[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU
OF INVESTIGATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2025
__________
Serial No. 119-35
__________
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
61-655 WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELL ISSA, California JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland, Ranking
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona Member
TOM McCLINTOCK, California JERROLD NADLER, New York
THOMAS P. TIFFANY, Wisconsin ZOE LOFGREN, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
CHIP ROY, Texas HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin Georgia
BEN CLINE, Virginia ERIC SWALWELL, California
LANCE GOODEN, Texas TED LIEU, California
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas J. LUIS CORREA, California
BARRY MOORE, Alabama MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
KEVIN KILEY, California JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, Wyoming LUCY McBATH, Georgia
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina
WESLEY HUNT, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California
BRAD KNOTT, North Carolina JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina DANIEL S. GOLDMAN, New York
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas
BRANDON GILL, Texas
MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
ARTHUR EWENCZYK, Minority Staff Director
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Wednesday, September 17, 2025
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Committee on the Judiciary
from the State of Ohio......................................... 2
The Honorable Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on
the Judiciary from the State of Maryland....................... 4
WITNESS
The Hon. Kash P. Patel, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Oral Testimony................................................. 8
Prepared Testimony............................................. 12
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted for the record by the Committee on the
Judiciary are listed below..................................... 121
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of New York, for
the record
An article entitled, ``Trump Invokes Kirk's Killing in
Justifying Measures to Silence Opponents,'' Sept. 17,
2025, The New York Times
An article entitled, ``F.B.I. Dismantles Elite Public
Corruption Squad,'' May 15, 2025. The New York Times
A letter to the Honorable Pamela J. Bondi, Attorney General,
U.S. Department of Justice, and the Honorable Kash Patel,
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, from the
Members of Congress, Aug. 28, 2025
Materials submitted by the Honorable Andy Biggs, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Arizona, for the
record
An investigations document of Arctic Frost (Not available at
the time of publication.)
An unclassified document from the FBI released (Not available
at the time of publication.)
A document from the Economic Times (Not available at the time
of publication.)
An article entitled, ``FBI Flooded with Record Number of New
Agent Applications.'' (Not available at the time of
publication.)
An article entitled, ``Review of domestic terrorism after
Kirk's murder shows Biden politicized issue, intel,
fudged data,'' Sept. 17, 2025, Just the News (Not
available at the time of publication.)
An article entitled, ``Democrat Running for Attorney General
Issues Profanity Laced Charlie Kirk Post.'' (Not
available at the time of publication.)
An article entitled, ``Cleveland Fire Chief Removed from Duty
Over Incendiary Charlie Kirk Social Media Post.'' (Not
available at the time of publication.)
An article entitled, ``Generic Combinations of Political
Violence Won't Stop the Left from Escalating It.'' (Not
available at the time of publication.)
An article entitled, ``2 weeks before Charlie Kirk was
assassinated,'' CNN (Not available at the time of
publication.)
Materials submitted by the Honorable Thomas Massie, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Kentucky, for
the record
An article entitled, ``Jeffrey Epstein's Sick Story Played
Out for Years in Plain Sight,'' Jul. 9 2019, Daily Beast
(Not available at the time of publication.)
An article entitled, ``What Epstein's Body Guard Warned About
His CIA Connections,'' Aug. 21, 2025, The Tara Palmeri
Show (Not available at the time of publication.)
An article entitled, ``What Epstein's Body Guard Warned About
His CIA Connections.'' (Not available at the time of
publication.)
An article entitled, ``Epstein's Private Calendar Reveals
Planned Meetings with Obama Admin Official, CIA Chief,''
FOX Digital (Not available at the time of publication.)
An article that highlights Ehud Barak's 36 meetings with
Jeffrey Epstein, Wall Street Journal (Not available at
the time of publication.)
A series of emails from the victims of Jeffrey Epstein (Not
available at the time of publication.)
Search warrant that was served on James O'Keefe for a diary
that he had already given to the government two months
before (Not available at the time of publication.)
Material submitted by the Honorable Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Maryland,
for the record
A Decision & Order, U.S. v. Epstein, 19 CR 490, Aug. 20,
2025, United States District Court, Southern District of
New York
An Opinion from the United States of America v. Ghislaine
Maxwell, Aug. 11, 2025, United States District Court,
Southern District of New York
An report entitled, ``Murder and Extremism in the United
States in 2024,'' Feb. 21, 2025, ADL Center on Extremism
(COE)
An article entitled, ``Timeline suggests Trump team changed
its tune on Epstein files after Trump was told he was in
them,'' Jul. 24, 2025, CNN
Materials submitted by the Honorable Daniel S. Goldman, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of New York,
for the record
A memo from the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Jul. 7, 2025
An article entitled, `` `Historical loss': Alleged gang
leader evades US justice with deportation to El
Salvador,'' Mar. 24, 2025, CNN
A report entitled, ``A Review of the Department of Justice's
Issuance of Compulsory Process to Obtain Records of
Members of Congress, Congressional Staffers, and Members
of the News Media,'' Dec. 2024, Oversight and Review
Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Materials submitted by the Honorable Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson,
Jr., a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State
of Georgia, for the record
An article entitled, ``DOJ Deletes Study Showing Domestic
Terrorists Are Most Often Right Wing,'' Sept. 16, 2025,
404 Media
A letter to the former President Joseph R. Biden, from the
Honorable Senator Tom Cotton, Chair of the Select
Committee on Intelligence from the State of Arkansas,
Jul. 10, 2024
A letter to the Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt Chancellor of the
Exchequer HM Treasury, from Senator Marco Rubio,
Secretary of State from the State of Florida, Jun. 10,
2024
An article entitled, ``Crime Is Down in 2025. Trump Doesn't
Deserve Credit,'' Jun. 20, 2025, Vera Institute
An report entitled, ``GOP vows to make America safe again.
Statistics contradict their growing crime claims,'' Jul.
17, 2024, NPR
An report entitled, ``REPORT: Record-Low Crime During the
Biden-Harris Administration,'' Jan. 17, 2025, The
American Presidency Project
An article entitled, ``Joe Biden is correct that violent
crime is near a 50-year low,'' May 28, 2024, PolitiFact
A press release entitled, ``FBI Releases 2024 Reported Crimes
in the Nation Statistics,'' Aug. 5, 2025, FBI Criminal
Justice Information Services Division
Materials submitted by the Honorable J. Luis Correa, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of California,
for the record
An article entitled, ``Trump's deportations divert FBI agents
off child predator cases,'' Sept. 16, 2025, MSNBC
An article entitled, ``FBI director backtracks on
administration's proposed budget cuts,'' May 8, 2025, The
Center Square
An article entitled, ``Trump Admin Says 70% of ICE Detainees
Do Not Have Criminal Convictions,'' Aug. 29, 2025,
Newsweek
Materials submitted by the Honorable Chip Roy, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Texas, for the
record
A report entitled, ``Outsourcing Justice: How donors and
activists control progressive prosecutors and corrupt the
criminal justice system from within,'' 2025, Law
Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF)
A list provided by the Center for Immigration Studies (NGOs),
2024, Center for Immigration Studies
A letter to the Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Committee
on the Judiciary from the State of Ohio, the Honorable
Mike Johnson from the State of Louisiana, and the
Honorable James Comer, Chair, House Oversight and
Government Reform Committee, from the 33 Members of
Congress, Sept. 11, 2025
Materials submitted by the Honorable Pramila Jayapal, a Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Washington,
for the record
An article entitled, ``Justice Department Told Trump in May
That His Name Is Among Many in the Epstein Files,'' Jul.
23, 2025, The Wall Street Journal
An article entitled, ``How a Frantic Scouring of the Epstein
Files Consumed the Justice Dept.,'' Jul. 24, 2025, The
New York Times
An article entitled, ``Ghislaine Maxwell hinted at Epstein's
ties to Trump officials--why wasn't she pressed for
names?'' Aug. 31, 2025, The Gardian
Materials submitted by the Honorable Mary Gay Scanlon, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of
Pennsylvania, for the record
An article entitled, ``Bank of America Flagged Suspicious
Payments to Epstein Only After He Died,'' Dec. 13, 2024,
The New York Times
An article entitled, ``Dem Sen. Ron Wyden claims `big'
Epstein file `full of actionable information' locked in
Treasury Department drawer,'' Jul. 17, 2025, New York
Post
An article entitled, ``Deutsche Bank agrees to pay $75m to
settle Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit,'' May 18, 2023, The
Guardian
An article entitled, ``JPMorgan processed over $1B for
Jeffrey Epstein despite internal concerns over sex
offender status: report,'' Sept. 10, 2025. Fox Business
An article entitled, ``DOJ Quietly Deletes Study on Politics
of Domestic Terrorism,'' Sept. 16, 2025, The New Republic
An article entitled, ``DOJ quietly removes study showing
right wing attacks `outpace' those by left,'' Sept. 17,
2025, The Hill
Materials submitted by the Honorable Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of
California, for the record
An article entitled, ``White supremacist group stands by
racist ideology,'' Jun. 24, 2015, CNN
An article entitled, ``Dylann Roof, the Radicalization of the
Alt Right, and Ritualized Racial Violence: Ritualized
racial violence,'' Jan. 12, 2017, University of Chicago
Divinity School
An article entitled, ``How Robert Bowers went from
conservative to white nationalist,'' Nov. 10, 2018,
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
An article entitled, ``Walmart gunman attacked El Paso
'because that's what his president was telling him,'
defense attorney says,'' Mar. 30, 2025, El Paso Matters
An article entitled, ``Buffalo shooting: How far-right
killers are radicalised online,'' May 17, 2022, BBC
An article entitled, ``Evergreen High School Shooter's Online
Activity Reveals Fascination with Mass Shootings, White
Supremacy,'' Sept. 12, 2025, Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
A report entitled, ``Murder and Extremism in the United
States in 2024,'' Feb. 21, 2025, Anti-Defamation League
(ADL)
A report entitled, ``Domestic Radicalization and Violent
Extremism: An Overview of NIJ's Research Portfolio,''
Jan. 2, 2024, National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
An report entitled, ``Politically Motivated Violence Is Rare
in the United States,'' Sept. 11, 2025, CATO Institute
Materials submitted by the Honorable Lucy McBath, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Georgia, for the
record
An article entitled, ``Exclusive: FBI scales back staffing,
tracking of domestic terrorism probes, sources say,''
Mar. 21, 2025, Reuters
An article entitled, ``Exclusive: Thousands of agents
diverted to Trump immigration crackdown,'' Mar. 22, 2025,
Reuters
An article entitled, ``The F.B.I. Is Using Polygraphs to Test
Officials' Loyalty,'' Jul. 10, 2025, The New York Times
An article entitled, ``Kash Patel knowingly broke law when
firing top officials, lawsuit alleges,'' Sept. 10, 2025,
MSNBC
An article entitled, ``Senior FBI official who resisted Trump
demands isousted,'' Aug. 7, 2025, AP News
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jasmine Crockett, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Texas, for
the record
An article entitled, ``Ken Buck one of multiple Republicans
receiving death threats for voting against Rep. Jim
Jordan as House Speaker,'' Oct. 19, 2023, Colorado Public
Radio (CPR)
An article entitled, ``GOP lawmaker says she's received death
threats over Speaker vote,'' Oct. 18, 2023, The Hill
An article entitled, ``Rep. Bacon says his wife slept with
loaded gun after `ugly phone calls' over his Speaker
vote,'' Oct. 19, 2023, The Hill
An article entitled, ``Russia's `Ghostwriter' hacker group
takes aim at German election,'' Sept. 21, 2021, Politico
An FPC Briefing entitled, ``30 Days Until Election 2024:
Electron Security Update as of Early October 2024,'' Oct.
7, 2024, Office of the Director of National Intelligence
An article entitled, ``How Russia is using artificial
intelligence to interfere in elections,'' Season 2024,
Episode 249, Sept. 4, 2024, PBS NewsHour
An article entitled, ``Russian Interference: Coming Soon to
an Election Near You,'' Feb. 13, 2025, Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace
A letter entitled, ``FBIAA Letter to Congress on Summary
Terminations,'' to the Honorable Jim Jordan Chair of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Ohio, the
Honorable Charles Grassley Chair of the Senate Committee
on the Judiciary from the State of Iowa, the Honorable
Jamie Raskin Ranking Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of Maryland, and the Honorable
Richard Durbin Ranking Member of Senate Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of Illinois, from Federal Bureau
of Investigation Agents Association (FBIAA), Aug. 21,
2025
An article entitled, ``FBI agents are again pulled from their
day jobs to address a Trump priority,'' Aug. 14, 2025,
CNN
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, a
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of
Illinois, for the record
An article entitled, ``ICE Has Diverted Over 25,000 Officers
from Their Jobs,'' Sept. 3, 2025, CATO Institute Blog
An article entitled, ``Trump's deportations divert FBI agents
off child predator cases,'' Sept. 16, 2025, MSNBC
An article entitled, ``White House pressure for increased
immigration arrests strains law enforcement agencies,''
May 29, 2025, CNN
Materials submitted by the Honorable Robert F. Onder, Jr., a
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of
Missouri, for the record
An article entitled, ``Massive crime drop in DC--city sees
zero murder week,'' Aug. 25, 2025, The Hill (Not
available at the time of publication.)
An article entitled, ``Man Who Set Fire to Shapiro's Mansion
Cited Treatment of Palestinians, Police Say,'' Apr. 18,
2025, The New York Times (Not available at the time of
publication.)
APPENDIX
Materials submitted by the Honorable Andy Biggs, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Arizona, for the
record
Thirty articles so I will just submit those later (Not
available at the time of publication.)
Materials submitted by the Honorable Lucy McBath, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Georgia, for the
record
An article entitled, ``Exclusive: FBI scales back staffing,
tracking of domestic terrorism probes, sources say,''
Mar. 21, 2025, Reuters
An article entitled, ``Exclusive: Thousands of agents
diverted to Trump immigration crackdown,'' Mar. 22, 2025,
Reuters
A letter to the Hon. Kristi Noem, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, and the Hon. Kash Patel, Director, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, from America's Communications
Association (ACS), The Rural Broadband Association (NTCA), The
Internet & Television Association (NCTA), The Broadband
Association (USTelecom), July 30, 2025, submitted by the
Honorable Laurel M. Lee, a Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of Florida, for the record
An article entitled, ``Walmart gunman attacked El Paso `because
that's what his president was telling him,' defense attorney
says,'' Mar. 30, 2025, El Paso Matters, submitted by the
Honorable Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a Member of the Committee on
the Judiciary from the State of California, for the record
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES, FOR THE RECORD
Questions for the Hon. Kash P. Patel, Director, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, submitted by the Honorable Brad Knott, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of North
Carolina; the Honorable Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Maryland; and the
Honorable Jared Moskowitz, a Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of Florida, for the record (No
response at the time of publication)
VOTES
RC 1--Vote on Motion to Table: Ayes, 20; Nays 19
RC 2--Vote on Motion to Table: Ayes, 23; Nays 16
RC 3--Vote on Motion to Table: Ayes, 21; Nays 16
RC 4--Vote on Motion to Table: Ayes, 21; Nays 16
OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU
OF INVESTIGATION
----------
Wednesday, September 17, 2025
House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in Room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Hon. Jim Jordan [Chair
of the Committee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Jordan, Issa, Biggs,
McClintock, Tiffany, Massie, Roy, Fitzgerald, Cline, Gooden,
Van Drew, Nehls, Moore, Kiley, Hageman, Lee, Hunt, Fry,
Grothman, Knott, Harris, Onder, Schmidt, Gill, Baumgartner,
Raskin, Nadler, Lofgren, Cohen, Johnson, Swalwell, Lieu,
Jayapal, Correa, Scanlon, Neguse, McBath, Ross, Balint, Garcia,
Kamlager-Dove, Moskowitz, Goldman, and Crockett.
Chair Jordan. The Committee will come to order. Without
objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess at any
time.
We welcome everyone to today's hearing on Oversight of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation. This is the first occasion for
the Committee to get back together since the tragic death of
Charlie Kirk. Charlie was a good man, a happy warrior who
fought for principles and guys, make our country special and
certainly was a strong proponent of defending the first
amendment, something this Committee cares deeply about. I said
this over the weekend. I think Charlie lived with that
scripture verse 2, Timothy 4:7, ``Fight the good fight. Finish
the course. Keep the faith.'' Charlie certainly lived that, and
he did it with a smile on his face. The tragic killing happened
a week ago while we were in markup here in the Committee. I
know everyone, I know the witness was a friend of Charlie's and
I know many people on the dais were as well. I know we are all
praying for Charlie's family and I would extend a moment to the
Ranking Member if you wanted to say something.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for saying that. The
whole country reacted with horror and shock to the brutal
assassination of Charlie Kirk in cold blood. There is never any
warrant for political violence in America and just as we all
recoil together at the shocking assassination of Melissa
Hortman and others who died in that Minnesota attack, we all
stand together categorically against political violence in
America and determined to end these cycles of political
violence that are traumatizing the country.
Chair Jordan. Well said. The Chair now recognizes the
gentleman from Kansas, Mr. Schmidt, to lead us all in the
Pledge of Allegiance.
All. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States
of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one
Nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
all.
Chair Jordan. As is customary, we will begin with opening
statements. Five weeks ago, because of the work of Director
Patel, we learned that the former Chair of the House
Intelligence Committee and current United States Senator leaked
classified information. We learned this because a whistleblower
came forward, a whistleblower with 23 years' experience in the
intelligence community. A Democrat staffer on the Committee
said this, ``They were pressured to leak classified
information.'' Which sort of raises the obvious question. Why
would the head of the Intelligence Committee, the Chair of that
Committee, who is supposed to be guarding our secrets, why
would he be encouraging the leaking of classified information?
The whistleblower told us that answer as well. The leaked
information was supposed to be used, the leaked information,
false information, was going to be used to indict President
Trump.
Now, the former Chair wasn't the only person leaking
information. Jim Comey was also sharing things he wasn't
supposed to share. Again, don't take my word for it. The
Inspector General told us this. In his report he said, ``James
Comey violated FBI policy by disclosing classified
information.'' What was Comey's motive? Same as the Senator
from California to sabotage and undermine President Trump's
first term. We know that Mr. Comey has not been shy about what
his objective was. In fact, four months ago, he told us.
Remember this? 8647. Jim Comey told us. Just four months ago.
Now, how did they do it? How did the former Chair of the Intel
Committee, the former FBI Director, and others in our
government attempt to undermine President Trump's first term?
Seven weeks ago, because of the good work of the Director
of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, we learned from
another whistleblower, a second whistleblower that in the
closing days in the Obama Administration, the intelligence
community assessment was changed. On December 5, 2016, we had
one assessment. That assessment said, ``Russia did not impact
the election vote count.'' There was a meeting at the White
House on December 9, 2016, where it was decided no, no, no. We
are not going to have that. We are going to come up with a new
one. The new one said that Russia was trying to influence
election and did influence election which just wasn't accurate.
That new one is published on January 6, 2017.
Let's just show you a few things that took place. I want to
show you this email from Admiral Rogers, the head of the NSA.
You can see it was December 22nd. It says to Jim, John, and
Jim: Jim Clapper, John Brennan, and Jim Comey. He says, ``I
asked my team if they have had sufficient access to the
underlying intelligence, sufficient time to review that
intelligence.'' On both points, my team raised concern. Further
states, ``my folks aren't fully comfortable.'' A few hours
later, there is an email back to Admiral Rogers. This one is
from Jim Clapper, and it says this, ``It is essential that we
be on the same page and all of us are supportive of the report
in the highest tradition of that is our story and we are
sticking to it. We may have to compromise on our normal
modality. This is one project that has to be a team sport. That
is our story, and we are sticking to it.'' Compromise on normal
modalities, that is a fancy way of saying, that is a government
speaking for we are going to have to change the rules. In fact,
we are not going to follow our own rules and that is exactly
what they did, to get the objective they wanted to, undermine
President Trump.
Now, how did this specifically take place? The
whistleblower said that the government officials ignored
concerns about discredited information. What was that
discredited information? What was the discredited information
that they didn't ignore the concerns about? What did they use
that discredited information? Of course, it was the dossier,
the now famous Steel Dossier that was paid for by the Clinton
campaign when they hired the law firm Perkins Hughley who hired
Fusion GPS, who hired the foreigner, Christopher Steel, who
wrote all this garbage and lies down. That is what was used to
change the intelligence community report.
What happens next? What did Jim, John, and Jim do next?
They go to Trump Tower on January 6, 2017, to brief then
President-Elect Trump about the dossier. Again, that Clinton
financed, or an authored dossier that the whistleblower knows
is garbage and that they know is garbage. Then, there is one
final step, one final step. Jim Comey leaves that meeting with
the President and immediately leaks to the press that they have
briefed the President on the discredited information. They
briefed the President on the dossier and thereby giving it some
credibility and creating a basis and a predicate for all they
did to the President. They leaked false information. They
leaked classified information. They used and leaked discredited
information, and they didn't follow their own rules, all to
sabotage President Trump's first term.
For this guy, Kash Patel, but for this guy, we would never
have known this information. The good people of this great
country would not have known what took place eight years ago
when they were trying to undermine the guy elected by ``We the
People.'' I want to thank Attorney General Bondi. She set up a
special strike force, a special team to look into this and see
if there is any criminal liability that existed in what took
place.
Now, in addition to getting the truth to the people,
Director Patel is getting the bad guys off the street. He has
moved agents out of Washington, got the focus off politics here
in D.C., and is instead putting bad guys behind bars. Twenty-
one thousand violent criminals have been taken off the streets
which is 125 percent increase from the comparable period in the
previous administration. He has rescued 4,000 kids. He has got
1,300 predators who he has arrested. He has also ended the
weaponization of the FBI. No more spying on parents at school
board meetings. No more predawn raids on prolife Catholics. No
more retaliation against whistleblowers. He has given us
information that Chris Ray didn't. Maybe said better, he has
given us information that Chris Ray wouldn't. Director Ray
didn't tell us that there were 26 confidential human sources at
the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Even though he was repeatedly
asked about that by Members of this Committee. Director Ray
didn't tell us that there were 17 of those confidential human
sources who entered restricted space forward in the Capitol,
none of them were arrested. They weren't authorized to do that.
They broke the law. None of them were arrested. Lots of
American citizens were arrested, but the guys whose American
tax dollars was used to pay these guys who broke the law, none
of them--one was recommended for charging and was not charged.
Remember when Chris Ray told us that the Richmond Field
Office memorandum on prolife Catholics was just a one off?
Turns out he wasn't being square with us then either. Director
Ray wasn't square with us. He told us that multiple other
offices were involved in targeting the Catholics. We got that
information from Director Patel. We learned from Director Patel
the FBI actually surveilled a priest, tried to get the priest
to divulge information, break the priest's penitent
relationship and confidence that exists. Director Patel is
saving taxpayers' money. Not going to build a new headquarters
outside of D.C. He is going to keep the headquarters right here
in the capital city, save Americans money, save the taxpayers
money. In eight months, in eight months, Director Patel has
given us the facts. He has ended the weaponization at the FBI.
He has taken bad guys off the streets, and he is saving
taxpayers money.
My guess is the Democrats won't focus on all that good
news. They will focus on politics. They will stick with Comey,
Clapper, and Brennan and continue to try to undermine President
Trump. With that, I yield to the Ranking Member for an opening
statement.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and welcome
Director Patel. You and I have not had the opportunity to meet
and alas, you have failed to respond to the eight oversight
letters I have sent you over the last seven months, so we do
have a lot of questions piling up for you. I want to start with
a word of praise. The first FBI Director of J. Edgar Hoover who
steadfastly refused to hire women, African Americans, and other
minorities as agents and although he was a closeted homosexual
who lived in domestic partnership for decades with Clyde
Tolsen, he also participated in antigay crusades. He
aggressively promoted what we would today call White Christian
Nationalism, and he would undoubtedly be turning over his grave
to see as one of his successors, a first generation Indian-
American and a proud Hindu. I graduate you on being a
breakthrough in this sense and being a beneficiary of the civil
rights movement that opened the FBI and the Federal workforce
to lots of people who never would have been hired in its first
decades.
Alas, you share J. Edgar Hoover's dangerous obsession with
blind loyalty over professionalism and effective public policy.
For Hoover, it was blind loyalty to him in keeping his secrets.
For you, it is blind loyalty to Donald Trump in keeping his
secrets. During your confirmation, it was widely noted on all
sides that your primary qualification was your unwavering
loyalty to Trump. Unlike other directors, you had no work
experience at the FBI, but you had made over a thousand media
and political appearances in support of Trump's campaign. Your
Senate confirmation vote was 51-49, the closest in history,
with your opponents warning you were not qualified and had no
interest in actually developing the qualifications for the job.
I hoped that they were wrong. Alas, they were not.
While most other new FBI directors drew on their experience
as FBI agents, you didn't have that, but you did write a
picture book trilogy for children ages five and up based on
your experience clashing with President Trump's political
enemies. In your book, you describe your literary alter ego,
Kash the Knight, as a wacky, easily bored wizard carrying out
King Donald's vengeance by driving his enemies out of the
kingdom. In the books, King Donald is besieged by the evil
Hilary Queentown, but saved in the end by Kash. Then, Kash goes
on to catch mules who are stealing the 2020 election for the
great King Donald from Sleepy Joe. Then, in the third book,
Kash takes down the Dragon of the Jalapenos nicknamed the DOJ.
