as a political cudgel over the heads of all 
other peoples.
    The very definition of terrorism is a threat or Act of 
violence, which is political in nature, which uses terrorist 
tactics to influence an audience beyond the immediate victims. 
Well, when you organize as military platoons and you are 
planning to intimidate a population by coming through with 
firearms you are not a terrorist until you use those firearms 
in a mass attack, as we saw with the representative from El 
Paso. That was a terrorist attack. Same thing with what we saw 
in Pittsburgh.
    So, that being the case, we have to really go at this as 
Mr. German said, you can't really tie ideology directly to it, 
but the actions and acts and the conspiracies of the 
individuals to see whether they are just people who are 
carrying out typical crimes, or are they part of a larger 
conspiracy intending to intimidate an entire Nation or peoples.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank you so very much, and I thank the 
witnesses again for their patience and their excellent 
testimony and for accepting our invitation to be part of this 
hearing. I thank the Members. We have had a very interesting 
hearing because we have mixed it with three hours of voting. 
So, I thank them for their indulgence and we look forward to 
being proactive in legislating around these issues.
    Let me close the hearing in the names of Michael Fanone, 
Officer Michael Fanone of the Metro Police Department, Harry 
Dunn, Officer Glover, and many others including the officer who 
testified yesterday in front of the Senate Homeland Security 
Committee; and all others who have fallen victim and fallen 
through the violence of hatred, White supremacy, White 
nationalism, and overall hatred. Let us in this full Committee 
and Subcommittee find a way to bring a solution that will heal 
this nation.
    This concludes today's hearing. Thank you to our 
distinguished witnesses for attending, as I said. Thank you 
again for your patience. Thank the Members again for their 
patience. Without objection, all Members will have five 
legislative days to submit additional written questions for the 
witnesses or additional materials for the record. This hearing 
is now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 6:48 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                APPENDIX

=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]