Your supporters had hoped that you would graduate from
imagining yourself a romantic, fairytale knight to actually
running America's premiere Federal law enforcement agency.
Alas, just as we have learned how dangerous it is to put a
science-denying, anti-vaxxer in charge of our public health, we
have learned how dangerous it is to name as Director of the FBI
a man who thinks of himself as a fairytale knight who keeps a
fire-breathing dragon named DOJ at home to forcibly drive
villains out of the kingdom.
When Charlie Kirk was assassinated, while his killer was
still on the loose, you decided you didn't need to be at FBI
headquarters in Washington to work with your team while the
chaotic manhunt unfolded. You spent your evening dining in a
swanky midtown Manhattan restaurant and tweeting out false
information that the subject of the shooting was in custody, a
statement you had to retract one hour later. Your performance
was so disturbing that even the MAGA base was alarmed. Culture
warrior Christopher Rufo, who just a few months ago sat in your
Chair as a Republican witness, observed that you performed
terribly and he called for your ouster. The FBI might be able
to survive your delusions of grandeur and the explosively
volatile temper that was display yesterday in the Senate, but
the intractable problem is that you are running the FBI not as
a law enforcement agency, charged with keeping the American
people safe, but as a political enforcement agency working
directly for the President's vengeance campaign.
Seven months in, it is impossible to overstate the
destruction, chaos, and demoralization you have brought to the
FBI and its workforce and the resulting danger your actions
have caused to our country. You have been systematically
purging the FBI of its most experienced and qualified agents,
division leaders, and experts in counterterror,
counterintelligence, and cybersecurity, precisely the people
who have the expertise you lack in which the FBI and the
country need. They have been expelled from the ranks of the
Bureau, simply because they did their duty investigating crimes
including those committed by the mob that attacked the Capitol
on January 6, 2021, and beat the hell out of more than 140
police officers or simply because you suspected them of being
insufficiently loyal to Donald Trump.
You illegally sacked Brian Driscroll, the former Acting
Director of the Bureau and a decorated counterterrorism expert,
who worked at the FBI for nearly 20 years. According to
Driscoll, you told him your own job, ``Depended on the removal
of agents who worked on cases against the President regardless
of whether the agents chose to work on those cases or not.''
You added ``The FBI tried to put the President in jail, and he
hasn't forgotten it.''
You forced out the leader of the Salt Lake City Field
Office, Mehtab Syed, just weeks before Charlie Kirk's
assassination depriving the FBI of an experienced,
counterterrorism expert described by her colleagues as
absolutely the best and legendary. She would have led the FBI's
manhunt had she not been fired.
When Trump decided that rounding immigrants with no
criminal records was more important than preventing crimes like
human trafficking of women and girls, drug dealing, terrorism
and fraud, you ordered the 25 largest field offices to divert
thousands of agents away from chasing down violent criminals,
sex traffickers, fraudsters, and scammers, to carry out this
immigration crackdown.
Director Patel, you treated the men and women of the FBI
with disrespect and paranoia. You have assembled a roving band
of freelancing henchmen within your office and charged them
with conducting unauthorized investigations, targeting, and
harassing career FBI employees. Amazingly, you forced senior
leadership to repeatedly take polygraph tests to prove their
political loyalty and pushed out leaders who refused these
demeaning exercises. Now, we are seeing one very clear reason
why you want to build a political FBI, the Epstein files. You
want an FBI blindly loyal to Trump and to you, as his enforcer,
so you can continue your cover up of a massive international
sex trafficking ring with more than one thousand victims
betraying all the survivors of the sexual violence.
Before you got in this job, you called for full release of
Epstein files, telling podcaster Benny Johnson that the only
reason the list was not released by DOJ and FBI was ``because
of who is on that list.'' On your confirmation, you promised
that, ``There will be no cover ups, no missing documents, no
stone left unturned and anyone from the prior or current Bureau
who undermines this will be swiftly pursued.'' This spring, you
ordered hundreds of agents to pore over all the Epstein files,
but not to look for more clues about the money network or the
network of human traffickers. You pulled these agents from
their regular counterterrorism or drug trafficking duties to
work around the clock, some of them sleeping at their desks to
conduct a frantic search to make sure Donald Trump's name and
image were flagged and redacted wherever they appeared, whether
an email, a text, a letter, an interview, photograph, or a
video.
In May, Attorney General Bondi reportedly told Trump that
his name had indeed appeared multiple times throughout the
Epstein files and not long thereafter in July, you and the
Attorney General released a memo claiming that ``no further
disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.'' In the few
short months, how did you go from being a crusader for
accountability and transparency to the Epstein files to being a
part of the conspiracy and cover up? The answer is simple; you
said it yourself because of who is on that list. Donald Trump's
relationship with Epstein over the years is well documented.
A week ago, the Oversight Committee released Trump's
disturbing Birthday Book, a note to Epstein, written over a
drawing of a woman's naked body referring to a quote,
``wonderful secret.'' The Oversight Committee obtained the note
from the Epstein estate, not from the FBI, raising questions
again of whether the FBI has been withholding documents.
While you are unleashing the FBI to cater to Trump's desire
to shut down the Epstein inquiry, the first nine months of the
Trump Presidency have seen a spate of political violence and
domestic terror events. We saw deadly attacks on political
figures on both the Left and the Right: The brutal
assassination of Minnesota Democratic House Speaker Melissa
Hortman and her husband, and the attempted murder of Democratic
State Senator John Hauffman and his wife who miraculously
survived a combined 17 gunshots. We saw an arsonist set
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro's residence on fire. Of
course, last week, we saw the horrific cold blooded
assassination of Charlie Kirk in Utah that has shaken the
Nation. One minute after Charlie Kirk was shot in the neck, a
16-year-old shooter in Evergreen, Colorado, radicalized by
White Supremacist ideology online open fired and critically
wounded two other students at Evergreen High School. We have
seen lethal anti-Semitic violence including the murder of two
Israeli embassy staffers just blocks from the Capitol, and then
in the attack on a gathering of Jewish people in support of
hostages held in Gaza in Boulder in June.
We have seen continued mass shootings at schools like the
domestic terror incident at a Catholic school in Minneapolis
last month which killed two children and wounded 18 others. In
August, a man fired more than 500 bullets at the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, killing a police officer who
was a Marine veteran and a father. People like Melissa Hortman
and Charlie Kirk should be able to participate in politics as
elected officials or active citizens without being shot down in
cold blood in the United States of America. People should also
be able to go to elementary school, the middle school, to high
school, to work, to the mall, and to church without being shot
down in explosions of gun violence.
The important position of the FBI requires a leader who
puts public safety and national security and the rule of law
first. I am afraid, Director Patel, you have given us reason to
believe you use the powers of the FBI to serve Donald Trump and
his agenda of partisan retribution. You have broken your
promise not to do that. You have betrayed Jeffrey Epstein's
victims and survivors. You have turned your back on the career
law enforcement officers of the FBI and as a result, you have
left all of us less safe than before.
Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. That statement may
have been longer than any book the Director has ever written or
anyone else has written. Without objection, all other opening
statements will be included in the record.
We will introduce today's witness. Mr. Patel has been the
Director of the FBI since February 2025. He previously served
as Chief of Staff at the Department of Defense; Deputy Director
of National Intelligence with the National Security Council;
and also, as a Congressional Staffer; as a Federal Prosecutor
where he focused on national security cases; and he also worked
as a public defender in the State of Florida. We welcome our
witness, appreciate his work, and thank him for appearing here
today. We will begin by swearing you in.
Director, would you please stand, raise your right hand? Do
you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony
you are about the give is true and correct to the best of your
knowledge, information, and belief so help you God?
Let the record reflect that the witness has answered in the
affirmative. You can be seated as you are. You have been
through this--you have been through this yesterday. Did a fine
job. Please know that your written testimony will be entered
into the record in its entirety. Accordingly, we ask that you
summarize your testimony.
Director, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. KASH PATEL
Mr. Patel. Good morning, Mr. Chair, Ranking Member Raskin,
and the Members of the Committee. I want to begin today by
discussing the appalling assassination of Charlie Kirk. It is
important for this FBI to be transparent without jeopardizing
our investigation, so a little bit of a timeline is important.
Charlie Kirk was unfortunately assassinated on September 10th.
We immediately, the next day, released images early in the day
in local time in Utah to start the public partnership in our
manhunt for the assassin and culprits. At approximately 5 p.m.
local time, I arrived on the ground and walked the crime scene
myself and we flew multiple FBI assets in and out to process
DNA simultaneously while bringing in evidence response
technicians, hostage rescue teams, and other experts to assist
State and local law enforcement with their investigation.
At 8 p.m. local on September 11th, the FBI collected and
populated and promulgated at a press conference a video of the
suspect on the ground. We also released enhanced images. Due to
that release that I directed and ordered, the suspect involved
was apprehended and in custody at 10 p.m. local time. That is
less than two hours after we did the video release and the
photo release, so within 33 hours that individual suspect was
in custody and his family who has since been interrogated
specifically stated to FBI interrogators that because of the
video that the FBI released at my direction and because of the
photographs that they released, they identified their son. They
confronted their son when he swung by their home and that is
what led to his apprehension.
We are still, the FBI, have that investigation ongoing and
it continues to be ongoing, and I want to thank the State of
Utah and the State and local authorities there and I also want
to thank the Attorney General and President Trump for directing
resources to allow us to conduct that investigation as we have.
Under this administration, the FBI has arrested more than
23,000 violent criminals, 23,000 in seven months. That is twice
as many year-to-date last year. We have taken over 6,000
firearms off the streets. Six thousand guns are no longer in
the hands of criminals in seven months. We have identified and
found and located 4,700 child victims. That is a 35 percent
increase year-to-date last year. We have arrested 1,500 child
predators. That is a 10-percent increase, year-to-date last
year in just seven months. We have assisted our partners with
countless counterterrorism operations around the world. We have
captured at the FBI four of the most top-ten wanted fugitives
in the world in seven months. To put that in perspective that
is as many as my predecessor nabbed the entirety of the Biden
Administration. We got four. We got more coming. On top of
that, in two weeks, thanks to the help of the CIA, we collected
and captured one of the individuals responsible for the
horrific Abbey Gate Bombing that led to the murder of 13
service members. We did that in two weeks. They didn't do it in
the four-years of the entire prior administration.
Nationwide, we have been executing our Operation Summer
Heat, the FBI's national focus on targeting violent crime based
on intelligence-driven operations. Ask the citizens of Seattle,
Miami, Memphis, Charlotte, Chicago, and New Orleans. To
specifically highlight New Orleans and Nashville, there has
been a 250 percent increase in violent crime arrests in those
cities alone and other major cities that I have just listed.
In just a few short months, we have already unleashed a
thousand FBI personnel across this country. Every single State
across this country is getting a plus up. This is a fiction
that the FBI is short or that we are compromising the men and
women in the field. They do not need to be in Washington, DC,
so we are sending them into the field to each and every one of
your States. Because of that, crime is at an all-time low. We
had to do it because of the explosion of crime. Maybe the most
important stat for Americans for realize in just seven months,
we are on track to produce the lowest murder rate in modern
U.S. history by double digits. Those are results, not of mine.
Those are results of the men and women of the FBI. If you want
to criticize me, bring it on, but do not attack the brave
leaders in the field.
We are also working 24-7-365 on the opioid epidemic that is
killing more than a hundred thousand people a year. We have
seized 1,600 kilograms of fentanyl off the streets so far in
seven months. Year-to-date a 25 percent increase. To put that
in perspective, that is enough to kill a third of the American
population, 120 million Americans. One hundred thousand
kilograms of cocaine and meth gone; off the streets.
Earlier this year, I highlighted Cincinnati, Ohio, how we
are getting creative to chase down those that were willing to
do harm to our citizens, not just by striking at the heart of
the fentanyl producers, but the fentanyl precursor companies in
China and we indicted for the first time multiple companies and
individuals, not just in America, but in Mainland China that
are producing the ingredients that produce and make fentanyl
that kill our children and we are going to keep going.
Counterterrorism work, cyber-attacks, and foreign
adversaries are something the FBI must never sleep on and we
are not sleeping. In the counterintelligence space alone, this
year, year-to-date is a 30 percent increase in
counterintelligence arrests from the DPRK, Russia, Iran, and
China. I want the American people to know in this setting,
there is a lot of work that the brave men and women of the FBI
are doing that we just can't get into, but they don't stop.
Our cyber threats, ransomware attacks, and those harming
our children online, we have nearly a 20 percent increase in
indictments and arrests in seven months alone this year. We are
going after those that harm our malware infrastructure systems,
telecom systems, and energy structuring. Combating Salt and
Volt typhoons are just a little bit of the examples we are
doing. Maybe most importantly under the counterterrorism and
domestic terrorism umbrella, our newest violent extremists, and
those that label themselves 764 who wish to go online and
convince children to maim and mutilate themselves and commit
suicide and we are producing record numbers of arrests under
that umbrella organization. We even stopped an individual in a
764 network who wanted to conspire to kill an adolescent girl.
He is now in custody.
Transparency is one of my main priorities at the FBI and
this is what I have done in my seven months at the helm. We
have produced more than 33,000 of pages of documents to
Congress to a variety of committees, including, I believe,
7,500 to this Committee alone, if memory serves me correct. To
put the 33,000 in perspective, my predecessor in seven years
produced 13,000 pages in total to the U.S. Congress. His
predecessor in four years produced 3,000 pages in total. I
repeat, I have produced 33,000 pages in seven years to this
Congress and will continue to do so. I am dedicated to
restoring the trust, the mission, and the integrity of the FBI
and we cannot do so without congressional oversight, and I
promise you I will continue to do so.
On the Epstein case, the original sin on the Epstein case
was how it was handled by Mr. Acosta when he first brought the
case in 2006, 2007, and 2008. The original case had a very
limited search warrant, had a very limited search window, had a
very limited investigative window. I was not there when those
search warrants and that investigation were launched. I would
not have done it that way. They were limited only to three or
four years of investigations from 1997 to approximately 2001
and 2002-2005. Mr. Acosta allowed Mr. Epstein to enter into a
plea agreement where he served week in jails for trafficking
minor women. He also was allowed to leave jail to go home on
the weekends, plus he allowed a nonprosecution agreement to be
signed as part of that plea deal, prohibiting future
investigations from that prosecution and from that evidence and
prohibiting the collection of further material. That is the
original sin. We are working with Congress to produce more than
any administration ever has material on Epstein and I welcome
the challenge to tell us that we are not being as transparent
as the law allows. We even went to court and asked the judges
to lift those prosecutorial agreements and to lift those court
order seals, and they denied us three times. Congress is
welcome to do the same and join the fight.
I would last like to focus on an operation that the
President led in D.C. Because of this, we are taking this fight
in D.C. to every single city across the country. Twenty-one
hundred arrests in the last month alone. D.C. has seen a 60
percent decrease in gun crimes; 75 percent decrease in
carjackings; and 53 percent decrease in homicides in our
Nation's Capital. Rightly so, we are bringing that fight to the
streets of America. I want to thank you for your support, and I
am proud to be the Director that leads this FBI into a new
headquarters building that they have needed for decades, saving
the taxpayer 3.5 billions of dollars and also providing our
workforce a safe environment. If you don't know the calamity
that is the Hoover Building, I invite each and every one of you
to walk around. I will give you a tour myself and you can see
where the cement falls on the heads of our employees that are
only to be saved by netting just to give you an example.
Thank you for support in our mission and I do want to
highlight one thing about D.C. It is because the FBI gathered
sources and evidence that we were able to, through our source
network, identify the horrific murder of the D.C. intern Eric
Tarpinian-Jachym and I have spoken to his family and we are
working to bring them justice and Mr. Chair, in my 16 years,
now my 17 years of government service, if anyone has any
questions about my service, bring it on.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Patel follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1655.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1655.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1655.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1655.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1655.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1655.006
Chair Jordan. Thank you, Director.
We will now proceed under the five-minute rule. The Chair
recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Issa.
Mr. Issa. Director, delighted to have you here. You are a
breath of fresh air.
As you outlined, and I won't repeat it, the
accomplishments, you did so with the same resources as your
predecessor roughly, is that correct?
Mr. Patel. I believe so, yes.
Mr. Issa. How much of that has to do with taking people out
of the back side of the FBI and moving them into the field,
into doing the job for which you primarily pay the FBI?
Mr. Patel. It's exactly what we needed done. One-third of
the FBI's workforce resided in the National Capital Region
before I got there. One-third of the crimes do not happen in
Washington, DC.
Mr. Issa. Not anymore.
Mr. Patel. Not anymore. One thousand personnel of the FBI
were deployed across this country on a permanent basis and
every single State in this union is getting a plus-up. Not a
reduction, a plus-up of 1811s, of intel analysts, and support
staff. That is why the crime rates are going down in record
numbers.
Mr. Issa. Thank you for doing that. Perhaps the hardest
thing for a bureaucrat to do is to lower the head count around
them that support them, and I appreciate your willingness to do
it different than your predecessor.
A lot of what you covered earlier was the find, the
discovery, and then the prosecution that is done by the DOJ. I
want to talk a little bit about the prevent side.
Mr. Patel. On the Charlie assassination, sir?
Mr. Issa. No, no. No, on all of these.
Mr. Patel. OK.
Mr. Issa. OK. For example; and I will bring it up before
the Democrats bring it up, January 6th. On January 6th, we now
know because of your find that in fact there were people
involved who were not just observers, but participants who in
fact--it has been alleged, and I personally believe--were a
part of promoting, perhaps even the one woman who died
encouraging her to walk through a door that led to her death.
When you see that kind of activity, and you know it was
done under predecessors with full knowledge, whether it is
January 6th where imbedded people crossed the line, or any
other activity including obviously the Russian hoax that we are
now dealing with front and center.
My question to you is what can you or others do to prevent
it from occurring again, not on your watch, but on future
watches? How can we know that this won't happen again the
moment you leave the FBI?
Mr. Patel. It's simple. What I am doing through our
leadership cadre is having FBI agents do what they were trained
to do, not what they were not trained to do, not put them in
situations that both harm them and the public. We're also
utilizing our SORT networks and prioritizing the threat
structure to go after the narco traffickers, the
counterterrorism people, the counterintelligence threats, and
the cyber threats. That's what they were trained to do, and
that is what we are letting them do.
Mr. Issa. One major question I have: After decades of doing
this, each on our side of it, both the Chair, myself, and
others, both at Oversight and here, have seen that the FBI and
the Department of Justice hide behind nonstatutory practices.
Now, you have changed the interpretation of many of those
practices. That is why we are getting the discovery that was
previously withheld.
How do we work together to make sure that we never again
have false walls, nonstatutory walls that say the Department of
Justice has a prohibition about giving, quote, ``you fill in
the blank that has led to the Chair not seeing anything until
you took over?''
Mr. Patel. I'm wedded to aggressive constitutional
oversight having been a House congressional staffer. I know
that is an important part of securing our democracy. The way we
make it an everlasting enduring process is by showing the
American people the results of what we are doing, and the
important work of this Committee, and putting it out to them so
they could see government waste, fraud, and abuse. Then they
can demand from our constituents and our electors that they
want this process to continue.
Mr. Issa. Last major question here: Some things are so
sensitive that we both would agree they cannot be made public.
Will you commit to this Committee when it is too sensitive to
disclose that you would at least make it available for in-
camera review by the Chair and Ranking Members, or others
designated?
Mr. Patel. I have done that, and I will continue to do
that.
Mr. Issa. Well, thank you.
Mr. Chair, this is a breath of fresh air. This is the
beginning of what we need. My questions today for the Director
are ones in which I believe that we do need to codify by
agreement, or by statute, if necessary, the kind of openness
and transparency that we are seeing from this administration,
the kind of discovery that is allowing us to do our oversight
properly. I would hope that this will be the followup to this,
obviously along with the Attorney General. I yield back my four
seconds.
Chair Jordan. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. The
gentleman from New York is recognized.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome, Director Patel. In the wake of the tragic murder
of Charlie Kirk, Donald Trump said, quote,
Violence and murder are the tragic consequences of demonizing
those with whom you disagree, day after day, year after year in
the most hateful and despicable way possible.
I would note for the record that Donald Trump has famously
demonized practically every person he has ever disagreed with,
and therefore using his own logic he has put their lives at
risk. I should know. Donald Trump continuously puts my life in
danger.
About two weeks ago when I had announced my decision not to
seek reelection, many people on both sides of the aisle,
including the Chair, offered me well wishes and thanked me for
my service. Donald Trump on the other hand took to Truth Social
to call me a quote, ``psychopathic-job,'' among other things.
Yesterday, I received a threatening note filled with anti-
Semitic comments and hateful attacks that mimic some of the
same language used by the President. I am sure many of us on
this Committee face similar threats every day.
We have seen political assaults on both the Left and the
Right. The attack on Charlie Kirk, the attempted assassination
of the President, the murder of the democratic speaker of the
Minnesota House, the assault on Paul Pelosi, and the attack on
the Capitol on January 6th, for example.
Director Patel, do you agree that there is political
violence from both the Left and the Right?
Mr. Patel. There is too much political violence.
Mr. Nadler. Do you agree, yes or no, that there is
violence--
Mr. Patel. There is too much political violence based on
ideologies from either side.
Mr. Nadler. From either side? OK. Are you aware of the
study by the Cato Institute, a well-known conservative group,
that found that 69 percent of the violence is from the Right?
Mr. Patel. I'm not familiar with that study.
Mr. Nadler. You are not familiar? OK. I would commend it to
you.
Are you aware the administration has threatened to use
violence as an excuse to crack down on liberty and freedom of
speech?
Mr. Patel. Say that again. I'm sorry.
Mr. Nadler. Are you aware the administration has threatened
to use violence as an excuse to crack down on liberty and
freedom of speech?
Mr. Patel. Nobody at the FBI's doing that.
Mr. Nadler. I didn't ask you about the FBI. I said the
administration.
Mr. Patel. I speak for the FBI.
Mr. Nadler. I would like to enter into the record an
article from today's The New York Times titled, ``Trump Invokes
Kirk's Killing in Justifying Measures to Silence Opponents.''
In the wake of Charlie Kirk's killing President Trump and his
allies have laid out a broad plan to target liberal groups,
monitor speech, revoke visas, and designate certain groups as
domestic terrorists.
I ask unanimous consent to insert this into the record.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you. Politicizing the murder or Charlie
King to go after free speech is not a legacy, I believe Charlie
King would have wanted.
Moving on, I want to address another topic: The FBI has
traditionally played a key role in prosecuting public officials
for corruption, but I fear that at a time when the President is
accepting planes from Qatar for his post-Presidential personal
use, issuing pardons to major donors, and personally profiting
from the Office of the Presidency, the FBI may be abandoning
its commitment to investigating public corruption.
Since its creation in the wake of the Watergate scandal the
Public Integrity Section has been one of the crown jewels of
the Department of Justice, investigating and prosecuting
corruption among the Nation's public officials and acting as a
key safeguard against politicized prosecutions. This section's
work has been supported by an elite squad in the FBI devoted
specifically to rooting out corruption. According to reports
the Public Integrity Section has now been decimated and the
FBI's public corruption squad has been dismantled.
I would like to submit to the record an article in The New
York Times entitled, ``FBI Dismantles Elite Public Corruption
Squad.'' I ask unanimous consent.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you. These actions are an invitation to
corrupt politicians to break the law since they know that the
government is asleep at the switch.
Last month Senator Warren and I, along with dozens of other
Members of Congress, wrote to you and Attorney General Bondi
expressing grave concern over your decision to effectively
legalize corruption and politicize prosecutorial decisions.
I ask unanimous consent to enter this letter into the
record.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Nadler. Thank you. I don't have time today to walk
through all our questions and concerns, but will you commit to
answering this letter in short order so that we can understand
what factors led to this decision and how it has impacted the
ability to hold corrupt officials accountable?
Mr. Patel. I will review your--I will review your letter
with my team and respond as soon as I can.
Mr. Nadler. You will respond? Thank you. I yield back the
balance of my time.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
Arizona is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Director, for
being here. I appreciate the change in the FBI and the tone
since you have been there. We heard the Ranking Member,
however, describe the FBI under your leadership as resorting to
political enforcement and you personally as being paranoid. I
would just suggest that perhaps that is the projections of the
Ranking Member himself, and not you, sir.
I want to refer to something that was said in yesterday's
hearing by Senator Grassley. He said it is well understood that
your predecessor left an FBI infected with politics. At your
nomination hearing he made--he gave you records, made public
records about whistleblowers regarding something called Arctic
Frost.
Arctic Frost was the FBI case opened and approved by anti-
Trump FBI agent Thibeau, and Arctic Frost became Jack Smith's
elector case. The new records show that Arctic Frost was much
broader than just an electoral matter. In fact, it was expanded
to Republican organizations.
Some examples of the groups that the Ray FBI sought to
place under political investigation included the Republican
National Committee, Republican Attorneys Generals Association,
and Trump political groups. In total, 92 Republican targets
including Republican groups, Republican-linked individuals were
placed under the investigative scope of Arctic Frost.
On that political list for investigation was one of Charlie
Kirk's groups, Turning Point USA. In other words, Arctic Frost
wasn't just a case to politically investigate Trump. It was the
vehicle by which partisan FBI agents and DOJ prosecutors could
achieve their partisan ends and improperly investigate the
entire Republican political apparatus.
I would ask, Mr. Chair, that this document be admitted to
the record.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Biggs. I know that this may be under current
investigation, but I wish to ask specific questions about this
for just a moment. What search tools were used in Arctic Frost
to view private communications of targets?
Mr. Patel. I believe the traditional search tools, search
warrants, lawful service of process, and the tools that the FBI
have in our infrastructure system, cybersecurity systems, and
counterintelligence systems.
Generally speaking, if I may, I want to use this to
highlight the fact that I'm continuing my promise to work with
Congress to produce documents simultaneously, and also conduct
ongoing investigations. I'm giving you as much as I can, and
I'll give you more when I can.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you. Another question with regard to that
is: Were there any directives from the Biden White House
concerning the Arctic Frost investigation?
Mr. Patel. Were there any--sorry?
Mr. Biggs. Directives or communications from the Biden
White House itself concerning the Arctic Frost investigation?
Mr. Patel. I'll just rely on what was turned over to date,
sir.
Mr. Biggs. OK. I want to add here the search warrants that
were used included the seizing of a U.S. Member of Congress--
his phone. I think we all know who that was, and how that was
taken away and used for political purposes, Mr. Chair, Mr.
Director.
We will leave that for a second, and let's go over to the
Charlie Kirk case for just a second. Let's emphasize this: How
many hours did it take from the assassination to the arrest of
the assassin, Mr. Director?
Mr. Patel. Thirty-three.
Mr. Biggs. That seems pretty swift. It was because of the
actual release of videos and photographs that you directed to
be released, sir?
Mr. Patel. That's correct. To put it in perspective, the
Boston Bomber took five days and Luigi Mangione took five days.
Mr. Biggs. Was the platform Discord forthright from the
start with law enforcement about the shooter's communications
on its platform?
Mr. Patel. Discord, the platform ownership has been working
with our lawful process and we obtained materials from them on
a rolling basis.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you. I want to get back here to Arctic
Frost for just a second.
Mr. Chair, I would like the unclassified document from the
FBI released to be admitted into the record. Also, a document
from the Economic Times also be admitted into the record.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Biggs. I am going to give you the last 30 seconds. We
could go on about the Epstein case. I have got a bunch about
that. I am just going to let you--if you wish to respond, to
either of the two vitriolic questioning or statement from the
Democrats.
Mr. Patel. The work of the FBI speaks for itself. It's on
showcase here today. Anyone that wants to attack the FBI can
attack me, but leave our leadership structure alone. When you
have 23,000 violent felons arrested, twice as many as this time
last year, the work speaks for itself.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Appreciate your
good work, Director Patel. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
Maryland is recognized.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you kindly, Mr. Chair.
Director Patel, before you joined the FBI you railed
against it for covering up Jeffrey Epstein's human trafficking
ring. Let me refresh your memory with this clip.
[Video played.]
Mr. Raskin. You finished that December 2023 interview with
a challenge to the FBI and harsh words for Republicans in
Congress for not getting the Epstein files out to the public.
See this clip.
[Video played.]
Mr. Raskin. Put on your big boy pants and let us know who
the pedophiles are, you said. You emphasized that the President
and FBI Director each had complete authority to release
Epstein's client list. You said Epstein's black book is under
the, quote, ``direct control of the Director of the FBI.'' Look
at this clip.
[Video played.]
Mr. Raskin. All right. You were sworn as Director more than
200 days ago. Now, the black book is under your direct control.
Why haven't you released the names of Epstein's coconspirators
in the rape and sex trafficking of young women and girls?
Mr. Patel. The Rolodex, which is what everybody
colloquially refers to as the black book, has been released.
Mr. Raskin. Oh, you are talking about what the journalists
got five years ago? No, that is not what we are talking about.
We are talking about what you were talking about there, the
black book under the direct control of the FBI Director.
Mr. Patel. That's exactly what--we have released more
material than anyone else before. The Biden Administration,
Obama Administration had the exact opportunities to release
this material, and they never did. If you are telling the men
and women of the FBI they're not going after child predators--
Mr. Raskin. Why do you change your position?
Mr. Patel. Hang on. You said we're not going after child
predators. Fifteen hundred child predators were arrested this
year. Thirty-five percent increase.
Mr. Raskin. OK. I reclaims my time.
Mr. Patel. Forty-seven hundred child victims--
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chair, I am going to reclaim my time. If
you could instruct the witness?
Why have you changed your position? There you were saying
it is under the direct control of the FBI Director and all of
it should be released. Why did you change your position?
Mr. Patel. Everything that has been lawfully permitted to
be released has been released. As I told you the investigation
was limited.
Mr. Raskin. Really?
Mr. Patel. Let me make something crystal clear: I never
said Jeffrey Epstein didn't traffic other people, other women,
and they're not other victims. This is the investigation we
were given from 2006-2008. The search warrants from 2006-2008.
That's what we're working with.
Mr. Raskin. Well, wait. Have you released all the stuff
that the FBI has seized from Epstein's house: The computers,
the emails, the file cabinets, and the documents?
Mr. Patel. Every--
Mr. Raskin. What about the financial records? Have you
released all that?
Mr. Patel. Everything the court has allowed us to release--
Mr. Raskin. Which court are you talking about?
Mr. Patel. Three separate Federal courts have come in and
said--
Mr. Raskin. We are talking about the evidence you have got.
It is nothing to do with what those courts have.
Mr. Patel. Do you have any idea how the law works?
Mr. Raskin. We are talking about the--Wait.
Mr. Patel. Do you want me to break the law and a Federal
judge's order to satisfy your curiosity.
Mr. Raskin. No, I want you to follow your own word,
Director Patel. You said up there it was under the direct
control of the FBI Director. He had the black book. Have you
released--
Mr. Patel. Everything I have direct control over--we have
gone to court. You haven't--
Mr. Raskin. Complete your sentence. Everything you have
direct control you said--
Mr. Patel. We have gone to court and everything we have
direct control over has been lawfully released.
Mr. Raskin. Director Patel, complete your sentence. You
said everything--
Chair Jordan. To the gentleman, he would like to complete
his answer.
Mr. Raskin. You began the sentence, everything you have
direct control over I--and then you stopped that sentence. You
have released everything that you have direct control over?
Mr. Patel. That I have direct control over and can lawfully
release. If you're not familiar with the court orders, that's
not my fault.
Mr. Raskin. Oh, I am perfectly--
Mr. Patel. Go look at that. Go to the court.
Mr. Raskin. I am perfectly familiar with them, but how did
we prosecute Ghislaine Maxwell?
Mr. Patel. She was prosecuted with the investigatory
material that was collected from 2001-2005. Because of the
nonprosecution agreements and the court orders on the
investigations and search warrants we were not able to develop
new information. Oh, by the way, Jeffrey Epstein was out for 12
years and the Obama and Biden Administration did nothing to
look at his work, his pedophile network. If you want to blame
me, that's fine, but now you're blaming the men and women who
conducted this--
Mr. Raskin. No, it is not that. I am not blaming anybody
other than you. You are not keeping your word. You said that
you would release all the materials under your direct control.
Mr. Patel. Has anyone released more information on Epstein
that I have? Has anyone?
Mr. Raskin. Well, much more--
Mr. Patel. Did Comey? Did Ray? Did they?
Mr. Raskin. Excuse me. Much more has come out in the days
since the American people and Congress have been demanding it,
but it is coming out in dribs and drabs. Why didn't you just
release the entire file as you promised to do?
Mr. Patel. I literally just told you. There are multiple
Federal court orders. I'm not going to break the law to satisfy
your curiosity. You didn't join us when we filed the courts to
release the court orders. You could've. You have lawyers. You
could've shown up. You didn't do that.
Mr. Raskin. That is a tiny fraction of the material we are
talking about.
Mr. Patel. That is not. It is not.
Mr. Raskin. It is a tiny fraction.
Mr. Patel. How do you know that? Have you seen everything.
Mr. Raskin. It is all misdirection.
Mr. Patel. How do you know that?
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentleman has expired. The
gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. McClintock. Well, thank you. Mr. Director, just to be
clear, how many of the Epstein files were released in the four-
years of the Biden Administration?
Mr. Patel. Zero.
Mr. McClintock. How many have you released?
Mr. Patel. I don't have the number, but it's got to be
thousands of pages of stuff.
Mr. McClintock. I was going to ask you, to begin, whether
Americans are safer today than they were nine months ago, but
you cited dramatic increases in criminal arrests since you've
taken office, a dramatic decrease in crime that has resulted.
Who would have thought that taking criminals off the
streets would reduce the crime rate? Somehow we have stumbled
on that new truth.
It begs the question what was the FBI doing during the
four-years of the Biden Administration to see that dramatic an
increase in work under your tenure?
Mr. Patel. The simple answer is I'm letting good cops be
cops. We're working with our State and local law enforcement.
We're energizing our partnerships. We're bringing on more task
force officers.
When you have more cops on the streets, when you're using
ground-based intelligence, when you're not weaponizing law
enforcement and focusing on D.C., and focusing on the rest of
America, this is what happens.
It is not a significant mind shift in terms of how we
maneuver the FBI. They've wanted to do this work since they
signed up. We're just letting them.
Mr. McClintock. We have seen many prominent Democrats
oppose your efforts to restore law and order to the streets of
our Nation's Capital.
All of us here have seen a dramatic change for the better
here in Washington, DC. Why are so many Democrats attacking you
for that?
Mr. Patel. Sir, Democrats have been attacking me for a
decade as has the fake news media. They didn't like the fact
that I exposed the Russiagate hoax and the largest
weaponization of the FBI and DOJ in U.S. history. We proved it
to be true with congressional oversight. I'm wed to that
congressional oversight and will continue to do that work.
Mr. McClintock. Christopher Wray repeatedly warned this
Committee that the Biden open borders policy had produced a
significant increase in terrorist threats that he said kept him
up at night.
A particular concern, he said, ``was the two million
gotaways that entered the country during the Biden
Administration.'' That's an average of 41,000 every month. What
are the monthly gotaways numbers today?
Mr. Patel. Sir, I'll have to get back to you on the exact
gotaways numbers but identifying that there are gotaways is
step one. Going and manhunting them is step two, and that's
what we're committing our resources to do.
Mr. McClintock. Well, that's my next question is what
progress the administration made in apprehending and removing
terrorist threats that came in during the Biden years.
Mr. Patel. I think you're talking about--if you're not, let
me know--known or suspected terrorists, and we have encountered
almost zero at the Southern border since the Southern border
has been sealed.
The problem that we are running into is our Northern
border. It's, largely, expansive. The enemy has adapted, and we
need more focus on the Northern border to stop known or
suspected terrorists from coming in from places like China,
Russia, the Middle East,
Africa, and Afghanistan.
Mr. McClintock. What can you tell us about the remaining
threat posed by potential terrorist cells here in the United
States?
Mr. Patel. The terrorist threat that continues to be posed
by international terrorists here in the United States is one of
my highest priorities.
We are working through our intelligence community partners
to identify those individuals, and we have taken down numerous
individuals and numerous rings across this country to
neutralize that terrorist threat, including in places like New
York City, Los Angeles, and, I believe, Dallas and Texas most
recently.
Mr. McClintock. How extensively did criminal cartels like
Sinaloa, Jalisco, New Generation, MS-13, Tren de Aragua, and
others infiltrate our country during the Biden Administration?
Mr. Patel. By the tens of thousands.
Mr. McClintock. What progress have you been making in
combating their presence?
Mr. Patel. The DHS is best to speak to that. I can't
remember the numbers of tens of thousands or hundreds of
thousands of individuals they found that came in illegally and
the tens of thousands that have associations to criminal
networks have all been deported.
Mr. McClintock. That effort is being opposed every step of
the way by Democratic leaders in our cities, some of our
States, and right here in the Congress. Isn't that true?
Mr. Patel. Well, we're just working where we can in every
single city we can, and I welcome the opportunity to partner
with Republicans or Democrats on fighting violent crime like
we're doing.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Biggs asked about Arctic Frost. What
else can you tell us about that and what we need to do to
ensure that it never happens again?
Mr. Patel. Continue the congressional oversight work that
you're doing on Arctic Frost. Let me provide you with more
documentation on Arctic Frost and also call in witnesses from
the paperwork that we have given you.
You have that right and the American public deserves to
hear what those people have to say. As for my ongoing
investigation, there's not much I can say.
Mr. McClintock. What role did the FBI play in suppressing
the Hunter Biden laptop story during the 2024 election?
Mr. Patel. Off the top of my memory, sir, I believe the FBI
was in possession of verified information from that laptop and
it was improperly publicized that they did not have information
and masked it as Russian disinformation.
We now know that was categorically false. I don't know why
the FBI did that when they did that, but we have released all
the materials related to that.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
New York is recognized, Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Patel, does Donald Trump appear anywhere
in the Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. I'm sorry, could you say that again?
Mr. Goldman. It's not a complicated question. Does Donald
Trump appear anywhere in the Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. I didn't say it was a complicated question. I
just didn't hear you, so my apologies. We have released where
Mr.--where President Trump's name is in the Epstein files and
everybody else, and all credible information that we are
legally allowed to release has been released.
Mr. Goldman. All right. Let's go through that. You're
referring to court orders that prohibit you from releasing
grand jury testimony under Rule 6(e). Is that what you're
referring to when you say as the law allows?
Mr. Patel. That's a piece of it.
Mr. Goldman. Really? What other evidence does the--do those
three court orders you cited prohibit from being released?
Mr. Patel. Information that was collected pursuant to those
search warrants that were limited in fashion.
Mr. Goldman. Wrong. Wrong. That's not what the court order
says and that's not under 6(e).
Mr. Patel. You're talking--and I said that's 6E and I said
there was others and I'm answering that. There are sealed court
order documents. There are protective orders--
Mr. Goldman. They are unsealed as part of discovery given
to Ghislaine Maxwell. They are no longer sealed.
Mr. Patel. That's just not true. We can argue about it all
you want but--
Mr. Goldman. OK. Well, you agree that there are--so wait,
your testimony here is that the reason why you are not
releasing all the videos that you have acknowledged there are
so many and that the FBI spent thousands of hours of
reviewing--the photographs, all the photographs that you have--
you're saying that you're not releasing those because there's a
court order requiring them to be sealed? Is that your
testimony?
Mr. Patel. I never said that about the videos. On the
totality of the videos, of the thousands of images that were
seized pursuant to the search warrants executed at the time,
the overwhelming majority of that video is pornographic
material that was downloaded from the internet and child sexual
abuse material. We will never release that.
Mr. Goldman. Well, as you should not release the victims.
If there are videos that relate to others who Epstein
trafficked to such as maybe Prince Andrew or photographs, that
you have total control to release.
Mr. Patel. Yes, and if it exists--
Mr. Goldman. Why haven't you released it?
Mr. Patel. Why are you supposing that this is a fact when
in fact it is false? Are you saying that I'm sitting on
evidence?
Mr. Goldman. You're saying that none of the videos relate
to anything relevant to the Jeffrey Epstein trafficking ring?
Mr. Patel. Every single video that we have collected
pursuant to the prior search warrants has been examined for the
last 10 years and every single video has been utilized for
whatever prosecutions were able to be legally brought.
Mr. Goldman. I'm not asking about prosecutions. I'm asking
about why you aren't releasing the full Epstein files including
the names of people who were involved in the sex ring that you
promised to do before you became the FBI Director.
Mr. Patel. I just told you I'm not going to release
downloaded porn and put it on the internet.
Mr. Goldman. I'm not asking about that. Fine. I'm asking
about all the other files.
Mr. Patel. What other videos? Tell me. Tell me.
Mr. Goldman. That's what I'm asking.
Mr. Patel. Tell me.
Mr. Goldman. You're saying there are no videos that would
be relevant to anyone else involved in the Jeffrey Epstein sex
ring?
Mr. Patel. Pursuant to Mr. Acosta's collection of
information based on the search warrants, that's all we have in
our possession.
Mr. Goldman. I understand, and I'm asking you about that
stuff.
Mr. Patel. That's all we have got.
Mr. Goldman. I'm not asking all you've got. I'm asking you
in that stuff there's nothing that's related to any other sex
trafficking--any other people engaged with Epstein in underage
sex.
Mr. Patel. That's correct. To my knowledge, no.
Mr. Goldman. OK. Let's talk about the witness interviews,
302s of witness interviews. Those are not subject to the court
order. Those are not subject to any fictional sealed order for
a search warrant. Why aren't you releasing those with the
redacted names of the victims?
Mr. Patel. We are releasing as much as legally allowed.
That's why we went back to the courts.
Mr. Goldman. How is that not legally allowed?
Mr. Patel. Sir, do you know how court orders work? Do you
know how protective orders work? Do you know how sealing orders
work?
Mr. Goldman. Actually, Mr. Patel, I was a prosecutor--a
real prosecutor for 10 years. I know exactly how court orders--
Mr. Patel. Oh, so I was a fake one?
Mr. Goldman. I want to understand what the court order
prevents you from releasing witness statements that the FBI
took.
Mr. Patel. You should know that as a real prosecutor when
the court hands down a protective order and a motion to seal
the material is sealed unless that judge waives it.
Mr. Goldman. Your testimony here is that all those witness
statements are under a court order--a protective order?
Mr. Patel. We are providing everything we can legally
provide. Congress has sent us a subpoena--
Mr. Goldman. No, that's not my question. My question is why
are those witness statements that are not grand jury testimony
that if they were under a protective order are no longer under
a protective order why they are not being released.
Mr. Patel. How are they not under a protective order?
Mr. Goldman. Why are you not going to the court like you
did for the grand jury testimony to unseal those records?
Mr. Patel. The DOJ did go to the court.
Mr. Goldman. No, not on those records. Why aren't you
going--you just went to grand jury.
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. Goldman. You are hiding the Epstein files, Mr. Patel.
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. Goldman. You are part of the cover-up.
Mr. Patel. Can I respond?
Chair Jordan. You sure can.
Mr. Patel. Any allegations that I'm a part of a cover-up to
protect child sexual trafficking, victims of human trafficking,
and sexual crimes is patently and categorically false. In the
work of my--
Mr. Goldman. I hope you will talk to them when they have
requested to speak with you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Goldman. Because the victims have requested and you are
not responding to them.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields.
Director, yes or no, is the FBI still spying on parents at
school board meetings?
Mr. Patel. No, sir.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still targeting Catholics?
Mr. Patel. No, sir.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still spying on President Trump?
Mr. Patel. I don't believe so.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still censoring Americans?
Mr. Patel. No, sir.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still targeting Americans for
shopping at Cabela's or purchasing Bibles?
Mr. Patel. Nobody is targeted for their faith.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still targeting Americans who are
prolife?
Mr. Patel. Nobody is targeting anyone for their beliefs.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still cooking the books on crime
data?
Mr. Patel. The crime data is real.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still purging agents for
conservative viewpoints?
Mr. Patel. No one at the FBI is asking their viewpoints on
politics.
Chair Jordan. Is the FBI still labeling the Betsy Ross
flag, the flag of the American Revolution, a hate symbol?
Mr. Patel. No.
Chair Jordan. Well, maybe that's why you've been able to--
what was the number, 23,000 bad guys you've arrested? A huge
increase from the same time period in the previous
administration. I think you said 1,400 predators, 4,000
children rescued. Were those the facts?
Mr. Patel. Forty-seven hundred, 35 percent increase on
children rescued.
Chair Jordan. Yes, and you got the guy at Abbey Gate?
Mr. Patel. We got the Abbey Gate guy.
Chair Jordan. The guy from the 4th District of Ohio who
lost his life there serving our country. We appreciate that.
Maybe when you're not focused on politics you can actually
do what the FBI is supposed to do, go get the bad guys, right?
Mr. Patel. That's what the men and women of the FBI do.
Chair Jordan. Director, did John Brennan lie to Congress?
Let me just read a couple things, actually, before you answer
that. Two years ago we had Mr. Brennan in for an interview, and
I asked him, ``How did you learn about the dossier in December
2016?''
Mr. Brennan replied,
I received a copy of it from the FBI and the CIA was very much
opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele
Dossier in the intelligence community assessment.
That's what John Brennan told the U.S. Congress.
Seven weeks ago, the Director of National Intelligence told
us this. John Brennan lied and denied using the dossier in the
intelligence community assessment because he knew it was
discredited. A CIA officer told the House Intelligence
Committee Brennan refused to remove it and when confronted with
the dossier's main flaws he responded, ``Yes, but doesn't it
ring true?'' Did John Brennan lie to us?
Mr. Patel. Mr. Chair, I won't stylize the evidence. What I
will say is that the intelligence community assessment, those
that created it and any individual involved with it is an
ongoing investigation.
Chair Jordan. There's an investigation into what took place
in December and January of--December 2016 and January 2017 when
this whole thing started, this grand conspiracy. That is being
investigated. Is that right?
Mr. Patel. That has been publicly announced by the
department.
Chair Jordan. That's been announced by the department. Did
Chris Wray hide documents from this Committee?
Mr. Patel. You would know better than me, sir.
Chair Jordan. Well, I think you told us, like, 700 pieces
of information you've given this Committee since you've been
director relative to just one incident, the Catholic memorandum
from the Richmond field office.
Mr. Patel. I can give you the comparison, sir.
Yes, the Catholic memo I believe we turned over 750
documents. In Mr. Wray's tenure I believe they turned over 19
pages.
Chair Jordan. Nineteen pages. You've given us 700. Why
would Chris Wray hide information from this Committee? Do you
want to hazard a guess?
Mr. Patel. I'm sorry?
Chair Jordan. Hazard a guess why he would do that?
Mr. Patel. I don't know, sir.
Chair Jordan. Maybe it was because they were--the FBI was
spying on a priest, trying to get him to break the priest-
penitent confidence that exists. Do you think maybe that was
the reason?
Mr. Patel. You'd have to ask him, sir.
Chair Jordan. Yes, we'd love to do that. I want to read a
few names here: Arctic Haze, Tropic Vortex, Riding Hood, Foggy
Falls, Echoes Fade, Sirens Lure, and Genetic Christmas. What
are these code names about, Director? Do you know?
Mr. Patel. Not off the top of my head.
Chair Jordan. Well, Arctic Haze, Tropic--my understanding
these are code names for leak investigations of classified
information from the year 2017. Does that ring a bell?
Mr. Patel. In terms of leak investigations, many of those
are classified and many of those are ongoing, Mr. Chair. We are
working with you to produce documents as we close those
investigations or as we declassify them.
Chair Jordan. Let me ask you this question, because this is
something I've wondered about the way the FBI used to work, the
way this whole thing kind of--so many of these things unfolded.
It seems to me you had all these people in government
leaking information that then gets reported in the press and
there's a story written about it, and then that article is then
used to further the investigation and move forward with what
they want to do. Did that take place back in 1916-1917?
Mr. Patel. That's the exact scenario that took place in the
FISA application for Carter Page and the rest of the Trump
campaign.
Chair Jordan. That is frightening because that's what the
CIA is supposed to do in foreign countries. It's not supposed
to happen to Americans. It did, didn't it, Director?
Mr. Patel. Yes.
Chair Jordan. Not just any Americans. It happened with the
President of the United States. Is that accurate?
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir.
Chair Jordan. Yes, and you were the key guy in helping
expose that. I think our country will be forever grateful for
what you did to let the country know that was going on
involving Americans, which is not supposed to happen and not
just, again, any American but the President of the United
States. The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from
California.
Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm concerned by reports
that FBI agents have been diverted from their important work on
crime and antiterrorism to work on matters that are not
critical to our safety.
I'd like to play the video--the whole video clip.
[Video played.]
Ms. Lofgren. In contrast to that attitude of letting it all
out we're getting reports of actions that run contrary to
getting everything out and that also involve diversions of FBI
resources.
For example, an FBI whistleblower reported that you were
pressured by the Attorney General to place 1,000 personnel on
24-hour shifts to mine, roughly, 100,000 Epstein-related
records to redact President Trump's name from the files.
Bloomberg reported this, that you directed FBI special
agents from the New York and Washington field offices to join
the Bureau's FOIA employees in Winchester and another building
a few miles away and that while reviewing the Epstein files FBI
personnel identified numerous references to Trump in the
documents, and people familiar with the matter said that
Trump's name along with other high-profile individuals was
blacked out.
Now, The New York Times reports--and this is a quote,
Justice Department officials diverted hundreds of FBI employees
and Federal prosecutors from their regular duties to go through
the documents at least four times, including once to flag any
references to Mr. Trump and other prominent figures.
Details of the review were based on accounts by three
former FBI and Justice Department officials who spoke on
condition of anonymity because of fears of retaliation and,
further, that the FBI finished--after they finished its review
of the files and materials was sent to a team of Justice
Department lawyers who double-checked the FBI's redactions and,
quote, ``were instructed to flag any mentions of Mr. Trump and
other celebrities.''
Now, I have three questions for you, Mr. Patel, about this.
First, how many times did President Trump's name appear in
the Epstein files? Was it more than a hundred? More than a
thousand?
Were the agents who were pulled from their duties to redact
the President's name from the Epstein files working on criminal
cases, national security cases, or child sex trafficking cases
and are the number of agents that have been reported diverted
for these purposes? Is that accurate?
Mr. Patel. No.
Ms. Lofgren. No what?
Mr. Patel. You asked if it was accurate. I said it wasn't.
Ms. Lofgren. You're saying that none of this happened,
that--
Mr. Patel. No, I'm saying it was inaccurate.
Ms. Lofgren. OK. How many times did President Trump appear
in the Epstein files? More than a hundred? More than a
thousand?
Mr. Patel. No, what we have been able to release is what we
have been legally able to release and that is the--
Ms. Lofgren. No, that's not the question. I asked you how
many times did the President's name appear?
Mr. Patel. I don't know.
Ms. Lofgren. It's your testimony that you do not know that
answer?
Mr. Patel. The number of times, no.
Ms. Lofgren. Could you tell us how many agents were
diverted for this task and what they were working on?
Mr. Patel. When you say diverted you make it seem as if
agents were pulled off what they do all the time. Agents at the
FBI masterfully do double duty and triple duty, and because of
the public's interest in this case we flexed resources to make
sure that we could answer the public's signal demand.
Do you want us to look through the material and provide it
to you or you do not want us to do that? Which one is it?
Ms. Lofgren. It's your testimony that no one was diverted
from a criminal matter, that this was a top priority to go
through these--this material to look for Mr. Trump's name. Is
that your testimony, that's the highest priority for the FBI?
Mr. Patel. One of the most impressive things about the FBI
leadership and the careers that are in place is that they make
the decisions on who to send where on priorities and make sure
the mission needs are not hurt and that's what happened here.
Ms. Lofgren. It's shocking to me that the FBI would think
that erasing Mr. Trump's name from the Epstein files is a high
priority when we have crime, we have national security threats,
we have terrorism threats, we have murders such as that
occurred, unfortunately, with Mr. Kirk. It's shocking to hear
that this is your highest priority.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Patel. That's literally not what I said.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back. The gentleman
from Wisconsin is recognized.
Mr. Tiffany. Director, is President Trump implicated in any
wrongdoing related to Jeffrey Epstein?
Mr. Patel. Based on the entirety of the evidence that we
have, absolutely not.
Mr. Tiffany. The President is not implicated?
Mr. Patel. Correct.
Mr. Tiffany. Thank you. I want to talk a little bit about
China's malign influence here in America and we have seen spy
balloons traverse the United States. We have seen police
stations in communities around America.
Sitting in the Chair you're in just two years ago there was
a sheriff from Cochise County, Arizona, Mark Dannels, that was
here who said that the exponential increase in the amount of
fentanyl that is coming into America is directly related to the
open borders policies of the previous administration. Do you
agree with Sheriff Dannels' characterization?
Mr. Patel. In large part, yes.
Mr. Tiffany. Since you've been the Director, has there been
a reduction with--we have talked about how the border is
largely secure now, right?
Mr. Patel. The Southern border, yes, sir.
Mr. Tiffany. The Southern border is, largely, secure. Has
there been a concomitant reduction or a reduction in the amount
of fentanyl that is coming into America?
Mr. Patel. There has been a massive reduction to the tune
of--we have seized more than 25 percent year-to-date this year
than the prior year and that's enough fentanyl to kill 120
million Americans.
Mr. Tiffany. Does China play a role in this fentanyl that's
coming to America?
Mr. Patel. As I stated in my opening, sir, what they do and
the companies in China--mainland China--do is produce the
precursors and the cutting agents that they send, ship overseas
through various countries and to the Mexican drug cartels who
produce it. They basically are the cooks in terms of the
ingredients.
Mr. Tiffany. Tell us, what is the FBI doing to stop China
from delivering death to America?
Mr. Patel. For the first time in a decade, I actually
reached out to my counterpart at the Ministry of Public
Security--no one at the FBI had done so--to engage--
Mr. Tiffany. The Ministry of Security--where is that?
Mr. Patel. In mainland China.
Mr. Tiffany. In mainland China. Thank you.
Mr. Patel. To engage in a conversation to say, hey, can we
have a certain number of these precursor chemicals listed in
China so that they become illegal and illegal to trade.
We're also working with our counterparts in places like
India and Guatemala because the transshipment routes of the
precursors the Mexican drug cartels have gotten creative and
instead of coming directly to America are going into these
countries, and we have had massive success in India and
Guatemala and in those governments' great partnerships in
shutting down the ability to ship the precursors into those
countries, which are ultimately destined to America.
Mr. Tiffany. Those people that are working with security
agencies have been working with you. Is that accurate?
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir.
Mr. Tiffany. I want to turn to a couple cases that are at
the University of Michigan where Chinese nationals on behalf of
the Chinese government smuggled in illicit biological
materials, stuff that can harm our agricultural industry. What
actions are you taking as we see repeated stories of Chinese
nationals doing this in the United States?
Mr. Patel. Just that, sir, this calendar year alone, as I
was mentioning, our counterintelligence operations and cases
brought against the Chinese are up by something like 40 percent
and specifically the cases in Michigan show two threat streams,
not just against our agricultural industry, which is a threat
to national security, but they were also bringing in chemical
agents and mushrooms--I'm not the exact expert--that would have
ultimately hurt our population.
We arrested and charged all those individuals and we are
aggressively going after them in every single State because
they weren't doing it in Michigan alone.
Mr. Tiffany. Should research universities across the United
States be doing a thorough job of vetting Chinese nationals
that are coming to their universities?
Mr. Patel. They should.
Mr. Tiffany. Turning to spying in America, we heard the
stories about Senator Dianne Feinstein's driver who was a
Chinese spy. We're familiar with Linda Sun who worked in
Governor Hochul's office, Christine Fang in California.
What are you doing to find these people who are Chinese
spies that are trying to burrow themselves into the politics of
America? Because we know it's happening, right?
Mr. Patel. Yes, it is, and what our counterintelligence
unit is doing is aggressively seeking the intelligence into
where these individuals are working and we are utilizing our
operational authorities to go in and investigate them, either
through our human source networks and collecting information
through a lawful process online, search warrants, and data so
that we can bring proper arrest charges and publicize to the
world what they're doing here. Just because we have caught a
few doesn't mean we have caught everybody. We have got a lot
more to go.
Mr. Tiffany. I'll get one more quick question in. The FBI
arrested a judge in Wisconsin, Hannah Dugan, for interfering
with a Federal law enforcement operation. Could you tell us a
little bit about that? Is a judge above the law here in the
United States of America?
Mr. Patel. Well, no one is, and that case is ongoing. As
you stated in these allegations there was an interference in a
lawfully executed Federal law enforcement priority that was
interfered with.
Mr. Tiffany. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
Tennessee is recognized.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, I believe
you had primary importance in starting Operation Viper in
Memphis. Is that correct?
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cohen. Operation Viper brought in the FBI, the DEA, and
the ATF to help the Memphis Police in policing the city?
Mr. Patel. That'll be Phase 2, sir. Phase 1 was FBI and
local law enforcement in Memphis for the last few months.
Mr. Cohen. OK. You did a good job, and at least the
Director and the Mayor have told me that this has been helpful,
the FBI working with the police. The FBI are trained in law
enforcement. They know Miranda rights. They know how to do
policing and they do a good job working with the police. Do you
think that the National Guard is necessary to do the work that
the FBI is doing now?
Mr. Patel. Thank you. I do think it's necessary to finish
it. What we've done is 500 arrests in Memphis and 110 Federal
indictments, but what we need to do is: We've only secured a
piece of where the criminal conduct is occurring in Memphis,
and we can't work inside perimeters that are not established
and safe. We don't have the manpower to give us the space to
fully go into the areas where the criminal activity remains.
Mr. Cohen. Well, are you suggesting that the National Guard
is going to go into the more heavily crime areas?
Mr. Patel. They're going to establish, like they did in
Washington, DC, perimeters, where local law enforcement and the
FBI, DEA, ATF, and U.S. Marshals can go into. We can't be going
into all these areas knowing that they're extremely volatile
and jeopardizing the safety of our agents.
Mr. Cohen. Would the National Guard do anything in
Washington to help the FBI stay safe from these dangerous
elements?
Mr. Patel. They establish perimeters.
Mr. Cohen. The criminals knew about it, so they--
Mr. Patel. It was a visible force, sir, so they kind of saw
it.
Mr. Cohen. Well, what you did--I commend you for what you
did, and I think the FBI coming in--we have a crime problem in
Memphis. The FBI has helped, DEA will help, and the ATF will
help. I don't think the National Guard is going to help. What I
have seen they are not trained in law enforcement, are they?
Mr. Patel. No, sir.
Mr. Cohen. That could be a problem. Who will direct the
National Guard in Memphis? Will they have control over your
agents?
Mr. Patel. No, sir, they won't.
Mr. Cohen. Who will have control over your agents? You?
Mr. Patel. Well, the SAC and then ultimately the chain of
command up to Washington, DC, will control the FBI. There's a
task force that was put together that is going to be led by
interagency--the heads of U.S. Marshals, DEA, and FBI will be
working together with DHS collectively on this.
Mr. Cohen. Have you visited Memphis before?
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir, I have.
Mr. Cohen. You know how good a city it is?
Mr. Patel. I love Memphis.
Mr. Cohen. A lot of us do. Memphis is a great city. Great
history. Civil Rights Museum. Might say something about
slavery, but that was history. It needs to be taught. Blues.
Elvis.
Mr. Patel. Beale Street.
Mr. Cohen. Beale Street. Right. Barbecue. People should
come. It is not a troubled city. We have got some crime, but it
is not a troubled city. We are not troubled. We love our city
and we hope that the National Guard doesn't come in and cause
people to have questions about Memphis because it is a city
they should visit.
Let me ask you this about--you said that the homicide rates
are coming down to an all-time low?
Mr. Patel. In modern recorded history, yes, sir.
Mr. Cohen. When does modern recorded history start?
Mr. Patel. The FBI, and I'll get back to you on this, has
stats on that going back about 30 years, sir.
Mr. Cohen. OK. I was thinking back to Ozzie and Harriet,
and I didn't think you could beat Ozzie and Harriet's time.
Second, you mentioned the Epstein case. Did any of the
women that were victims, and they came up here and had a press
conference and all--did any of them contact your office and ask
to give information?
Mr. Patel. To my knowledge, no, sir.
Mr. Cohen. If they did--let me ask you first: Is there a
statute of limitations on sex crimes like that, sex with a
minor, rape?
Mr. Patel. The DOJ is the expert, but I do not believe
there's a statute of limitations on that.
Mr. Cohen. If there is not a statute of limitations, should
you not be interviewing those people who know who raped them
and the names and the places and give you that information?
That seems like that is a treasure trove of information. It is
a serious, serious, serious number of crimes.
Mr. Patel. Sir, I couldn't agree with you more. We've been
very public about asking individuals to come forward with new
information, and we would run out every single lead on that.
Mr. Cohen. Well, I am sure the women would come forward
especially today to assure that they will get an opportunity,
because that seems like something we ought to do. Mr. Driscoll,
what was his reputation?
Mr. Patel. I can't comment on Mr. Driscoll's matter. It's
an ongoing litigation.
Mr. Cohen. Yes, but his reputation you could tell us about.
Mr. Patel. I could tell you--I can't tell you about his
reputation. His work has been laid out in that lawsuit.
Mr. Cohen. How many of the FBI agents who worked on the
January 6th case have been fired?
Mr. Patel. I don't have that number, sir.
Mr. Cohen. Do you have a ballpark figure?
Mr. Patel. No, but I can tell you that individuals based on
case assignments in the FBI that I have led have not been
terminated for case assignments.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, sir. Come back to Memphis and work
with Kevin Kane in our Tourism Bureau.
Mr. Patel. Yes. Yes, he's great.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you for your work in Memphis.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Massie. Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent request.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Massie. I have got four documents I would like to
introduce into the record:
The first is ``Jeffrey Epstein's Sick Story Played Out for
Years in Plain Sight.'' Acosta is quoted in here saying, ``I
was told Epstein belonged to intelligence and to leave it
alone.''
The second document is entitled, ``What Epstein's Body
Guard Warned About His CIA Connections.''
The third document is from FOX Digital. It is titled,
``Epstein's Private Calendar Reveals Planned Meetings with
Obama Admin Official, CIA Chief.''
The last document is a Wall Street Journal article that
highlights Ehud Barak's 36 meetings with Jeffrey Epstein. He
was the former prime minister of Israel and head of military
intelligence for Israel.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Massie. May have held that title when he met Epstein
and then--yes.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentleman will hold
for a second? The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just one UC request. This
is Judge Engelmayer's decision from August in U.S. v. Epstein
stating the government's 100,000 pages of Epstein files dwarfs
the 70-odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentleman from
Kentucky is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. Massie. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, I watched
some of your Senate hearing yesterday when Senator Kennedy
asked you, ``You've seen most the files. Who if anyone did
Epstein traffic these women to besides himself?'' You replied,
according to the transcript, ``There is credible information
that he didn't traffick them to anyone else.'' You also said
somewhere in the hearing and here today that the problem is
that the case files are constrained by limited search warrants
from 2006-2007 and that the nonprosecution agreement hamstrung
future investigations.
Those constraints only apply to the Southern District of
Florida. They do not apply to the Southern District of New
York, the location of the 2019 sex trafficking indictment which
produced many things including a series of FD-302 documents.
According to victims who cooperated with the FBI in that
investigation these documents in FBI possession, your
possession, detail at least 20 men including Mr. Jes Staley,
CEO of Barclays Bank, who Jeffrey Epstein trafficked victims
to, victims including minors such as Virginia Roberts Guiffre,
may she rest in peace.
That list also includes at least 19 other individuals, one
Hollywood producer worth a few hundred million dollars, one
royal prince, one high-profile individual in the music
industry, one very prominent banker, one high-profile
government official, one high-profile former politician, one
owner of a car company in Italy, one rock star, one magician,
and at least six billionaires including a billionaire from
Canada.
We know these people exist in the FBI files, the files that
you control. I don't know exactly who they are, but the FBI
does. Have you launched any investigations into any of these
people, and have you seen these 302 documents?
Mr. Patel. Sir, I have asked my FBI agents to review the
entirety of the Epstein files and bring forth any credible
information. We're working with Congress not only to divulge
that information and produce it to you, but any investigations
that arise from any credible investigation will be brought.
There have been no new materials brought to me launching a new
indictment.
Mr. Massie. Is it the loophole here or is it your assertion
that these victims aren't credible, that the 302s maybe didn't
produce credible statements that rise to a probable cause?
Mr. Patel. It's not my assertion, sir. It's the assertion
of two different United States Attorney's Offices from three
separate administrations who investigated those same materials
in live time.
Mr. Massie. Are the 302 documents in the FBI's possession?
Mr. Patel. They reviewed all that. Yes, sir.
Mr. Massie. Have you reviewed those 302 documents that--
where the victims' name the people who victimized them?
Mr. Patel. Have I personally? No, but the FBI has.
Mr. Massie. How can you sit here and in front of the Senate
and say there are no names?
Mr. Patel. I said all--
Mr. Massie. I named one today.
Mr. Patel. I said we are not in the practice at the
Department of Justice and FBI of releasing victims' names. That
is not what we do. We are also not in the habit of releasing
incredible information. That's not what we do. Multiple
authorities have looked at the entirety of what we have.
Mr. Massie. OK. I have got to move on here. Were you
present when the AG had the White House event when she released
the binders to social media influencers?
Mr. Patel. I was, yes.
Mr. Massie. If you are willing to meet with social media
influencers who stood to benefit from the sensational and sad
stories of these victims, will you meet with the victims as
well?
Mr. Patel. The FBI will meet with anyone who has new
information.
Mr. Massie. Will you personally meet with them?
Mr. Patel. The FBI and the professionals who are handling
the cases will.
Mr. Massie. Were you instructed that it was important to
release the documents to the Oversight Committee on the day of
my introduction of the discharge petition to release these
files?
Mr. Patel. I don't know what day that was, so no.
Mr. Massie. Well, they were released that day and there
were victims' names who weren't redacted, because they were in
such a rush, and the victims are not happy about that. Have you
investigated any of the CIA connections? Have you seen the CIA
file on Jeffrey Epstein? If you wanted to see it, would they
show it to you?
Mr. Patel. Well, I can speak for the FBI, and that's
presuming there's a CIA case file, and I've reviewed everything
that the interagency--not I, the FBI--that was provided to us.
Mr. Massie. Would you be willing to look at the CIA file on
Jeffrey Epstein?
Mr. Patel. If there is such a file and if it has not
already been turned over to the FBI, the FBI will look at any
new investigative leads.
Mr. Massie. Have you made any progress on the pipe bomb
investigation from January 6th, and have you made any progress
on the motive of the Las Vegas shooter?
Mr. Patel. As to the first, it's an ongoing investigation.
We have made progress. As for the second, sir, I'll have to get
back to you.
Mr. Massie. All right. Thank you. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent request.
Chair Jordan. A unanimous consent request from the
gentleman from New York.
Mr. Goldman. I ask unanimous consent to introduce an
unsigned memorandum from July 7, 2025, that says we did not
uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against
uncharged third parties with the insignia of the Department of
Justice and the FBI.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Johnson. Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent request.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. Johnson. It is an article entitled, ``DOJ Deletes Study
Showing Domestic Terrorists are Most Often Right Wing.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for
five minutes.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, thank
you for being here today. I want to first talk about the
significant role that the FBI plays in combating the national
security threats posed by our Nation's greatest threat, our
Nation's greatest security threat, China and the Chinese
Communist Party. It is a fact that China is America's most
significant national security threat, isn't that correct?
Mr. Patel. I would say so, sir.
Mr. Johnson. You would agree with me that China wants to
dominate the United States of America?
Mr. Patel. I think that's largely their plan.
Mr. Johnson. They want to dominate the world, both
militarily and economically, isn't that correct?
Mr. Patel. I think so.
Mr. Johnson. Sir, you have been the FBI Director for the
last, what, eight months?
Mr. Patel. Seven months. Yes.
Mr. Johnson. Seven months? During that time, have you held
any stock in any companies founded in China?
Mr. Patel. I don't believe so.
Mr. Johnson. Well, you do own stock in a company known as
Elite Depot, don't you?
Mr. Patel. Which one? Sorry.
Mr. Johnson. Elite Depot. You own stock.
Mr. Patel. I'll have to get back to you. It's a law firm
and it's a company out of Singapore.
Mr. Johnson. OK. Well, another country out of Singapore
which is owned by Elite Depot is the Shein company, which was
founded in China. Correct?
Mr. Patel. That company operates out of Taiwan.
Mr. Johnson. Well, they changed their headquarters from
China back in 2022 to Singapore for tax purposes. It is owned
by a Chinese billionaire. His name is Charlie Zeus. You own
stock in the company that owns Shein.
Mr. Patel. Which I disclosed during my confirmation
process.
Mr. Johnson. You certainly did. Now do you still hold that
stock in that Chinese company?
Mr. Patel. Pursuant to the Department of Justice, who
reviewed my material that was submitted during my confirmation
process, I was able to hold certain stocks, and they made the
decision--
Mr. Johnson. You still hold the stocks that you have? You
still hold onto these Chinese stocks, these stocks in this
Chinese company?
Mr. Patel. I disagree that it's a Chinese company, but I
was--the DOJ, when you're appointed, makes a call on what you
can and can't possess.
Mr. Johnson. Well, now, let me ask you this: Chinese
companies steal trademarks. They produce counterfeit products
and sell them over the internet on platforms such as Shein.
They steal intellectual property. They steal data from American
companies. To me it seems inconsistent with your role as the
FBI Director that you would own stock in a company that is
based in a country that is the Nation's premier national
security threat. It is like you are putting your own financial
security over the security of the Nation.
Mr. Patel. I disagree with that characterization.
Mr. Johnson. Well, the American people look at it like it
is a classic situation of the fox guarding the henhouse. If the
FBI is charged with investigating espionage, economic espionage
by companies controlled by the Chinese Communist Party and you
are the Director of the FBI, you have got a conflict of
interest.
Mr. Patel. Sir, I would just show if there's any intimation
that I--
Mr. Johnson. Well, why are you holding onto this stock?
Mr. Patel. It wasn't a decision I made.
Mr. Johnson. It is valued up to $5 million as of when you
last reported, correct? Five million dollars in stock?
Mr. Patel. No, I don't follow it. The Department--
Mr. Johnson. You don't follow it, but you are still making
money off it?
Mr. Patel. I don't have any money off anything.
Mr. Johnson. Well, you--
Mr. Patel. I have done--
Mr. Johnson. Trump's trade policies directly impact the
value of that Chinese stock. Won't you agree with that?
Mr. Patel. Which trade policy? I'm not a trade expert.
Mr. Johnson. OK. All right.
Mr. Patel. I want to tell you this:
[Simultaneous speaking.]
Mr. Johnson. Crazy on me today. Let me ask you this
question: Why are you hiding pedophiles? Why are you shielding
pedophiles? Why are you protecting pedophiles?
Mr. Patel. That is maybe the most offensive thing you could
say to me given the numbers of pedophiles we have arrested.
Mr. Johnson. Well, you have not released the Epstein files.
You are aware of the Epstein client list that was published
in the 18,000--
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentleman has expired. The
gentleman yields back.
Mr. Johnson. Can he answer the question?
Mr. Patel. Can I just respond?
Chair Jordan. Of course, the gentleman can answer the
question.
Mr. Patel. Since I took over the FBI there has been a 33-
percent increase--
Mr. Johnson. Sir, all that under Christopher Ray.
Chair Jordan. Your time is done.
Mr. Patel. No, it didn't.
Chair Jordan. The witness gets to answer the question and
then we will go to our next--
Mr. Johnson. All of that is under the previous Director,
sir, and you are coming in here trying to take credit for
something that a previous Director instituted and largely
brought to conclusion.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman--
Mr. Patel. I take no credit.
Chair Jordan. I think it is pretty clear that the
Director's numbers--
[Simultaneous speaking.]
Mr. Johnson. It is offensive. It is incorrect also.
Chair Jordan. --are so much better than the previous
Director.
Mr. Johnson. It is deceptive.
Chair Jordan. Director Patel, if you want to answer the
question--
Mr. Patel. I take no credit. The men and women of the FBI
have seen a 33-percent increase in the number of
counterintelligences arrests out of the PRC.
Mr. Johnson. All the sudden when you are coming in seven
months ago--go for that.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Patel. On the pedophile accusation--we have arrested
1,500 child predators in the last seven months.
[Simultaneous speaking.]
Mr. Johnson. Under investigations initiated by the prior
Directors.
Mr. Patel. That's more than anybody else.
Chair Jordan. We appreciate the Director's good work and we
really appreciate that the time of the gentleman has expired.
We now go to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. Roy. Thank Mr. Chair. Thank the FBI Director for coming
before the Committee. I assume the FBI Director--Mr. Patel, I
believe you probably agree with me that there is a
significantly organized effort on the Left side of the
political spectrum to advance criminal organizations being able
to put more criminals out on the streets. What we have seen
this in daily action. Are you familiar with the report that
came out last Monday from the Law Enforcement Legal Defense
Fund?
Mr. Patel. I'm not familiar with that. Sorry.
Mr. Roy. This report came out this past Monday and it said
that significant amounts of the money flowing out of George
Soros and other leftist organizations and funders has been
funding DAs and prosecutors and, quote,
Many of these DAs have never managed an office, prosecuted a
criminal case, developed organizational policies. In dozens of
America's largest cities and counties this report finds these
progressive district attorneys have outsourced core parts of
the American criminal justice system to activists and political
donors, taking direction and advice on everything from staffing
decisions, and communication strategy. Organization is a
complex web of donors going in through these organizations to
put radical DAs and prosecutors out there, putting criminals on
the streets.
Does the FBI Director agree that this exists and is a problem?
Mr. Patel. I will accept the factual representation. If
that exists, it is a problem.
Mr. Roy. The organizations such as Tides, the Fair and Just
Prosecution, Brennan Center for Justice, Partnership for Safety
and Justice, and the Vera Institute of Justice--the amount of
dollars flowing from George Soros through and to these
organizations and to the various prosecutors that have resulted
in increased crime on our streets including the brutal murder
of the Ukrainian refugee in Charlotte. I bring that up because
that is one component of the problem.
In addition, we have an organized effort targeting our
border. The NGO's, the nonprofits, and the deep pockets of the
United Nations, charitable organizations, and a long list of
over 250 organizations that the Center for Immigration Studies
put out that lays out a complex web of organizations that were
moving people into our country knowing that they are dangerous,
knowing that they are criminal, associated with taxpayer
dollars flowing through the United Nations and donor dollars
flowing through organizations, including ostensibly religious
ones, putting these dangerous individuals on the street that
resulted in fentanyl in our communities, that resulted in the
death of Jocelyn Nungaray, of hundreds, thousands even, as the
Director testified--100,000 people dying from these narcotics
every year. All this in an organized effort, a complete effort
by the radical Left to use taxpayer dollars and these dollars
to put people on our streets.
In addition, the extent to which we have seen now with the
Southern Poverty Law Center and their hate map targeting, for
example, the Family Research Council, where we had a shooting
right here in D.C. over a decade ago, putting Charlie Kirk--
putting a target on TP USA, Antifa, other radical organizations
that are very specifically organizing, targeting conservatives
and ordinary Americans.
Well, how about the organized to infiltrate our schools and
advance the transgender agenda and advance a radical agenda,
perhaps one that we will see exposed further in the individual
that actually shot Charlie Kirk?
Here are my question: (1) Will you as the Director and are
you as the Director pursuing all legal channels to follow the
truth wherever it may lead on this organized effort? (2) Do you
agree that Congress should take all action necessary to expose
this web of dollars that are flowing to undermine our way of
life? I have got another minute of my time. Then, I would like
to hear from you on this topic broadly.
Mr. Patel. I'll keep it short. Investigatively speaking, we
are doing the following: We are following the money. We are
following the money in every organization and every person that
is violating the Federal code. It doesn't matter what your
background or ideology is. We are following the money. We are
using the legal process to follow that money, issuing subpoenas
to follow that money, using grand juries to follow that money.
When we have results to recommend for prosecution to the
Department of Justice, we will do that. We will continue to
publicize documents to Congress, yes, when we make these
findings.
Mr. Roy. Mr. Chair, I would like unanimous consent to
insert to the record ``Outsourcing Justice'' by the Law
Enforcement Legal Defense Fund that I alluded to before.
I would ask unanimous consent to add a 2024 list provided
by the Center for Immigration Studies on these United Nations
and other affiliated groups that are responsible, over 250 of
them, for moving individuals into our country in a coordinated
effort.
I would like a unanimous consent to insert a letter that I
sent that currently has--33 Members of the U.S. House of
Representatives have signed on it calling for a special select
committee to pursue the organized effort from the radical left
to target our way of life and undermine our security by putting
criminals on the street and having our borders being wide open
and putting us in danger.
With that, I would yield back.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Johnson. Mr. Chair, I have a couple of unanimous
consent requests.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. Johnson. First, a letter from Senator Tom Cotton dated
last year urging the U.S. to, quote, ``ensure that data from
U.S. companies is not harvested by the Chinese Communist Party
through the purchase if Shein software and technology.''
Second, a statement by Marco Rubio, then Senator Marco
Rubio, which warned our U.K. allies about, quote, ``Shein's
deep ties to the People's Republic of China.''
Third, for the record ``Crime is down in 2025. Trump
doesn't deserve credit,'' which demonstrates that the crime
rates have been decreasing since 2023, which was published by
the Vera Institute.
Fourth, a unanimous consent request to enter into the
record an NPR report from July 2024, ``GOP Vows to Make America
Safe Again. Statistics Contradict Their Growing Crime Claims.''
Fifth, a report out of The American Presidency Project
dated January 17, 2025. ``Record Low Crime During the Biden/
Harris Administration.''
Sixth, ``Joe Biden is Correct that Violent Crime is Near a
50-Year Low,'' which was a PolitiFact publication of May 2024.
Seventh, an ``FBI releases 2024 Reported Crimes in the
Nation Statistics.'' These are FBI statistics published on
August 5, 2025, which details decreases in murder rate,
aggravated assault, and robbery in 2024.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentleman from
Kentucky is recognized for U.S. Government.
Mr. Massie. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to submit
two sets of documents:
First, a series of emails from the victims of Jeffrey
Epstein. They are making FOIA requests to get their own FBI
files and not having any success. I want to bring attention to
that by submitting that to the record.
Second, a document that I want to submit for the record--I
know we don't usually read these. This one is not readable. It
is completely redacted, for the most part, the first 50 pages.
This is actually the search warrant that was served on James
O'Keefe for a diary that he had already given to the government
two months before. As it turns out there were no indictments
here, yet he still doesn't know why he was raided, and I think
he deserves to know.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Massie. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
California.
Mr. Swalwell. Director, the first time you saw Donald
Trump's name was in the Epstein files, did you close the files
or keep reading them?
Mr. Patel. I reviewed not the entirety of the files, so I
haven't made--
Mr. Swalwell. You haven't reviewed all the Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. Personally, no.
Mr. Swalwell. You are the Director of the FBI. This is the
largest sex trafficking case the FBI has ever been a part of,
buck stops at the top, and your testimony today is you have not
reviewed all the files?
Mr. Patel. What I've been doing is busy providing the
safest country this country has seen in modern U.S. history in
historic speed because the men and women of the FBI are given
the resources to reduce the homicide rate, to reduce the drug
trafficking rate, to reduce the amount of children that are
being trafficked, and the number of record high.
[Simultaneous speaking.]
Mr. Swalwell. Well, it sounds like those children being--
trafficked would appreciate the Director reviewing the files.
You said you don't know the number of times Trump's name
appears in the files. It could at least be 1,000 times. Is that
right?
Mr. Patel. The number is a total misleading factor. We have
not released anyone's name in--
Mr. Swalwell. Could the number at least be 1,000 times?
Would it at least be 1,000 times?
Mr. Patel. We have not released anyone's name in the
Epstein files that has not been credible.
Mr. Swalwell. Would it at least be 1,000 times? Director,
could it be at least be 1,000 times?
Mr. Patel. We have every piece of legally permissible
information.
Mr. Swalwell. OK.
Mr. Patel. You can characterize the numbers however you
want it--
Mr. Swalwell. Reclaiming my time, Director. It sounds like
if you don't know the number it could at least be 1,000 times,
which leads me--
Mr. Patel. It's not. It's not.
Mr. Swalwell. Is it at least 500 times?
Mr. Patel. No.
Mr. Swalwell. Is it at least 100 times?
Mr. Patel. No.
Mr. Swalwell. Then, what is the number?
Mr. Patel. I don't know the number, but it's not that.
Mr. Swalwell. Do you think it might be your job to know the
number?
Mr. Patel. My job is to provide for the safety and security
of this country. My job is not to engage in political
innuendo--so you can go out to the sticks and get your 20-
second hit and your fund-raising article.
Mr. Swalwell. That includes protecting sexual assault
victims. Reclaiming my time, Director.
Mr. Patel. Keep going reclaiming your time because the
people of California--are being underserved by your
representation.
Mr. Swalwell. If the President is not implicated, why not
release everything that involves him?
Mr. Patel. We have released everything, the President and
anyone else aside, that is credible and lawfully be able to be
released. Your fixation on this matter and baseless accusations
that I'm hiding child pedophiles is disgusting.
Mr. Swalwell. It is also Mr. Massie's interest.
Mr. Patel. Anyone that says that needs to look at the stats
alone. Go back to the State of California who's receiving the
biggest surge in FBI resources through my redeployment because
the cities of Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco need
it.
Mr. Swalwell. Reclaiming my time, Director. Remembering
your oath to tell the truth, did you ever tell Donald Trump his
name is in the files?
Mr. Patel. I have never spoken to President Trump about the
Epstein files.
Mr. Swalwell. Did you ever tell the Attorney General that
Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. The Attorney General and I have had numerous
discussions about the entirety of the Epstein files and the
reviews conducted by our team.
Mr. Swalwell. Did you tell the Attorney General that Donald
Trump's name is in the Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. We have released where President Trump's name is
in the attorney's file.
Mr. Swalwell. Did you--It is a simple question. Did you
tell the Attorney General that the President's name is in the
Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. During many conversations that the Attorney
General and I have had on the matter of Epstein we have
reviewed--painstakingly who--
Mr. Swalwell. The question is simple. Did you tell the
Attorney General that Donald Trump's name is in the Epstein
files, yes or no?
Mr. Patel. Why don't you try spelling it out if you're
going to mock me?
Mr. Swalwell. Yes or no, Director.
Mr. Patel. Use the alphabet.
Mr. Swalwell. Yes or no?
Mr. Patel. No? ABC. DEF. Don't want to do it?
Mr. Swalwell. Director, it sounds like you don't want to
tell us. Did you tell the Attorney General that Donald Trump's
name was in the Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. Why don't you try serving your constituency by
focusing on reducing--
Mr. Swalwell. Director, did you tell the Attorney General
that Donald Trump's name--
Mr. Patel. --violent crime in this country and the number
of pedophiles that are legally harbored in your sanctuary
cities in California?
Mr. Swalwell. Reclaiming my time, Director. Director,
reclaiming my time.
Mr. Patel. I'll work with you on that. Do you want to work
with us?
Mr. Nadler. Bring order, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Swalwell. Director, reclaiming my time.
Chair Jordan. Time belongs to the gentleman from
California.
Mr. Swalwell. Did you tell the Attorney General that Donald
Trump's name is in the Epstein files, yes or no.
Mr. Patel. The question has been asked and answered.
Mr. Swalwell. You have not answered it, and we will take
your evasiveness as a consciousness of guilt.
Director, did Donald Trump ever say to you just find and
release the entire truth? Don't worry if I am in it?
Mr. Patel. The instructions from the administration were to
release all credible information, and we have done that.
Mr. Swalwell. Did Donald Trump ever provide information
about Jeffrey Epstein as an informant?
Mr. Patel. Donald Trump has not been, and I can only speak
for the FBI, an informant of the FBI.
Mr. Swalwell. So, Director, you have played this cute shell
game where you say you can't release everything because the
court has said that it legally is not allowed to be released.
The court calls bullshit. Judge Richard Berman said that when
you went to the court, quote, ``information contained in the
Epstein Grand Jury transcripts pales in comparison to Epstein
investigation information and materials in the hands of the
Department of Justice.''
Let's move on, Director. You wrote a book called
``Government Gangsters.'' You identified 20 individuals in that
book. You put me on that list, at the top of the list. Thank
you. My children find it flattering. Twenty of those
individuals have been investigated or have had adverse actions.
Director, considering that you have identified these people as
quote, ``government gangsters,'' will you recuse yourself from
making any investigation decisions about these individuals?
Mr. Patel. Anyone that has been terminated at the FBI has
been done so--
Mr. Swalwell. No, no. The question again.
Mr. Patel. --because they failed to meet the muster and
their constitutional obligation--
Mr. Swalwell. Director, I will work on the audiovisual
capabilities--
Mr. Patel. No, no. I'm going to borrow your terminology--
Mr. Swalwell. Reclaiming my time.
Mr. Patel. --and call bullshit on your career in Congress.
Mr. Swalwell. I am reclaiming my time, Director.
Mr. Patel. It has been a disgrace to the American people.
Mr. Swalwell. Director, I am reclaiming my time.
Mr. Patel. You can reclaim your time all you want. I'm
protecting the people of California.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, are you going to allow a witness a
speak this way?
Mr. Swalwell. Would you recuse yourself, Director?
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, would you--
Chair Jordan. The gentlemen has no time to reclaim.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, would you admonish the witness not
to insult Members?
Chair Jordan. The gentleman has no time. The Committee will
remember--
Mr. Roy. Mr. Chair, just a quick point of order. Could the
gentleman be extended an additional 20 seconds to complete his
thought since the witness decided to interrupt him
continuously?
Chair Jordan. The witness will be able to respond, if he
wants. We will make sure he has time to do that.
Mr. Swalwell. Thank you. My question was, will you
Director, recuse yourself, yes or no, from investigating or
making decisions about the 60 individuals, including myself,
that you identified as government gangsters? Yes or no?
Chair Jordan. Time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. Patel. No.
Chair Jordan. The witness may respond, if he would like.
Mr. Swalwell. The answer was no, as I heard.
Mr. Patel. Correct.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Wisconsin. The gentleman
yields back. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Director
Patel, for being here today. I wanted to talk a little bit
about the assassination of Charlie Kirk and the FBI's
subsequent investigation. I know it is really sensitive, and
you can make the call as to whether or not, obviously, it is
something that you can respond to. I think it is still fresh on
many people's minds. I want to congratulate you and Utah law
enforcement for the work you did in identifying the suspect and
apprehending him.
According to public reports--this is what maybe it is--I
still have questions about, and maybe the public does.
According to public reports the alleged shooter arrives on the
Utah Valley University campus nearly four hours before the
shooting. Was that your understanding? Is that kind of--
Mr. Patel. I'll let the public reports reflect themselves.
I don't have the exact timeline.
Mr. Fitzgerald. OK. We don't have any idea kind of his
prep, or how he set up, or how he utilized that time when we
first showed up on campus?
Mr. Patel. All those are being currently investigated
through our cell phone analysis and through our witness
interviews. The State of Utah has now announced charges seeking
the death penalty against this suspect, so we're a little
limited on what we can continue.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Sure, I understand.
The suspect like you referred to is then captured on
security footage jumping off the roof of the alleged shooting
location, the Losey Center. Do we have any idea how the suspect
got up on the roof in the first place?
I think for the Members of Congress, especially after
Butler in Pennsylvania, it's just unimaginable that there could
be some type of security breakdown prior to an event of that
size where somebody could access a rooftop.
Mr. Patel. I'm not commenting on the case, but having gone
to the crime scene and walked the steps that we believe were
taken on the roof was actually readily accessible through an
exterior stairwell. Anyone could have gotten on it.
Mr. Fitzgerald. OK. OK.
The suspect flees on foot to this wooded area where he
drops the rifle, wraps it in a towel, then proceeds to his
staged vehicle, and basically drives home.
Do we have any idea what the towel was about? Was it used
later to identify a place where the firearm was left or do we--
Mr. Patel. Well, we--sorry. What we can tell you is the
towel--there was a screwdriver found on the rooftop which DNA
was collected off, and the towel was found wrapped around the
firearm in question in a wooded area next to the campus. All
had been processed for DNA.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Then according to the suspect's roommate
there were allegedly messages on instant messaging platforms,
specifically Discord, suggesting the towel may have been used
to identify that weapon's location.
The public reports have suggested that the shooter acted
alone. Do we still believe that this is true? Do we have any
idea as to whether or not those Discord messages led us to
believe that the shooter may have had help in any way or
assistance?
Mr. Patel. I can only speak to the FBI's investigation, and
our investigation is ongoing, and we are interviewing any of
those individuals involved in that chat and other individuals
in the area.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Very good. My suggestion, if there are
accomplices I'm sure this is something the FBI is going to
continue to investigate fully and thoroughly into the future.
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir.
Mr. Fitzgerald. The reason I ask that is because I don't
know if that was necessarily the case with Butler,
Pennsylvania. Thank you so much for your persistence in this
matter. There's still a lot of public questions that need to be
asked.
Let me shift to another topic very quickly. On July 31,
2025, the DOJ and the CIA declassified the annex to Special
Counsel John Durham's 2023 report on Operation Crossfire
Hurricane.
The 29-page Durham Annex contains previously classified
information about, among other things, the investigative
referral of the Clinton campaign plan.
Why would somebody place documents in a burn bag related to
this case?
Mr. Patel. That case is very much ongoing so I can't
comment on the stylization of the evidence we're collecting.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Can you comment at all on the Durham Annex
as I described it?
Mr. Patel. The Durham Annex, which has been publicly
released thanks to the FBI's commitment to transparency, is one
of the documents that's being utilized.
In general terms, speaking for burn bags, sir, a burn bag
is what you use to put classified documents into generally
because that is literally how you destroy them.
Mr. Fitzgerald. It appears that efforts were made by the
Clinton campaign to reach out to the FBI agents or the Clinton
sympathizers in the intelligence community to lead more
credibility to the Clinton campaign plan. Do you think that's
an accurate characterization?
Mr. Patel. Again, I'm not going to characterize that
material because it's part of an ongoing investigation.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Thanks for being here today. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. Lieu. Thank you, Director Patel, for being here today.
The FBI searched the Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan residence,
correct?
Mr. Patel. I believe that happened in 2018. There were two
locations, sir.
Mr. Lieu. In 2019, and in that residence the FBI found a
safe, correct?
Mr. Patel. I don't have the catalog of evidence in front of
me.
Mr. Lieu. In that residence the FBI found a safe, correct?
Mr. Patel. I'll accept your representation.
Mr. Lieu. OK. In that safe the FBI found topless and lewd
photographs of girls, correct?
Mr. Patel. Again, sir, I'll accept your representation. I
don't know.
Mr. Lieu. Thank you. It was all over the media at the time.
There's The New York Times article that says Jeffrey Epstein is
indicted on sex charges as discovery of lewd photos is
disclosed, dated July 8, 2019, and The Times reports a trove of
lewd photographs of girls was discovered in a safe inside
financier Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan mansion.
Author Michael Wolff has conducted numerous interviews with
Jeffrey Epstein. I'm going to play for you a video clip of what
Michael Wolff said Epstein told him was in the safe and what he
showed the author was in the safe.
Let's please play that clip now.
[Video played.]
Mr. Lieu. So, Director Patel, I'm going to ask you a very
broad and general question. As you know, Donald Trump and
Jeffrey Epstein were friends. There are, of course, photos
showing Donald Trump together with Epstein, correct?
Mr. Patel. I don't have the entirety of the photographs,
but I think they've been photographed in public together.
Mr. Lieu. All right. Are there any photos showing Donald
Trump with girls of an uncertain age?
Mr. Patel. No.
Mr. Lieu. How do you know that?
Mr. Patel. Because that information would have been brought
to light by multiple administrations and FBI investigators over
the course of the last 20 years.
Mr. Lieu. Well, you know what? That's just not true because
no one knew about the creepy birthday message that Donald Trump
wrote to Jeffrey Epstein until The Wall Street Journal
disclosed it and then all of a sudden the Epstein estate
provides it to Congress.
Certainly, you weren't there at the search. You don't know
what Epstein may or may not have done with those photographs
even prior to the search. Maybe someone has it. Maybe the
Epstein estate has it.
Mr. Patel. You raise a great point.
Mr. Lieu. I'm going to ask you have you asked to talk to
Michael Wolff?
Mr. Patel. You raise a great point. I haven't personally
asked to talk to Michael Wolff.
Mr. Lieu. Has the FBI asked--
Mr. Patel. The FBI--I'll get back to you if the FBI--
[Simultaneous speaking.]
Mr. Lieu. Michael has about a hundred hours of testimony of
Jeffrey Epstein. Wouldn't it be good for the FBI to interview
Michael Wolff?
Mr. Patel. I'm not saying they haven't. I just don't know.
Mr. Lieu. Has the FBI subpoenaed the tapes that Michael
Wolff has conducted of Jeffrey Epstein?
Mr. Patel. I don't know.
Mr. Lieu. All right. If you could provide us an answer that
would be terrific.
Well, let me ask you this question then. Have you looked at
all the photos in the Epstein files?
Mr. Patel. I have looked at all the information that the
investigators who investigated this case have provided to run
out credible leads.
Mr. Lieu. In the Epstein file was there that creepy
birthday message that Donald Trump had written to Epstein?
Mr. Patel. That's what I was trying to tell you. You raise
a great point. The estate of Jeffrey Epstein has a voluminous
amount of information that they have not released before.
Mr. Lieu. OK. That's great. Wouldn't it be great if the FBI
subpoenaed the estate of Jeffrey Epstein for all that
information?
Mr. Patel. The estate is under no obligation to provide
that material, even pursuant to a subpoena. That's a great
point.
Mr. Lieu. That's just false.
Mr. Patel. OK.
Mr. Lieu. That's just false. You're the fricking FBI. You
can subpoena the information from the estate, and you better do
that.
Mr. Patel. That's literally not how it works.
Mr. Lieu. I'm going to move on now and talk about Epstein's
client list. You confirmed that it exists. Attorney General Pam
Bondi confirmed earlier this year that it exists.
I just want to ask you a simple question. Is Prince Andrew
on Epstein's client list?
Mr. Patel. The material related to Prince Andrew has been
made public.
Mr. Lieu. Is Prince Andrew on the client list?
Mr. Patel. We have released the index of names that were in
Jeffrey Epstein's--
Mr. Lieu. All right. Is Donald Trump on Epstein's client
list?
Mr. Patel. The index has been released, and the index will
speak for itself.
Mr. Lieu. I'm going to say America, this is a huge red
flag. The FBI Director could not answer whether Donald Trump
was on Epstein's client list.
I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman's time has expired. I now
recognize the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the
Director for being here and for his work over the last several
months removing the taint of partisanship that has infected the
intelligence community over the past several years under the
last administration, under the last several directors, standing
up for law enforcement, standing up for the brave men and women
who work in your agency.
To set the record straight, we have to correct the record
and the record early days of the first Trump Administration saw
a dramatic spike in news stories that contained sensitive and
sometimes classified details about the FBI's bogus Russia
probe, about a leak a day.
It's unacceptable that senior FBI officials coordinated to
leak classified information to try and harm President Trump.
The documents produced to the Committee in August of this
year revealed that the FBI interviewed a former intelligence
committee staffer who gave details on a systematic process
through which leaks of classified information were affected by
then Chair, now Senator Adam Schiff.
Were these findings escalated within the bureau's chain of
command and if so to what level?
Mr. Patel. Sorry. Were the findings escalated--
Mr. Cline. Were these findings that were given to us
escalated within the bureau's chain of command and, if so, what
level did you receive this information?
Mr. Patel. That entire matter is currently under
investigation by the people of the FBI that handle leaks of
classified information.
Mr. Cline. All right. It's good to know that there is an
ongoing investigation.
Can you tell me whether these leaks to the media
compromised any ongoing FBI investigations during the Trump-
Russia probe?
Mr. Patel. I can tell you, generally speaking, the leaks of
classified information are detrimental to any work the FBI is
doing.
Mr. Cline. Now, former Director James Comey testified
before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had never been an
anonymous source nor authorized anyone to be an anonymous
source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump
investigation or the Clinton investigation.
Was Comey's testimony true?
Mr. Patel. In reference to Director Comey, I'm very limited
in what I can say because of what the current status of those
matters are with the FBI and the Department of Justice. When I
am able to make those public I will.
Mr. Cline. Can you tell me if there's an ongoing
investigation there?
Mr. Patel. Again, without identifying any individuals
related to the information you're generally speaking about
there is an ongoing matter that has been under review by the
Department and the FBI for some time.
Mr. Cline. Because we know that the documents that we
received last month revealed that former Director Comey used a
Columbia University law professor as a conduit to leak stories
to the media that contained classified information.
Let me move on to the way that the FISA process was weapon-
ized by past directors. Prior to your confirmation you raised
concerns about government misuse of FISA including Section 702,
stating that FISA was in need of major, major reform.
Specifically, you highlighted that the FISC report that the
FBI had conducted 278,000 improper searches of the FISA
database.
Do you remain concerned about governmental abuse of FISA in
Section 702?
Mr. Patel. I'm always concerned but what we have done since
I became FBI Director is implement new audit systems. We are
nearing 100 percent review of the 702 query system that you are
specifically referring to and we have also eliminated anyone
that has ever touched that database has in any way made a
mistake whether intentional or not, and we have also identified
a system in which those going forward who misuse the 702 system
they don't get two strikes. They get one and you're done.
Mr. Cline. OK. I'm glad you mentioned you're continuing to
audit because, as you know in May, The New York Times reported
you closed the FBI's Office of Internal Auditing. Can you
explain why you decided to close this office?
Mr. Patel. Yes, because under the new restructuring of the
FBI to save resources there were two different places doing the
exact same thing. We have a specific division dedicated to
audits.
I didn't need another audit system doing the audits again
and so we folded some of those folks with their expertise into
our specific division, then took the rest of those folks and
moved them out across the country.
Mr. Cline. Under previous FBI leadership, FBI agents were
found to have lied to the FISC. There have been hundreds of
thousands of violations of querying standards. In light of past
violations what action is the FBI taking to ensure that similar
abuses do not occur in the future?
Mr. Patel. Exactly what I've outlined. You cannot have
access to the 702 query system if you improperly query that
system at all at anytime in your career.
Mr. Cline. At a Senate hearing two years ago your
predecessor, Director Wray, testified the FBI had previously
purchased U.S. phone geolocation data for a specific national
security pilot project and further stated that the project had
not been active for some time and that the FBI relies on court-
authorized process to obtain location data from companies.
Does the FBI purchase location data or any other data of
Americans from data brokers?
Mr. Patel. I don't believe so, but I'll get back to you.
Mr. Cline. Thank you. That would be important. I appreciate
that. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady
from Washington is recognized.
Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Patel, before you joined the FBI you had very strong
opinions about what the FBI was hiding regarding Jeffrey
Epstein. In a September 2023, interview with Glenn Beck you
said the black book is under the, quote, ``direct control of
the Director of the FBI.''
In December 2023, you said, ``Let us know who the
pedophiles are.'' Even for a short time after becoming the FBI
Director in February 2025 you tweeted, quote, ``There will be
no cover-ups, no missing documents, and no stone left
unturned.''
In June, you told Joe Rogan, quote, ``We have reviewed all
the information. We're going to give you every single thing we
have and can.''
Then, suddenly in July everything changed. You and Attorney
General Pam Bondi released one video and said that there was
nothing more to see.
In your July memo says you uncovered more than 300
gigabytes of data and physical evidence but that you had
decided no further disclosure would be appropriate or
warranted. That is a quote.
I think what happened, Mr. Patel, is that suddenly you
discovered that Donald Trump's name was all over these files
and you started a giant cover-up.
You are under oath, Mr. Patel. You just testified to Mr.
Swalwell that you did not speak to the President about the
Epstein files. To your knowledge, did Attorney General Pam
Bondi speak to the President about what was in the Epstein
files?
Mr. Patel. I can't speak for Attorney General Pam Bondi.
Ms. Jayapal. To your knowledge, you don't have any
information. The question was, do you have any knowledge? Do
you have any knowledge?
Mr. Patel. I can't speak for the Attorney General Pam
Bondi.
Ms. Jayapal. You are refusing to answer the question.
Let me tell you that The Wall Street Journal reported that
in May Bondi told Trump that he was in the Epstein files and at
the same meeting said that the DOJ did not plan to release the
files.
Yesterday, you testified to Senator Kennedy that there was,
quote, ``no credible information that Epstein trafficked girls
to anyone else'' and that you have, quote, ``continuously and
publicly asked the public to come forward with more information
and we'll look into it.''
Today in response to Mr. Massie's question you appear to
say that the survivors were not credible. These are survivors.
Mr. Patel. That's not at all what I said.
Ms. Jayapal. OK, great. I'm going to ask you this in a
second but let me tell you about the survivors.
Mr. Patel. Then, don't lie about me.
Ms. Jayapal. Let's bring them up here into the room. These
are women who came to the Hill and testified that they were
groomed and raped at the age of 14-16 years old and they called
to meet with the President and to meet with the FBI and to have
people investigate their claims.
Some of them have never testified before. If you are so
interested in getting the public to submit any information, why
have you not met with them? You said you haven't met with them.
Have you met with them? I'll give you one more chance.
Mr. Patel. My job as the FBI Director is to invite all
investigative leads--
Ms. Jayapal. Is the answer yes or no to whether or not you
met with these women who were sexually abused and raped?
Mr. Patel. Any insinuation by you or any people on your
side that I am not manhunting child predators and sex
traffickers, just look at the stats. You talk about cover-ups,
ma'am. You talk about cover-ups--
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Patel--Mr. Chair, this is my time and I
will take as much time as I want. Instruct the witness, Mr.
Chair.
Mr. Patel. Where were you during the Obama and Biden
Administrations when these so-called cover-ups were going on?
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair--
Mr. Patel. Why didn't anyone in those administrations talk
to any of these purported witnesses?
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair--
[Simultaneous speaking.]
Mr. Patel. --single person to provide credible information.
Chair Jordan. The time belongs to the gentlelady from
Washington.
Ms. Jayapal. I'm going to take another couple of minutes.
Chair Jordan. When you accuse the witness of something he's
allowed to respond. That's how it works. You say something--
Ms. Jayapal. Listen, he didn't even--excuse me, Mr. Chair,
you have always been fair, but this is not fair.
Chair Jordan. I'm being fair, and you will get your time.
Ms. Jayapal. No, this is my time, and he said that the
witnesses were not credible.
Chair Jordan. We will give the gentlelady a few additional
seconds of time.
Ms. Jayapal. I'm going to get an additional minute of time
because that's how much time he took.
Chair Jordan. No, you won't get a minute. You'll get some
seconds what we think is under five minutes. You don't get to
demand how much time you get. That's not how it works.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Patel, are the victims of the Jeffrey
Epstein horrific trafficking ring, are they credible?
Mr. Patel. Any person with information about ongoing sexual
trafficking--
Ms. Jayapal. I'm asking you if they're credible. Are they
credible?
Mr. Patel. Ma'am, I'm commenting on the evidence we have.
We have routinely asked for people to come forward with more
evidence and we will look at it, and the evidence that we have
was the same evidence that the Biden and Obama Justice
Department had and they determined, not me--they determined
that that information was not credible.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, he's not letting me even ask my
questions.
Chair Jordan. You asked the questions. He gives an answer.
You may not like what he says but that doesn't mean you get to
interrupt him.
Ms. Jayapal. No, I'm asking. He's not answering my
questions.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, could we restore the gentlelady 45
seconds so she can complete her question?
Chair Jordan. We'll give her an additional 30 seconds,
which is what I said earlier.
Ms. Jayapal. I'm going to keep taking my time because
here's the thing.
Chair Jordan. No, you'll take the time that you get. You
get 45 seconds.
Ms. Jayapal. You are not answering the question. The
question is: Are these women credible?
Mr. Patel. I have. You just don't like the answer.
Ms. Jayapal. It's a yes or no answer.
Mr. Patel. I have answered the question.
Ms. Jayapal. Well, what is the answer?
Mr. Patel. I keep telling you I'm the only FBI Director
that has welcomed new information in this case. This
administration is the only one that has welcomed any new
information in this case.
Ms. Jayapal. Is there a yes or no whether the victims are
credible?
Mr. Patel. Present new credible information--present new
information--
Ms. Jayapal. Are the victims being credible or not?
Mr. Patel. The victims--I'll tell you what happened in the
last Trump Administration.
Ms. Jayapal. Are they credible or not? You can't even say?
Mr. Patel. Victims credibly came forward and you know what
happened? President Trump authorized the indictments of Jeffrey
Epstein.
Ms. Jayapal. President Trump called them a hoax.
Mr. Patel. Not Biden, not Obama. No one else.
Ms. Jayapal. President Trump called the entire thing a
Democratic hoax. I would like to ask you if you will meet--if
you will meet--
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady's time has expired. I gave her
the additional 45 seconds she requested. The gentlelady yields
back. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for his five
minutes.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, I would like to ask if you would
meet with the women who were sexually abused--
Chair Jordan. The time does not belong--the time does not
belong to the gentlelady from Washington. The time now
belongs--
Ms. Jayapal. --and raped and groomed at the ages of 14-16
years old. Are you going to cover up--are you going to continue
to cover up--
Chair Jordan. I'm going to recognize the gentleman from New
Jersey for his five minutes.
Ms. Jayapal. --for the rich and powerful men including
those that might be on this Committee?
Mr. Van Drew. I can yell too, Mr. Chair, but I don't want
to yell about this.
Ms. Jayapal. Or are you going to allow them to testify?
Chair Jordan. The time belongs to the gentleman from New
Jersey. I appreciate the gentlelady yielding back.
Ms. Jayapal. Are you going to allow them to testify, Mr.
Patel? Will you allow them to testify to you, Mr. Patel?
Mr. Van Drew. Mr. Patel, thank you for being here. I know
it's been an interesting and difficult two days. I wasn't going
to talk about the Epstein thing because there's a lot of other
issues that affect the FBI, but I have to say a few words.
I've sat here, I've listened to this, I've watched it, and
my Democratic colleagues are so concerned now, Mr. Patel, all
of a sudden.
Where were they last year? Where were they the year before?
Where were they the year before that? Where was the last
president in any of this?
Well, I know the only thing I see is a single letter from
the Ranking Member that was sent in 2019 that he didn't like
the plea deal and some people signed on to that.
Most of the truth, the real truth--let's be honest. Let's
be intellectually honest. The real truth is we didn't hear from
them at all, anybody of them. Hardly any of them ever mentioned
it. Some of them didn't mention it at all until the beginning
of this year.
Earlier in the year it started. Not one Democrat asked
Director Wray. We all remember. Director Wray was here not
once, not twice, but multiple times. Nobody asked Director Wray
about Epstein before this Committee. Nobody was that concerned.
Where was the concern for the victims then? Where was the
moral righteousness then? Where was the outrage then? Where was
the sense of duty then? Where was the desire for accountability
then? Where was the urgency for justice then?
Most of all, where the hell was the integrity then? You
know what the truth is. Let's just say it, man. Tell the truth
time.
The truth is it's politically useful for them to try to do
this now even though they didn't give a damn about it in the
past. You know what? That's an insult to the victims and that's
an insult to America.
Continue to do the work you're doing. Continue to uncover
what needs to be uncovered.
One real quick thing before I say anything, too. ``9/11''--
we know that was mishandled by the past director and by the
past FBIs. There are family members here. There are family
members who are concerned.
God Almighty, we want to get to the truth of that. I ask
you, please, to meet with them, to talk to them, and to
investigate this with truth.
In the Biden Administration we went through a very dark and
difficult period of time. The FBI trust was broken with the
people. Catholics were--this is the stuff we have been talking
about--were labeled radical threats for praying in their
churches with their rosaries.
Parents at school boards were called terrorists for
standing up for their children. Hindu holy men in New Jersey--
we have a large--the largest Hindu temple in the world. They
were attacked. They were put up against the wall with guns to
their heads.
It isn't just a Catholic or Christian thing. American Jews
were targeted in colleges and universities, and a lot of folks
in the FBI, in the past FBI--not this one--didn't give a damn.
We can't go back to targeting religion. We can't go back to
silencing free speech. The Biden Administration did that.
I got questions for you, hopefully, thoughtful questions
that you can answer for us in a thoughtful way.
How is this FBI now under your leadership--how are we
restoring trust for Catholics, for Hindus, for Jews, for
parents, and for all the other--for just American people that
were targeted by FISA because they had a different viewpoint?
How are we restoring that trust in the FBI?
Mr. Patel. Multiple ways, sir.
First, and maybe most importantly, is through transparency
and providing the American public with the materials so they
can see, read it themselves, as to what the abuses were in the
past, whether it relates to the Catholic memo or the Hindu
incident you talked about at the largest temple in North
America.
Any institution of faith and any member of faith will not
be investigated by this FBI because they are men and women of
faith ever. Period.
Mr. Van Drew. Nor should they. Nor should they. I don't
mean to interrupt you, but my God, of all the amendments to the
Constitution, freedom of speech, freedom to believe in what you
want to believe in. I know you're standing up for that.
Continue, I'm sorry.
Mr. Patel. No, that's it, sir.
Mr. Van Drew. OK. The Richmond memo was driven by a
reliance on sources. The Southern Poverty Law Center--the words
sound nice but the organization's not so nice and we have seen
the Anti-Defamation League distort data that counts as well as
violence.
Have you been able to identify and eliminate these kinds of
partisan sources? We welcome all sources, but we want
objectivity, neutrality, and decency in the way we report all
this. Have you been able to uncover any information there? How
do we make sure our sources are good in the future?
Mr. Patel. We have reviewed the source processes that
infiltrate any institutions of faith, and they will no longer
be going into institutions of faith. They will be directed
toward criminal activity and protecting the homeland, the two
most important missions the FBI has, and that's what we're
going to continue to do.
Mr. Van Drew. Good, and I'll say this. There was a lot of
bull today. A lot of you know what, and I'm not going to say it
because I respect the institution, so much going on around
here.
Continue to do the work of the people. You are here for
that reason. The administration is here for that reason. It was
weaponized and politicized--the FBI--in the past. I hope to God
we never, ever see that again, one of the darkest parts of
American history.
Thank you, Mr. Patel. I yield back.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
New York is recognized for UC.
Mr. Goldman. I would like to introduce a CNN article that
explains how an alleged top leader of the MS-13 gang was
dismissed. His case was dismissed in Brooklyn, so that he could
be deported back to El Salvador even though he was charged with
murder.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Jayapal. Mr. Chair, I have some unanimous consent--
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from Washington is recognized.
Ms. Jayapal. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record an article titled ``Justice Department told Trump in May
that his name is among many in the Epstein files.''
I have another one that is a July 2025, article by The New
York Times entitled ``How a Frantic Scouring of the Epstein
Files Consumed the Justice Department,'' stating that DOJ and
FBI employees reviewing the Epstein files were instructed to
flag any mentions of Trump and other celebrities.
I have another unanimous consent request to enter into the
record, an August 2025 article by the Guardian entitled,
``Ghislaine Maxwell Hinted at Epstein's Ties to Trump
Officials: Why Wasn't She Pressed for Names?'' stating that
Maxwell told Deputy U.S. Attorney Todd Blanche that some of
the, quote, ``cast of characters'' around Epstein are in
Trump's cabinet.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The Chair now recognizes
the gentlelady from Pennsylvania.
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr.
Patel, for coming before us to testify today.
I am concerned by your repeated claims that you're not able
to disclose anything further about the Epstein investigation
files and that there's no evidence of a broader conspiracy or
other people who should be charged, because the American people
aren't buying that you've been transparent or that there's
nothing further to be seen.
In your exchange with my colleague Mr. Roy, you reiterated
something that I heard you say yesterday in your Senate
testimony and that under your direction the FBI will always
follow the money. Is that right?
Mr. Patel. The money did you say? Yes.
Ms. Scanlon. Yes, you said you'll follow the money. That's
great.
Just now you said you'd welcome the opportunity to
investigate new evidence. There has been significant recent
reporting just in the last couple weeks that after Jeffrey
Epstein was arrested four major banks flagged more than $1.5
billion in suspicious transactions connected to him that
suggested a massive conspiracy related to his child sex
trafficking activities.
Director Patel, has the FBI reviewed the $1.5 billion in
suspicious bank transactions flagged to the government relating
to Epstein and his coconspirators?
Mr. Patel. I know the FBI has reviewed numerous SARs. I
don't know the totality of that number.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. Can you provide us with that number?
Mr. Patel. I'll get back to you.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. Have you initiated any new investigation
of those bank transactions since, say, September 8th, when the
new reporting came out?
Mr. Patel. I'll check with the Treasury Department because
they're the lead on that.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. So, Director Patel, how many individuals
or entities has the FBI interviewed, subpoenaed, or compelled
to testify? Can you give us those numbers with respect to these
bank transactions?
Mr. Patel. Not off the top of my head. I'll have to work
with Treasury.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. We're concerned because you say you're
going after child predators but obviously, this is how you
follow the money is if you follow the bank transactions that
apparently enabled the child sex trafficking. Would you agree?
Mr. Patel. We are. It's one of the valuable investigative
tools is to follow the money.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. The Jeffrey Epstein's victims have asked
us to ask you whether or not you've investigated Epstein's
lawyers, the lawyers who facilitated those payments. Have you
subpoenaed or questioned any of those lawyers?
Mr. Patel. In 2018 and 2019 what I recollect is many, if
not every one of those lawyers, was part of the investigation.
Ms. Scanlon. You weren't there at that time, right?
Mr. Patel. I wasn't there.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. Can you get us the names and the numbers
of who was investigated then with respect to those lawyers?
Mr. Patel. As long as I'm allowed to release it,
absolutely.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. Well, if we provide you with subpoenas, I
assume you can release it. Is that right?
Mr. Patel. We have a current subpoena and we're working
with Congress to provide it.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. You've said that the Acosta investigation
had an original sin. What do you mean by that?
Mr. Patel. Basically, if you're looking at an actual
pedophile ring what you should not do is limit the timeframe in
which you're legally able to collect information.
Search warrants that Mr. Acosta utilized in 2006-2007
leading to the 2008 plea agreement had a very specific narrow
window of years--I think three or four years.
Information pursuant to the legal process wasn't collected
for 10-15 years or 20 years. It also--subpoenas were not sent
out to hundreds of witnesses at the time, hundreds of victims
at the time. None of that was done. None of these people were
put in grand juries.
The totality of information from the jump instead of being
this big was like this and that, in my opinion, is not how you
run an investigation if you're trying to break a sex
trafficking ring.
Ms. Scanlon. You're now in charge of the FBI. Why haven't
you done that investigation?
Mr. Patel. Great question and here's the answer. Simply
because I am not able to go back 20 years and collect
information that the courts had decided was already subject to
search warrants. They have said, ``this was in the
investigation.''
There's a nonprosecution agreement out of that plea and
when the case was reopened--and this is where it comes into
play--when the case was reopened in 2018 and 2019 the search
warrants, again, were limited to the conduct of Jeffrey
Epstein.
Now, whether that's right or wrong that's a different
discussion. I'm telling you that's the information we reviewed.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. Well, that is a different discussion and I
think the discussion we'd like to have today is why you aren't
following the money with respect to the broader conspiracy that
has been reported in The New York Times and elsewhere and that
if you really want to attack the issue--if you wanted to attack
the issue, if you wanted to get to the bottom of it, if you
wanted to disclose what really was involved in the Epstein
files--the Epstein cover-up--that you would be taking very
different actions than you are today.
I do want to seek unanimous consent to enter into the
record The New York Times September 8, 2025, article, ``How
J.P. Morgan Enabled the Crimes of Jeffrey Epstein.'' Also, an
article dated July 17, 2025, in the Epstein case, ``Follow the
Money.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back. The gentleman--
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chair?
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you much.
Pursuant to Clause 2, Case 6 of Rule 11, I move that the
Committee subpoena the CEOs of four banks, JPMorgan--that's
Jamie Dimon; Bank of New York Mellon, Robin Vince; Bank of
America, Brian Moynihan; and Deutsche Bank, Christian Sewing,
to get the suspicious transaction reports. These four banks
have flagged to the government $1.5 billion in suspicious
transactions related to the sex-trafficking crimes and
conspiracy that Epstein, Maxwell, and all their collaborators--
and as you know, Mr. Chair, we got the SARs reports for Hunter
Biden totaling around $20 million.
These $1.5 billion in SARs reports we should get,
especially since the Director doesn't seem to be forthcoming. I
request that we do this immediately to--
Chair Jordan. I think the Director has been very
forthcoming. We will hold any motion to subpoena any banks at
the conclusion of the hearing.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Director Patel,
for being here.
It is quite clear. It is quite clear that certain Members
of this Committee--they want their 15 seconds on TV stamping
and--maybe it's for fundraising. Maybe they are struggling in
their district; they need a little bump. They have turned the
Committee into a clown show, and that is what we are seeing.
You are being unjustly attacked today. I watched the Senate
hearings yesterday. You were attacked there. We know there is
an agenda. There is always an agenda. It is the same characters
with the same personalities, the same objective, and that is
destroy the MAGA movement.
Your being attacked, Director, is because you are
effective. You highlighted what you have been doing in D.C.
with the President in reducing violent crime. You are very
effective. Another individual that was very effective with
meaningful debate and dialog was Charlie Kirk, and they killed
him for it.
Charlie Kirk was a man of faith first and foremost. He
loved his Lord Jesus. He loved his family, beautiful wife and
beautiful children. Just a remarkable, honorable man that was
silenced with this assassin's bullet. I would say if Charlie
Kirk lived in the biblical times, he would have been the 13th
disciple. He would have been the 13th disciple.
We have a new Committee, if you are not aware, a new select
Committee we got on January 6th. I am honored to be on that
Committee. I am looking forward to working with other Members
to expose truth, questioning Federal agencies that were
involved on January 6th, like the FBI played a role. We don't
really know, Director, to what extent. We don't know.
The January 6th sham Committee was not formed by Nancy
Pelosi to seek truth. It was nothing about getting to the truth
about January 6th. Their sole mission was to damage Donald J.
Trump and end his political career, and everybody knows it.
That is what the purpose was. You know what is nice is I kind
of get to ask the question, though, how did that work out for
you? Donald J. Trump is back in the White House, and America
loves him.
I spent 30 years in law enforcement. I am a retired sheriff
from a large county in the great State of Texas. I have seen,
Director--I have seen more enthusiasm and support for law
enforcement today because of what you and Donald Trump have
done over the last eight months to protect the American people.
The American people couldn't count on their government to
protect them. Crime is rampant. Now, we have a President and an
administration that puts the American people and their safety
first.
It is interesting. A few minutes ago, a classmate reached
out to me and sent me a--I told him--I said, yes, we got
Director Patel in front of our Committee today. Andy wanted
me--Andy Kane(?) wanted me to tell you--he said, quote, ``Tell
him we love him. Tell him we love him and all the brave
warriors exposing the deep State.''
Kash, you are a great American, sir. You are a great
American. Your work as the Director of the FBI is commendable.
It is commendable, and I want to thank you, sir, thank you for
your service. Keep up the good fight, brother. Don't let them
tear you down. Keep up that good fight. You have it in you.
With that, sir, I yield back.
Chair Jordan. Will the gentleman yield? Will the gentleman
yield to me?
Mr. Nehls. Sure.
Chair Jordan. Director Patel, there were 26--the gentleman
mentioned the Select Committee. There were 26 confidential
human sources at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Four entered
the Capitol and thereby broke the law. Do you know if those
individuals were being paid by the Wray FBI?
Mr. Patel. We have provided 600 pages of documents to this
Committee alone regarding January 6th. That is 600 pages more
than any of my predecessors. Generally speaking, confidential
human sources are always paid by the FBI. That is how it works.
I can't speak to the specifics on each one and how much they
made.
Chair Jordan. We appreciate it. We have reviewed some of
that material, and you gave us a lot of material that we didn't
get from Director Wray. That specific question is important to
the American people. Were people who were confidential human
sources of the FBI who broke the law--one was recommended for
prosecution, my understanding is, by the information we
received from you. Were they actually paid by the very
taxpayers who may have been charged with the same offense? That
is important for us to understand.
Mr. Patel. I'll get back to you on that.
Chair Jordan. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the
gentleman from California.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Welcome, Director Patel.
I want to focus a little bit on domestic terrorism. We have a
graph here, data up to 2021, but as you can tell, domestic
terrorism is on the rise. Nation--our citizens under threat. We
saw the assassination of Charlie Kirk, two assassination
attempts on the President, a school shooting, Minnesota last
month, and closer to home just a couple days ago, Huntington
Beach, peaceful vigil for Charlie Kirk infiltrated by neo-Nazis
who essentially made the local individuals attending that event
fear for their safety.
All of us know that a lot of these domestic attacks are by
lone wolves, but they do leave clues, social media or
elsewhere. Director Patel, you are it. You are the thin, blue
line, the FBI, your job is to protect our citizens back home
from those that would harm us. You have to find the needle in
the haystack. It takes a lot of work and a lot of resources.
Talking to my local sheriff this morning, said they are
concerned. Federal cuts, Federal cuts to local grants that
helped them do the job. Of course, let's not forget about other
threats there are coming before us, like high-tech fraud. Local
senior recently was talking to me about a text she had gotten,
a demand by the IRS to send a payment immediately or the IRS
agents were on their way to arrest this individual. Pretty
gutsy stuff by folks probably from Europe, North Korea, Russia,
China, people--OK--going after those precious savings our
senior citizens rely on.
Yet, the President is proposing a budget cut of $500
million or more to your organization, the FBI. You have said
that that will essentially equate to about 1,300 less jobs at
the FBI. I am going to ask you, essentially, what is it that we
can do to help you do your job? A little concerned.
Friday Night Lights, one of the events I love to do on
Friday nights--go to the local high school football game. Sit
there at
the stadium. You always say, ``What if? What if?'' You are the
thin, blue line. Can you do your job cutting $500 million from
your
budget?
Mr. Patel. Thank you, sir. We are doing our job, and the
distinction is, with the budget that we have, we are flexing
more resources to the field. California is receiving the
largest FBI plus-up of any State in the Union due to that plus-
up. They are not getting a reduction. No State is getting a
reduction. Every State is getting a plus-up.
I am utilizing the money that we have to first plus it up.
The empty vacancies that we have--those haven't been filled in
years, not under my leadership.
Mr. Correa. Here is my concern. You are going to do well.
You are doing more with less is what you are saying. Yet, we
are about to vote on a budget that has $88 million more to
protect the Members of Congress, the executive branch, the
Supreme Court. There is a contradiction here.
Back on Main Street, we are saying you can do more with
less; you can protect them with less money. Yet, here in
Washington, we are saying we need more money to protect the
Members of Congress. There is a little contradiction here. Or
maybe, sir, you ought to talk to leadership about coming in
with your management style to protect the Supreme Court,
Congress, and the administration. Otherwise, it is essentially
a hypocritical situation. We need more protection, yet folks on
Main Street can do less.
Mr. Patel. My concern is for the folks on Main Street. We
also think we received over 300 million in the Big, Beautiful
Bill. We are also receiving pots of money from our inner
agency. This sort of 500 million cut isn't entirely accurate.
Mr. Correa. You are still getting cut 200 million-plus. You
are still moving your agents to do ICE work. You are leaving a
lot of bases uncovered. I am not going to be argumentative with
you, Director Patel. I am just saying, if that thin, blue line
does not hold, people on Main Street will pay the price.
Mr. Patel. I agree with you, sir.
Mr. Correa. I am just look forward to working with you
because I am very concerned that these kinds of budget cuts are
shortsighted, especially when my local sheriff calls me and
says, ``We need more support, and we are looking at budget
cuts.''
Mr. Patel. I'll work with you, sir.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, I have another unanimous consent
request.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
New York is recognized for a unanimous consent.
Mr. Goldman. I seek to introduce a December 2024, OIG
report from the Department of Justice, which confirms the
conclusion of the Bill Barr Justice Department that the so-
called whistleblower, a disgruntled former employee of the
Intelligence Committee, was not a credible witness and there
were no further actions taken.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Chair, I would like to submit some items
for the record.
Chair Jordan. You bet. The gentleman from California.
Mr. Correa. First, ``Trump's deportation diverts FBI agents
off child predator cases.''
Second, ``FBI Director backtracks on administration's
proposed budget cuts.''
Third, ``Trump administration says 70 percent of ICE
detainees do not have criminal convictions.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentleman from Texas
is recognized.
Mr. Gooden. Thank you. Director, earlier this year, the
Committee learned of new documents tied to the Crossfire
Hurricane investigation and the Russian collusion hoax against
President Trump. Your efforts in declassifying key documents
tied to this investigation allowed the Committee to acquire
thousands of pages that it did not have previously. Did any of
your predecessors make any effort to declassify these
documents?
Mr. Patel. Not to the extent we have.
Mr. Gooden. Did any of your predecessors share or leak any
details that were classified at the time?
Mr. Patel. There are ongoing leak investigations across the
board at the Bureau related to this.
Mr. Gooden. I believe one of those is Mr. Comey, and I
thank you for continuing that investigation. Among the
declassified documents are the Durham Report Annex, the
Crossfire binder, and the Nellie Ohr criminal referral. Could
you summarize for those watching what we know about the Russia
collusion hoax so far?
Mr. Patel. Well, sir, the record will speak that the Russia
collusion matter was perpetrated by a political party to go
overseas and obtain information from a foreign intelligence
asset, only to have that information, which was demonstrably
false, turned over to the FBI, who walked into a Federal FISA
Secret Court and asked for a secret surveillance court order
and lied to the Federal court. We know that because someone was
convicted of it--and only to surveil the political opponent.
That is a massive scandal. We helped to expose it. In terms
of the pages of productions, I provided 1,400 pages of
production related to Crossfire Hurricane, and my predecessors
have provided zero.
Mr. Gooden. I appreciate that, and I appreciate your
courage and commitment to declassifying these important
documents for our review and hope that you will continue with
this commitment. Can we expect to see more declassification
efforts regarding the Crossfire Hurricane and Russia collusion
hoax?
Mr. Patel. Yes.
Mr. Gooden. Thank you. I yield the remaining balance of my
time to Chair Jordan.
Chair Jordan. Oh. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Director, that is when it all started, right? The whole
Russia--that is when it all began. Then, it was Muller. Then,
it was impeachment. Then, it was Jack Smith, Fani Willis, and
Alvin Bragg and you name it. It all started then, and that is
why the gentleman from Texas wants to make sure we get all the
information there.
I want to go back to when it was changed. We talked about
this earlier. I just want to read to you what the CIA officer
said to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence:
Brennan refused to remove the dossier. When confronted with the
dossier's main flaws, he responded, ``Yes, but doesn't it ring
true?''
That is what he initially said.
Then, when he was talking to this Committee, he said,
The CIA was very much opposed to having any reference or
inclusion of the Steele Dossier in the intelligence community
assessment.
On one hand, you got a witness who was there that said he
refused to remove it even though he knew it was garbage. Then,
he is, on the other hand, telling the Committee, ``No, no, no.
We didn't want anything to do with it. It shouldn't have been a
part of the intelligence community assessment,'' which we know
it was. You know it was. You found that.
Those are two entirely different stories. Mr. Brennan has
some explaining to do, frankly, what happened there. You said
earlier that this whole thing--and I think you said to Mr.
Gooden this whole thing is being looked at as part of this
grand conspiracy to undermine the President, whether it's
Comey, Brennan, Clapper, former head of the Intelligence
Committee, now a Senator from--whoever it is. That is all being
looked at; is that accurate?
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir.
Chair Jordan. We appreciate that. Part of what is also
being looked at--and the gentleman from Wisconsin brought this
up earlier--what is a burn bag for, by the way?
Mr. Patel. Generally speaking, the intelligence community
obviously utilizes and possesses classified documents. Drafts
of those classified documents and even ultimate finished
products of those classified documents have to be recorded and/
or discarded. If they are discarded, the only way we do that,
the hard copies, is we literally put them in burn bags that are
identified specifically for that purpose. There is a very exact
courier system in which those burn bags are obtained and the
material inside is destroyed.
Chair Jordan. It is to get rid of the material, right?
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir.
Chair Jordan. It looks like the annex that Mr. Durham and
his investigation had was put into a burn bag by your
predecessor, I assume to be destroyed. Is that accurate?
Mr. Patel. Without getting into the stylization of the
evidence, anything that is put in a burn bag is for purposes of
destruction.
Chair Jordan. Do you find that interesting that the Durham
Annex was placed in a burn bag, that you would discover that
when you took over as the head of the FBI?
Mr. Patel. We found a lot of information in a lot of burn
bags.
Chair Jordan. Well, we appreciate you finding that. We
would like to know a little bit more about that, and we look
forward to that information coming forward.
I appreciate the gentleman yielding. With that, we now
recognize the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for holding this hearing.
Thank you, Director Patel, for being here today.
I have a couple of questions regarding a terrible shooting
that occurred in Colorado, which is the State, as you may know,
that I represent. You have testified previously about what you
would describe as your efforts to provide more information
regarding the investigation with respect to the horrific
assassination of Mr. Kirk.
In that same vein, I am hoping you can provide this
Committee and my constituents in Colorado with some clarity.
Mr. Patel. Absolutely.
Mr. Neguse. As my colleagues know, in Evergreen, Colorado,
Jefferson County, a county that I proudly represent, at
Evergreen High School, a shooter ultimately injured two
students. We are praying for their swift recovery.
There is an article here from Colorado Public Radio. The
title is, quote, ``FBI Was Already Investigating an Account
that May Have Been Linked to the Evergreen Shooter.'' You are
familiar with the circumstances generally, Director, regarding
this terrible tragedy?
Mr. Patel. Of course. Yes.
Mr. Neguse. My understanding from the public reporting is
that an organization reported to the FBI in July of this year
regarding, which we hear from the article, that the FBI opened
an assessment into a social media account user whose identity
was unknown and who was discussing the planning of a mass
shooting with threats nonspecific in nature--this is the FBI
statement to the press--and that the FBI continued to work this
assessment investigation to identify the name and location of
the user up and until September 10, 2025, which was the day of
the tragedy.
Can you provide us with some clarity on what were the
impediments to finding the account user and maybe describe in
greater detail the FBI's work in that regard?
Mr. Patel. Generally speaking, yes, because I know even
though the shooter is deceased, the investigation is--we're not
done. The impediments to finding these individuals--and you
have a great point. We had two huge tragedies in the span of
days in this country, the school shooting in Evergreen,
Colorado, being one of them.
Proactively going out onto these social media platforms,
which are so large, is our biggest impediment. We need to rely
on the service providers. There is actual legislation I can't
remember the name of that's up for renewal which will--and at
the end of the month--which gives service providers the ability
to report that information in from their end without liability.
We need that to continue because, while the FBI has so many
people and the police are great at doing it, there are just too
many platforms to cover down on.
Mr. Neguse. I appreciate that, Director Patel. I think we
are certainly--I am interested in continuing this conversation
because the reporting suggests that there is a pattern and that
ultimately, we want to make sure that law enforcement is able
to prevent this kind of tragedy from happening in the future.
I have a question. It is not meant as a gotcha question, so
just to frame it there. It is in regard to some reporting
around a periodic transaction report that you had filed
earlier, a periodic transaction report that you had filed
earlier this year. This is in July. Pursuant to ethical
obligations as a Senior Executive official. You remember filing
that in July?
Mr. Patel. Yes.
Mr. Neguse. In that report, as best as I can surmise, you
disclosed that you divested $100,000 or more in a variety of
different stocks--
Mr. Patel. Right.
Mr. Neguse. --which I presume is pursuant to the ethics
agreement that you negotiated with the Department of Justice.
Mr. Patel. Yes. In that same report, there's a disclosure
regarding purchases of two different--well, rather, two
different transactions, so between $15,000-$50,000 in a
national coffee house chain and between $50,000-$100,000 in a
semiconductor company on May 9th and May 12th.
Mr. Neguse. Are those transactions that you are doing
personally? Are these through a stockbroker, or are these
transactions that you are handling yourself?
Mr. Patel. How they happen is I submit proposals under DOJ
guidance to say, ``Hey, I would like to trade this or that.''
They run their review--and the FBI runs their review, and then
they come back and say yes or no. Then, I make the transaction.
Mr. Neguse. Is there a reason that you decided to make the
purchases with those two companies?
Mr. Patel. Generally speaking, before I got this job, I was
trading stocks, but not a lot, like most people. I just follow
certain industries, you know? I thought that would be a good
investment.
Mr. Neguse. The reason why I ask--right? Because you had
divested in other companies.
Mr. Patel. Yes.
Mr. Neguse. I presume that wasn't because there were actual
conflicts; it is just that you wanted to avoid an appearance of
impropriety.
Mr. Patel. It was both.
Mr. Neguse. Both. Not all the companies were conflicts that
you divested from.
Mr. Patel. Whatever, I didn't make the call. They make the
call.
Mr. Neguse. Sure.
Mr. Patel. Yes.
Mr. Neguse. I guess my point would be--the reason why I
asked this, when I said it is not a gotcha--I have for years
led an effort here in Congress to try to ban Members of
Congress, Senior Executive officials, from trading stocks. It
is bipartisan in nature. We are working really hard to get that
done, Republicans and Democrats.
You can understand given your role, given the nature of the
position that you hold as the leader of the largest law
enforcement agency in our country, that divesting entirely, not
doing day trading now would be something that would be in the
interest of the American people. I just would hope you will
consider that and make--moving forward that perhaps not
purchasing the stocks in individual companies I would think
would be something that would be worth pursuing.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman's time is--
Mr. Neguse. If you--yes, I am happy to give the witness an
opportunity to--
Mr. Patel. Thank you. I'll work with you on it.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Director Patel,
for being here today.
Knowing that classified documents confirm that the
intelligence community under President Barack Obama knowingly
relied on unverified and fraudulent evidence to manufacture a
false claim that Russia in fact meddled in the 2016 election,
is there more to be done to uncover the depths and origins of
the Russian collusion hoax?
Mr. Patel. There is, and we're doing it.
Mr. Moore. Why should Americans still care about that,
Director Patel?
Mr. Patel. Everybody wants to talk about a weaponized
bureaucracy. When we put out the facts about a weaponized
bureaucracy, not because I said so, but because we found the
files and documents, because we found the 302s and the 1023s,
then it becomes a political football.
My job is to continue to put out that information and let
the American public read it for themselves when I'm lawfully
able to do so. That's been my commitment on any subject,
Russiagate or otherwise. Wherever the law allows me to do it, I
will do it.
Mr. Moore. When I first came in 2020, the No. 1 concern as
I was doing town halls was the weaponization of the government
against the American citizen. Are there things that you are
doing, structural reforms that--implementing so that the FBI
cannot be weaponized again, whether it is against President
Trump or future elected Presidents?
Mr. Patel. Well, it shouldn't be weaponized against anyone.
The structural reform is simple. If you're going to go after a
political individual or someone seeking political office, there
has to be a grounded basis in law and fact to open a criminal
investigation. If there's not, the investigation isn't even
opened.
I've also gone back and reviewed other cases that were
opened in prior administrations related to public officials.
We've closed a number of them because we felt that some of
these actions were weaponized on either side of the aisle. I
felt it wholly inappropriate for the FBI to be playing umpire
and referee among these decisionmakers when there was no
factual or legal basis to continue those investigations. I shut
them down.
Mr. Moore. That is so desperately needed because we need to
restore trust in law enforcement and certainly in the DOJ and
the FBI so the American people don't fear the very government
that is supposed to protect them. Thank you for doing that.
On August 11th, you released to the Committee documents
concerning leak investigations that began in 2017. Do you
believe these leaks were accidental, or were they intentional
to influence public opinion against President Trump?
Mr. Patel. When I can publicly make a final decision on
that, either through a recommendation of charging that the DOJ
makes or findings that I have, I'm able to do so. They're still
not complete.
Mr. Moore. Why did the FBI under Director Comey want to
undermine the Trump Administration?
Mr. Patel. I don't know. You'll have to ask him.
Mr. Moore. Think it might have been political? How will
Director Comey be held accountable for his leaks in classified
information concerning the Russian collusion hoax?
Mr. Patel. Well, anyone--doesn't matter what you did before
or what seat you were in. If you leak classified information,
that's illegal. We will investigate it fully. If we can bring
enough evidence to recommend charges to the Department of
Justice, we will.
As you know, in these leak investigations, it's very
difficult to produce the information necessary. We know leaks
happen. They literally happen every week. It's one of the most
destructive things to this country. Media receives classified
information beneficial to one side or the other.
I'm a fan of none of it, and I want to shut all it down. We
need to bring some real cases to deter individuals from doing
that. That's my focus.
Mr. Moore. What was Comey's role in creating the ICA?
Mr. Patel. Speaking from my memory, as the head of the FBI,
he was charged under then Director Brennan and Director Clapper
and the other IC elements to come in with the NSA, CIA, FBI,
and ODNI, and put together a collection of information on how
the information surrounding Russiagate came together. He
represented the FBI in that.
Mr. Moore. Was former Director of CIA John Brennan--he
denied that the Steele Dossier was used in creating the ICA; is
that true?
Mr. Patel. Well, without commenting on him, the FISA has
been released, and the dossier was in the FISA. It was in four
FISAs. I'll let the public decide.
Mr. Moore. Well, former Director Brennan actually denied
repeatedly that he pushed or the Steele Dossier to be included
in the ICA. Is that true?
Mr. Patel. I'll let his testimony speak for itself, but
then-Deputy Director Andy McCabe also testified to the House
Intelligence Committee, which has now been declassified, that
were there no Steele Dossier, there would have been no FISA.
Mr. Moore. Well, my time is getting close, but let me tell
you this, sir, and one of my colleagues from Texas said thank
you for the job you are doing. You are making the American
people safe. You are restoring trust in these agencies that
many of us have lost trust in. Thank you for the work you are
doing. That thin, blue line--you are doing a fine job, and we
want to let you know we appreciate it.
Mr. Patel. Thank you.
Mr. Moore. Thank you. God bless you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady
from California is recognized.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you,
Director, for coming here today.
Actually, thank you for your response to my colleague from
New York who asked you earlier about a violent extremism, and
you said that there is violent extreme ideology on both sides.
You actually alluded to that same statement yesterday in the
Senate.
I, too, have some questions I would like to ask you. These
are not gotcha questions, and just deny, please, what you deem
to be false. Dylann Roof, who followed White supremacist
propaganda, murdered nine Black parishioners in Charleston in
2015. Do you deny this?
Mr. Patel. I'm sorry. Dylann Ruth?
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Roof.
Mr. Patel. Roof? Can you give me some more information?
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Do you--head of the FBI, you probably
know this. If you don't know, that is fine.
Mr. Patel. Can you give me a reminder? I've got a lot in
front of me.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. It was national news. Robert Bowers
murdered 11 Jewish worshipers in Pittsburgh in 2018.
Mr. Patel. I do remember that.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. It was the deadliest anti-Semitic
attack. Do you admit that this happened?
Mr. Patel. Yes. I'm not saying the other thing didn't
happen. I'm just asking for a little information.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Patrick Crusius, who posted a manifesto
about a Hispanic invasion, walked into a Walmart in El Paso,
Texas, in 2019 and began firing. He murdered 23 people that
day, and the youngest was 15. Do you admit or deny that this
happened?
Mr. Patel. I'll take your presentation as accurate.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. All right. Well, I have to say all these
cases have been adjudicated. As I said, they are not gotcha
questions. These incidents were national news. As Director of
the FBI, you have access to all this information.
In 2022, Payton Gendron walked into a supermarket in a
Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, and started shooting.
He murdered 10 people that day. On September 10th, your friend
Charlie Kirk was assassinated. Tyler Robinson has been taken
into custody and charged, but also on that day, Desmond Holly,
a 16-year-old White male, shot and injured two students at a
high school in Colorado before killing himself. According to
the Anti-Defamation League, he had a fascination with mass
shootings and White supremacy.
Do you admit to/deny these facts?
Mr. Patel. Those happened.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. OK. Your predecessor, former FBI
Director Christopher Wray, said that one of the most dangerous
concerns is that racially motivated violent extremism,
especially White supremacist, has been the biggest chunk of our
domestic terrorism cases and is responsible for the most lethal
attacks over the last decade.
Do you admit or deny that he said this?
Mr. Patel. I'll let the record reflect that whatever he
said was what he said.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. All right. Do you agree?
Mr. Patel. That there are racially motivated crimes being
committed in America? Yes.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Yes, especially White supremacist, which
is the biggest chunk of our domestic terrorism. I am glad that
you said this. Last week, President Trump was asked if there
were extremists on both the Left and the Right. He was actually
asked this by Fox and Friends. His exact words were,
I'll tell you something that is going to get me in trouble, but
I couldn't care less. The radicals on the Right oftentimes are
radical because they don't want to see crime. The radicals on
the Left are the problem, and they're vicious, and they're
horrible, and they're politically savvy.
Do you agree with the President?
Mr. Patel. I don't speak for the President. The President
speaks for himself.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Do you agree with the President?
Mr. Patel. On what matter?
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. On the question that I just asked. Do
you agree with his statement about the radical Left?
Mr. Patel. That there's ideology that's driving violence on
both sides? Yes, that's what he acknowledged.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. No, he didn't. He didn't. I'm glad that
you're saying that and actually creating some separation
between you and the President. I'm glad that you--
Mr. Patel. That's literally not what happened. He said
both.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. --are acknowledging that there is
violent extremism on both sides. What is interesting is that
the research arm of the Department of Justice, the National
Institute of Justice--do you know what that is?
Mr. Patel. I'm familiar with them.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. OK. Great. It is the research arm of the
Department of Justice, and it published an article in 2024
devoted to domestic radicalization, violent extremism, and
terrorism. I have it. It is interesting that it is no longer on
the website. It has been scrubbed. I ask these questions
because what makes a strong qualified director of any business,
of any household, of the FBI, what makes a reputable
prosecutor, is not lapdog loyalty but a commitment to the creed
that evidence is agnostic and that the evidence will lead you
to making the right decision. Your job--no one's job is to like
the data or the evidence. It is to collect it. That is how you
gain trust.
Mr. Chair, I would like to enter into the record the
following:
First, ``White Supremacist Group Stands By Racist
Ideology.''
Second, ``Dylann Roof, the Radicalization of the Alt Right,
and Ritualized Racial Violence.''
Third, ``How Robert Bowers Went from Conservative to White
Nationalist.''
Fourth, ``Patrick Crusius Believed He Was Fulfilling
Trump's Wishes in El Paso Attack, His Attorney Said.''
Fifth, ``Buffalo Shooting: How Far-Right Killers are
Radicalized Online.''
Sixth, ``Evergreen High School Shooter's Online Activity
Reveals Fascination with Mass Shootings, White Supremacy.''
Seventh, ``Murder and Extremism in the United States in
2024,'' a report by the Anti-Defamation League.
Eight, the report that was scrubbed from the DOJ just
recently, National Institute of Justice Journal Focusing on
Domestic Radicalization, Violent Extremism, and Terrorism.
Ninth, the libertarian think tank Cato and their analysis
on violent extremism and the Right rising in extremist acts.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. Thank you, and I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back. The gentlelady
from Wyoming is recognized.
Ms. Hageman. Just very quickly, Director Patel, thank you
for being here, for your service to this country, and for the
transparency that you have brought to the FBI and for the
American people, transparency that was absolutely nonexistent
in the Biden Administration and FBI.
I believe that you might have been asked earlier about
whether you had had an opportunity to visit with any of
Epstein's legal counsel. Were you asked that question earlier?
Mr. Patel. I think so.
Ms. Hageman. OK. One of the legal counsels or legal fixers
for Mr. Epstein was Stacey Plaskett, the Democrat delegate to
Congress from the Virgin Islands. Perhaps for those on the
other side who are interested in talking to Jeffrey Epstein's
attorneys, they could sure visit with one of their own
colleagues.
I want to focus on something that I think is very important
that has not been addressed enough today, and that is related
to the consequences of the Biden open border.
One consequence of the Biden border crisis is the impact
that it continues to have on our Tribal communities with the
cartels taking advantage of our open borders, our domestic and
drug cartels, by infiltrating our reservations and bringing
violence, drugs, murder, trafficking and more.
Last year when I questioned the Attorney General Garland
about what the DOJ was doing to protect these communities, he
simply deflected responsibility and said that Congress had not
appropriated sufficient resources for them to be able to
protect our Tribal communities.
Mr. Patel, what is the Trump FBI doing to counter the drug
cartel infiltration and other violent crime targeting our
Native American communities?
Mr. Patel. Thank you. It only took more than half of this
proceeding to talk about one of the priorities that the FBI
has, which is crimes on Tribal lands.
Every single crime that we have been talking about, whether
it is child predators, human trafficking, narco traffickers,
and murder, they all happen on Tribal land as well. I said
since the beginning it is a priority, which is why we launched
Operation Not Forgotten on Tribal lands.
I am the first FBI Director to meet with the staff and
Tribal leaders here in Washington, DC, and elsewhere, and
invited them into my office in headquarters to see them,
because I need engagement with Tribal leadership, and I need
our police and FBI agency engaging with Tribal leadership,
otherwise we are not going to break through.
We have 1,900 Indian Country cases open right now. We have
got 600 indictments this year alone. We cannot forget Tribal
lands.
Every single one of those people lives in the United States
of America. It is an absolute priority to protect them and
their children, just as it is anyone else.
Ms. Hageman. It is fair to say that what Larry Garland
testified that they did not, that the FBI and DOJ did not have
the resources to address that, this was an absolutely false
statement. Would you agree with me?
Mr. Patel. It is a decision by him not to do so. That is
not my decision.
Ms. Hageman. At the end of August, the U.S. Attorney and
FBI announced that nearly 100 personnel representing members of
the Safe Trails Task Force operated their Wyoming's Wind River
Reservation to assist with reducing drug trafficking and
illegal guns.
Director Patel, you have routinely stated that it is your
mission to partner with and strengthen local and State law
enforcement partners. How do the task force and other FBI
efforts bring Tribal law enforcement into this process?
Mr. Patel. The major problem with Tribal lands is the shear
terrain geography and the amount of coverage that they have on
land versus the personnel they have to do it.
What we have done is constantly surge resources to Tribal
lands across this country on a 30-, 60-, 90-day rotating basis,
reporting back to us saying who needs more. What we found is
that most of these lands can be assisted by our Counter UAS
program, our drone capabilities.
We are going to do it, because what is happening is the
Mexican drug cartels are literally flying overhead, dropping
their cargo, their narcotics onto this land where no one is
looking, and then it is being disseminated to children, to
youth, and to adults on that land and killing them.
We have got to stop it before it gets dropped off.
Ms. Hageman. Well, and your testimony proves that the Biden
Administration did not lack the resources to address drug and
violent crime in Tribal communities or around the United
States. It, instead, expended and wasted these resources
investigating parents, Catholics, we now find out Turning Point
USA, the RNC, and Republican organizations rather than
protecting our Native Americans by closing the border. Is that
fair?
Mr. Patel. I think so.
Ms. Hageman. Wonderful. Thank you. I do appreciate the work
that you have done in this regard.
I was previously the Chair of the Subcommittee on Indian
and Insular Affairs with the Natural Resources Committee.
Safety and security on our reservations and for our Tribal
members have been one of our priorities, one of my priorities.
I very much appreciate the work that the FBI has done.
Let me know if there is anything else I can do to help you.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. Patel. I will, ma'am.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back. The gentlelady
from Georgia is recognized.
Ms. McBath. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for coming today,
Mr. Patel.
In the past few months, the country has experienced a
string of horrific high-profile attacks that have been
motivated by racial hatreds and political ideology.
A shooter attacked the CDC headquarters, firing hundreds of
rounds and killing a police officer. An arsonist set first to
the Pennsylvania Governor, Josh Shapiro's residence with the
Governor and his family actually inside. Minnesota House
Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband were assassinated
earlier this year. Charlie Kirk was murdered last week. Bomb
threats have been made against HBCUs and the DNC. The list goes
on and on.
I only have just a few minutes today, so I don't want to
take a lot of time to go into all the countless and devastating
violent crimes and incidents that have happened at our schools,
or on our streets, and in the communities that have just been
happening all year long.
Mr. Patel, just yes or no, is this type of political
violence ever acceptable in your eyes?
Mr. Patel. No.
Ms. McBath. I am glad that we agree that these heinous acts
designed to instill fear and division in our Nation are never,
ever acceptable, that each of these incidents that has recently
taken place under your watch. The FBI's website states that
protecting the United States from terrorist acts is the FBI's
No. 1 priority, including from domestic terrorists. Is this
still your No. 1 priority?
Mr. Patel. Domestic terrorism?
Ms. McBath. Preventing domestic terrorism.
Mr. Patel. The our number priorities are protecting the
homeland, international terrorism, and crushing violent crime.
Domestic terrorism sort of interlays between both of those.
Ms. McBath. Well, then I am glad that you are giving us the
right answer. Unfortunately, your actions tend to tell a
different story.
Earlier this year you gutted the ranks of FBI's Domestic
Terrorism Operations Section. This is the section of the FBI
that is most directly responsible for addressing political
violence in our country by preventing attacks from occurring
and effectively responding to them if they do.
The agents in this section are the ones who stopped an
individual stockpiling weapons who planned to attack schools
and churches in Florida, and seized bombs made by an ISIS
sympathizer in New Orleans.
Instead of ensuring that this section has all the resources
that it needs at a time when its mission is critical, you fired
its decorated veteran FBI agents who have served their country
proudly under Republican and both Democratic presidents, and
you scrapped the tools that they developed to fight domestic
terrorism, including the National Domestic Terrorism Incident
Data base.
Mr. Patel. Most of that is just not true. We have 1,700
current DT managed programs. We are up 300 percent in the
amount of cases we brought against nihilistic, violent
extremists, including 764 wishing to harm our children.
The FBI and the men and women are getting after that
problem set more than ever because I have unleashed them to do
so. Any insinuation that these tragic occurrences across the
country are somehow singularly my fault are disgusting because
that water goes downhill from the FBI.
Ms. McBath. Mr. Patel, I am going to reclaim my time.
Mr. Patel. They are not responsible for for it.
Ms. McBath. Mr. Patel, I am going to reclaim my time.
Mr. Patel. I am happy to work with you to get them what
they need.
Ms. McBath. Mr. Chair, unanimous request--
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady controls the time. Unanimous
consent request. You will state the request.
Ms. McBath. Thank you very much.
I have unanimous request to put into the record an article
from Reuters titled ``FBI scales back staffing, tracking of
domestic terrorism probes, sources say.''
Thank you very much.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. McBath. I appreciate that.
Mr. Patel, and it isn't just the Domestic Terrorism
Operations Section. Under your watch, agents are fully
diverting their attention to these anti-immigrant and city
takeover operations, leaving our children vulnerable to
dangerous networks of online predators, both domestic and
international.
You pulled more than 120 FBI agents from their normal
duties to operate sobriety checks and conduct traffic stops,
exposing the FBI's fleet of unmarked cars, and thereby making
it harder for the FBI to combat violent criminal gangs, foreign
intelligence services, drug traffickers, and the process.
Mr. Patel. That is simply not true. If we were not able to
do two things at one time how would be seizing record amounts
of fentanyl.
Ms. McBath. Mr. Patel, I reclaim my time. I reclaim my
time.
Mr. Patel. Twenty-three thousand violent felons have been
arrested.
Ms. McBath. Mr. Chair, unanimous consent--
Chair Jordan. The time belongs to the gentlelady. The time
belongs to the gentlelady from Georgia.
Ms. McBath. Thank you very much.
This request basically is, it is an article from Reuters
which quotes law enforcement officers familiar with agents who
once covered child exploitation cases but now focus on
immigration and child exclusive. ``Thousands of agents diverted
to Trump immigration crackdown.''
Mr. Patel, in the short time I have left, your tenure as
Director of FBI has been somewhat problematic. Americans are
less safe, less--definitely less, less safe under your watch.
You have gutted the FBIs ability to keep safe from domestic
terrorism. You have sent FBI agents to conduct traffic stops
and round up hardworking immigrants who pose no danger to
public safety, people even President Trump referred to as good,
longtime workers. Their job is to protect and serve the
American public--
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentlelady--
Ms. McBath. --and, yet, spend their time protecting heinous
individuals and using the FBI to serve as a political circus.
You at times have appeared unequipped for this. I yield.
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentlelady has expired. The
gentlelady yields back.
Mr. Patel. May I respond.
Chair Jordan. Sure can.
Mr. Patel. Simply put, what is it? Are we failing? If we
are failing, how are we arresting 23,000 violent felons, twice
as many as this time last year?
Are we failing? Because if we are failing, how are we
seizing 1,500 kilograms of meth, 25 percent increase from last
year?
Are we failing? Because we captured four top 10 FBI's Most
Wanted from around the world in seven months. That is more than
the entirety of the last Administration.
Are we failing? Because we put 1,500 child predators in
prison.
Are we failing? Because we dismantled 300 human trafficking
networks.
Which is it? You don't like me, that is fine. Don't you
dare disparage the men and women in the FBI that are producing
record results in historic fashion to protect this country.
They are kicking ass for America, and they are going to
continue to do so.
Chair Jordan. We appreciate your leadership. The gentlelady
from Florida is recognized.
Ms. Lee. When I was home recently, I met with the agents
leading the Tampa office of the FBI. I saw what they are
focused on in my community: Stopping drug traffickers, rescuing
children from exploitation, fighting cybercrime, protecting us
from acts of terrorism, and foreign and domestic. I know from
my time as a Federal prosecutor and a judge that this work by
the Bureau doesn't make headlines, but it is happening every
single day.
At the top, accountability is necessary, transparency is
critical. Today we have seen an effort not just to diminish but
to distort the work of Director Patel and the agents he leads.
If we really care about transparency and about truth, then
what we owe to the American people is this reality, that
thousands of dedicated professionals at the FBI wake up every
single day thinking not about themselves but about this
country, and keeping every single one of us and our children
safe from harm.
Director Patel, I would like to hear from you the facts
about what the FBI is doing and your efforts to fight crime.
Director Patel, isn't it correct that since January 20,
2025, the FBI has made over 25,000 immigration-related arrests,
including 350 members of Tren de Aragua, and 195 members of MS-
13?
Mr. Patel. Those numbers are accurate. The Tren de Aragua
numbers are up over 350 percent from the year before.
Ms. Lee. During that same period hasn't the FBI seized over
66,000 kilos of cocaine, 6,000 kilos of meth, and 1,500 kilos
of fentanyl?
Mr. Patel. Not to be nitpicky, but it is 89,000 kilos of
cocaine, and 7,300 kilograms of meth.
Ms. Lee. Isn't it also true that the FBI Tampa Division's
Panama Strike Force specifically seized nearly 67,000 kilos of
cocaine valued at more than $1.6 billion from illicit maritime
vessels?
Mr. Patel. One of our best operations out of the Port of
Tampa. I was down there in South Florida when PANEX did their
work.
Ms. Lee. Director Patel, since the October 7, 2023, Hamas
attack, the FBI has been a coleader of the Joint Task Force
October 7th. Isn't it correct that this task force is actively
working to bring justice for victims and to prevent terrorist
infiltration at our borders?
Mr. Patel. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Lee. Since January 20th, hasn't the FBI arrested 59
foreign intelligence operatives for spying or smuggling
dangerous material into the United States?
Mr. Patel. Yes, we have. That is on track to be more than
25 percent more than the year before.
Ms. Lee. The FBI has also been leading operations against
major cyber threat actors, including those from Russia, China,
Iran, and North Korea; isn't that right?
Mr. Patel. A 17 percent increase from year-to-date last
year.
Ms. Lee. Director Patel, the FBI's Child Exploitation Task
Force has continued to investigate predators who target
children online and across our communities. How significant is
that threat today?
What results have you seen under your tenure in bringing
these offenders to justice?
Mr. Patel. We have under Operation Greyskull dismantled
Dark Web units that are operating online, not just in the
United States but across the world to do our children harm. We
have taken into custody more suspects than ever before on those
who seek to harm our children.
That is what the men and women of the FBI do, and that is
what they are going to continue to do. Those are the real
results when you let good cops be cops, and when you let us get
on these platforms and expose them to the public and show them
the harms of these predators on these online gaming systems and
social media systems.
We need more help from Congress to allow us more
authorities to do that work.
Ms. Lee. The FBI Laboratory manages the combined DNA Index
System, or CODEX, which compares over 25 million DNA profiles
and aids more than 125 investigations each day.
Director Patel, why is this important to law enforcement
nationwide?
Mr. Patel. All the law enforcement relies on our CJIS
operation out of West Virginia. What that does is allow 19,000
agencies to come in and say, hey, does this guy have a criminal
history? Hey, is this an illegal firearm? Do we have a DNA hit,
like we did in these recent assassinations?
That is what the FBI brings there, because local and State
law enforcement agencies doesn't have that capability. We are
doing it 24/7/365. CJIS does not close for one minute.
Ms. Lee. In your testimony you noted that the FBI has
ongoing counterintelligence investigations into China, Iran,
and Russia across all 55 field offices.
Why is it essential to maintain that scope of coverage?
What success can you point to in disrupting the Nation State
actors?
Mr. Patel. Our biggest threats involving the Nation State
actors are the PRC, Russia, and China. They are up 33 percent,
83 percent, and 60 percent respectively in arrests alone this
year.
Those Nation State actors wish to do harm in our
infrastructure, our critical infrastructure system, our energy,
and our water supply. Also, go after and target individuals and
senior citizens and take their money through online pig
butchering schemes which we have exposed in Cambodia by way of
the CCP.
This is groundbreaking work that the American public should
be seeing that their FBI is doing. I am happy to have the
opportunity to report on it.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Director Patel. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady yields back. The gentlelady
from--
Ms. McBath. Mr. Chair, I have a couple UCs.
Chair Jordan. Unanimous consent.
Ms. McBath. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.
In response to Mr. Patel's making those remarks that maybe
our colleagues are disparaging the men and women of the FBI I
would like to enter into the record three unanimous consent
requests.
First, entitled ``FBI using polygraphs to test officials
loyalty.''
Second, entitled ``Kash Patel knowingly broke law when
firing top officials, lawsuit alleges,'' published by NBC.
Third, entitled, ``FBI forces out more leaders, including
ex-director who fought Trump demand for January 6th agents
names.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. McBath. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from Vermont is recognized.
Ms. Balint. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, thank you
for being with us today. I appreciate your time.
Let me say at the top, political violence should have no
place in this country. I strongly, unequivocally condemn the
killing of Charlie Kirk last week.
This is exactly the kind of case that warrants a swift and
thorough investigation by the FBI.
What shouldn't be happening, however, is this
Administration(s seeming attempt to exploit Mr. Kirk's death
within minutes of this horrible, horrible assassination,
dividing us even further, without knowing enough about the
killer's complicated, confused political ideology, and the
extent of his motivation.
This week Vice President Vance claimed that this is ``an
extremely destructive movement of Left-wing extremism,'' and
said that ``it's part of the reason why Charlie was killed.''
He pledged to go after organizations on the Left.
Director Patel, it was just three months ago that Melissa
Hortman, the Minnesota House Speaker, and her husband Mark were
shot to death in their home in the middle of the night by a
self-identified Right-wing extremist and Trump supporter.
When that assassination happened, the FBI released a
written statement denouncing the killings and pledging to hold
the killer accountable. I thank the Bureau for that. It was
clear, concise, and to the point.
When you compare that statement to the over 50 mentions of
the Charlie Kirk killing and just four for the Hortmans on
accounts affiliated with the FBI and your personal account, it
appears to many Americans that you are valuing some lives more
than others. That is painful. This is what I am hearing from my
constituents. I just want to convey that to you.
The Vice President didn't even call on Right-wing
organizations to tone down their rhetoric after that horrific
killing in Minnesota. He never once spoke about dismantling
conservative institutions.
This week, when the President was asked by a reporter about
Speaker Hortman, he claimed he didn't even know who she was.
Most of the most high-profile assassinations of an elected
official in recent memory and the President claims to know
nothing about it, hasn't even heard of it, is absolutely
devastating for her colleagues and for her family.
We all can agree in this room that we have to stop this
political violence.
My first question to you is, Director Patel, what is your
plan as Director of the FBI to turn down the temperature,
especially in light of the fact that it seems like Members of
the Administration are reacting to political violence based on
party affiliation. What is your plan?
Mr. Patel. I can only speak for myself and the FBI.
Ms. Balint. Of course.
Mr. Patel. What we are doing is, we mentioned earlier, we
are following the money. Because whatever attack you are
describing--and they are all despicable, equally so--people
need money to operate. People need money to conduct these
attacks and to conduct these investigations.
What we are doing is finding the people that supported this
infrastructure system. Because even when you say there is a
lone, quote, ``lone wolf actor,'' he is not truly a ``lone wolf
actor.'' Something happened along the way.
Ms. Balint. I agree. Just because we have such little time,
are you making a commitment right now to follow where the
evidence goes in investigating whether it is violence on the
Left or the Right?
Because over the last 10 years when you look at the
ideology--I want to followup on what my colleague from
California said--when you look at the data and you look at the
Anti-Defamation League data, 96 percent of ideological
motivated killings were committed by the Right-wing.
When you look at the Institute of Justice Report that she
cited, it is five times the number that--five times the number
of far-Left extremist incidents are perpetrated by far Right.
It has been reported--and she mentioned this--that as of
September 12, 2025, just two days after Charlie Kirk's killing,
that the DOJ removed that report from the DOJ website. That is
why Americans are concerned that there seems to be a separate
system of justice that if you are a Republican, and you are
attacked, you will get the full weight and authority of the FBI
and this Administration.
If you are somebody serving in the Minnesota State
Legislature and you are assassinated in your home that the
response is different. To ignore the threats from the Right, or
try to do a both/and, when there are multiple instances when it
is overwhelmingly coming from the Right, this is a disservice.
Americans want to know that whoever they are, whatever their
political affiliation, that the response is going to be the
same, and it is going to be done with the same diligence.
I am wondering if you will commit to me right now that you
will be a voice right now standing up to those voices in the
Administration that are adding to the violent rhetoric right
now. That is what I am asking you, will you commit to this?
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentlelady has expired. The
gentleman can respond.
Mr. Patel. My voice will be through the investigations that
the FBI conducts. We will conduct them all lawfully and
equally.
Ms. Balint. Can we expect in the future that your tweets
related to one killing will be the same level of concern?
Chair Jordan. The time of gentlelady has expired. The time
of the gentlelady has expired. The gentleman from Texas is
recognized.
Mr. Hunt. Thank you, sir. Director Patel, thank you for
being here today.
Most importantly, thank you for restoring trust and faith
in the FBI, which has been severely eroded under the Biden
Administration. Thank you for your service, your continued
service in this capacity.
On April 7, 2024, Charlie posted on X,
Assassination culture is spreading from the Left. Forty-eight
percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified
to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about
Donald Trump, and California activists are naming ballot
measures after Luigi Mangione. The Left is being whipped into a
violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or
losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
Unfortunately for Charlie, that reaction also came when they
couldn't win a debate on a college campus.
You cannot be intellectually honest and say that this
problem is on both sides. It is not just what happened to
President Trump, it is also what just happened to Charlie. We
have gotten to a point in America where violence is encouraged.
We have a former President of the United States that opens
up his campaign in 2019, that is Joe Biden, by saying that his
opponent is an ``existential threat to this country. Houston,
we have a problem.''
People that you disagree with are not existential threats.
They are not Nazis. They are not fascists. They are not
racists. They are not deplorable. They are not irredeemable.
They are your fellow Americans who have a different perspective
on how government should run and what government should look
like: Whether or not we should have strong sovereign borders;
whether or not we should have safe communities; whether or not
we should have places to worship our god and not worry about
being shot; whether or not we lived in communities and cities
that are not overwhelmed by drugs and crime; whether or not we
have two genders; and whether or not we have commonsense in our
policies and our values.
If you want to believe these things are not existential
threats, I happen to be one of those people that believes all
of the above and, as someone that served this country in
combat, I am not an existential threat to this country because
I swore to protect her.
I also want to point out have many cities have you seen
burned to the ground since Charlie Kirk's death? Zero. No
Summer of Love, no riots, no nothing, no looting, and no
killing. None. We simply gathered and prayed for his soul, his
family, and this country, because that is exactly what we
represent.
While we might be angry, this righteous anger will carry on
Charlie's message and legacy. I want everybody to know
something very simple: Charlie is not dead because of what he
said. He is dead because people listened.
My time is limited, so I have a few questions for you, sir.
Again, thank you very much for being here. I really appreciate
your time and your service.
In your experience in the FBI, have you noticed a
precipitous rise in political violence in other associated
crimes that you have been investigating so far this year? If
so, is this trend in motive left wing or right wing violence?
Mr. Patel. I can only speak generally, sir. There is too
much political violence. There has been a precipitate rise on
too many fronts.
Mr. Hunt. How do we solve this?
Mr. Patel. We solve this by giving the FBI more authorities
to go into and work with the private sector. There are too many
online platforms, there are too many social media platforms,
there are too many gaming platforms, there are too many places
for people from America and around the world to get together
without their parents knowing anything about it, without their
schoolteachers knowing anything about it, an infection
infesting the minds of our children, and infecting them with
radical ideology.
That is the root cause of these problems. We must tackle
it. It is not the 1950s America anymore. In 2024, the
cyberspace needs to be tackled.
Mr. Hunt. Thank you.
Switching gears. When you predecessor sat right there in
that seat a couple years ago, last year in a Committee hearing,
I asked him a very detailed question about Matthew Thomas
Crooks, the shooter responsible for the assassination attempt
on President Trump's life.
I didn't get an answer from Chris Wray that day. I
submitted written questions to the FBI and into the record of
this Committee. I am going to resubmit those questions today
because I think we are still awaiting answers to those
questions.
Mr. Chair, I would like to submit them for the record,
please.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Hunt. I would like to ask you, sir, and the FBI under
your leadership, would you please respond to these questions?
Can you commit to doing that?
Mr. Patel. As soon as the trial is over.
Mr. Hunt. Thank you very much.
I will end with this: Charlie Kirk is not dead because of
what he said. Charlie Kirk is dead because people listened. He
set up a tent that said, ``Prove me wrong,'' and exercised his
First Amendment right. That is all he did.
We will continue to do so in this country to preserve this
constitutional republic. With that I yield back. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
Florida is recognized.
Mr. Moskowitz. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Before I begin, I want
to caution my colleagues on the one-sided violence in this
country.
We just heard that there were no riots on the Right. We are
literally sitting in the building where there was a giant riot
by supporters of the President, the Right.
We also heard that only Leftists, OK, have said that Trump
is a Nazi. In 2016, the current Vice President of the United
States said Trump is either a cynical asshole or he's America's
Hitler.
This is the problem. I don't want to have to say this
garbage, but you want me to sit here and get painted with one
brush, the whole Left. No, no, there are extremes on the Left,
and there are extremes on the Right. We collectively should
tackle that.
To come here and just look at us and say we all support
what is going on in the extreme, is why we can't solve anything
in this building.
Director, let me say first thank you for being here. My
condolences on the loss of your friend. I am happy to hear that
you want to do more on the social media platform. OK, it is
crazy what is going on the social media platform.
There are so many conspiracy theories on what is going on
with Charlie Kirk. Israel assassinated him; right? There are
conspiracy theories about your personal social life, all day.
It is totally rampant. Big names on the Right, Candace Owens,
right? Talking about how the--what has been released as far as
the dialog between the perpetrator and his roommate is
manufactured by the FBI, manufactured by the Administration. It
is totally rampant.
Allowing foreign Governments to just perpetrate these
platforms, all these bots all the time to weaponize Americans.
You see what is going on here? This is a byproduct of all that.
What is going on in the streets is a byproduct of all that.
What is happening as we see people celebrate Luigi Mangione is
a byproduct of all that.
If we want to do something, then we could talk about
Section 230. We should talk about how we are going to make sure
that we don't let foreign governments poison our children's
minds.
I will work with you on that, Director.
Mr. Patel. I will work with you on 230 any day.
Mr. Moskowitz. No problem. Now, that was the good part. I
want to take your attention back a second. OK?
Breaking news: Kash Patel is nominated to be the FBI
Director. Dan Bongino is nominated to be the No. 2 at the FBI.
MAGA celebrates, rejoices, bells are ringing out. The team,
Patel and Bongino have sought every podcast microphone to talk
about the Epstein list. The names are finally going to get
released.
It begins. They produce white binders. Phase one with the
podcasters. This is not actually one of them, of course. I made
this. Your name is on it; right? The names are going to come
out. Pan Bondi says the list is on her desk.
Then, a memo comes out all a sudden and says there is no
list. Oh no. No phase two. Phase two binders never happen. You
said the conspiracy theories around Epstein just aren't true;
they never have been.
Yesterday, in an answer to Senator Kennedy you said the FBI
is not in possession of any credible evidence that Epstein
trafficked girls to anyone but himself.
The recording of your testimony yesterday and in this
Committee quoting to the evidence the FBI has, ``the number of
names on the list are zero.'' Zero.
Mr. Patel. No. The index has the release. The number of
people involved in that trafficking operation were charged in
2018.
Mr. Moskowitz. Other than Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell,
your testimony in the Senate and here is that according to the
evidence you have, the number of other names is zero?
Mr. Patel. That were charged based on credible evidence.
Mr. Moskowitz. Well, who are the other names? Give me the
other names that weren't charged.
Mr. Patel. We are not releasing the names of anyone,
because the Department of Justice never does that of anyone
that didn't have any credible information to attack them.
Mr. Moskowitz. OK, let me move forward. The President has--
you have seen the picture of the woman's body with the writing
and the President's signature, and the President says that is
not his.
Mr. Patel. Uh-huh.
Mr. Moskowitz. OK. The President says it is not his. The
Republican colleagues say it is not his. The Administration
says it is not his.
Will you be opening up an investigation into the Epstein
estate for putting out a fake document with the President's
signature linking him to the world's largest pedophile ring?
Will you be opening that investigation into that?
Mr. Patel. On what basis?
Mr. Moskowitz. On what basis? They literally put out a fake
document, according to the President, with a fake signature,
and a forgery of the President of the United States' signature.
That is the basis.
Mr. Patel. Sure. I will do it.
Mr. Moskowitz. OK. I look forward to that investigation.
Am I over? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate your doing
this.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair
now recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. Kiley. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Director Patel, as my State, California, is home to the
worst public infrastructure failure in U.S. history, known as
California high-speed rail, although the name is probably a
misnomer. Earlier this year I joined your counterpart at the
Department of Transportation, Sean Duffy, doing a compliance
review of the Federal money the State has received. The outcome
was that the State has not complied with the terms of its
billions of dollars in funding because it hasn't actually built
anything.
That Federal funding has now been cutoff. A lot of us in
California still have questions as to where all the money went.
We are 17 years into this project and absolutely nothing has
been built, not a single bit of track has been laid. There are
no stations. There are no passengers.
The plan initially was to have the whole thing, LA to San
Francisco, done by 2020 at a cost of $33 billion. Yet, here we
are in 2025, nothing has been built. According to The New York
Times, the project won't even be completed this century. The
total cost is now estimated to be over 130 billion.
I just wanted to ask you, do you think this is something
that bears scrutiny? Can you confirm whether there is any
investigation going on at the FBI?
Mr. Patel. The FBI certainly can't investigate
incompetence. The FBI certainly can investigate and does
investigate waste, fraud, and abuse. If we have any information
that indicates that that happened in this situation or anything
else, we will look at it.
Mr. Kiley. Thank you very much.
We have, also, been talking today about the issues that
occurred at the border during the Biden Administration. You
might not agree with your predecessor on everything, but you
probably would agree with some of the statements he made in
testimony before this and other committees raising alarms about
the risk of terrorism from illegal border crossings.
Since becoming the Director, have you gotten some insight
into how well-calibrated those warnings were? What is the
status of that risk now?
Mr. Patel. Since becoming the Director there has been a
sharp decrease of border crossings for known or suspected
terrorists on the Southern border. Unfortunately, there has
been a sharp increase of known or suspected terrorists entering
through our Northern border.
What I am trying to do is work with our Northern border
States and our interagencies to tackle that problem. It is a
naturally massive border that can't physically be sealed. We
are going to have to get creative and put more resources into
that.
Mr. Kiley. In a similar vein, there were over 500,000
unaccompanied children that crossed the Southern border during
the Biden Administration. As we know, many were trafficked,
either through forced labor or sex trafficking.
Do you have any insight into as to what the scale of that
problem was and how things have changed over the last several
months?
Mr. Patel. Other than what you outlined in terms of how it
was described, I don't have any additional details.
In terms of how many people are being trafficked into this
country, especially unaccompanied missing children, that number
has drastically reduced because the coyotes that smuggle these
children for their criminal activity are the same ones that
smuggle in narcotics, they are the same ones that traffic older
age women. They are all interconnected.
Because of the sealing of the Southern border by this
Administration, that has come to near halt.
Mr. Kiley. That is a very important point, that we have
seen far fewer victims of human trafficking because we finally
prioritized border security.
By the way, you have children who are getting rescued
because of the immigration enforcement activities that,
unfortunately, some politicians in my State are trying to stop,
thereby stopping those kids from getting rescued.
We have seen, of course, a substantial reduction in crime
here in Washington, DC, since the FBI and the National Guard
got involved. I am asking you to State the obvious here, but
what is the mechanism there?
Why have we seen a reduction in crime when D.C. has had
such a huge crime problem for years and then almost overnight,
we see such a big difference?
Mr. Patel. Because of the dedication and resources from
President Trump's Administration to utilize all Federal, State,
and local assets in a heavily crime-ridden area.
If we did not have a crime-ridden area, then homicides,
carjackings, and gun violence would not be dropping by 40-60
percent. When you allow the police, the MPD, to work with
Federal authorities and allow the National Guard to set up your
perimeter, this is what you can do in a few short weeks.
We at the FBI under Operation Summer Heat have set those
Phase 01 operations in motion four months ago quietly at the
direction of President Trump. We are scattered across cities
across this country doing just that.
We are going to need more help to complete the job.
Mr. Kiley. Yes. In too many places in this country crime
has just been treated as sort of a norm that this is the way
things are going to happen to be. What has happened in D.C.,
shows that is not the case if we have the right policies and
the right priorities.
Finally, this is, tragically, the second time in as many
years that we have had an FBI Director here following either an
assassination or an assassination attempt. Since there has been
some time now since from the attempted assassination of
President Trump at Butler, would you say that the public's
understanding of what took place on that day is fairly
consistent with all the facts as you know them?
Do you believe there are still material facts that have not
been made public or are not fully understood by the public.
Mr. Patel. I think it is fairly consistent.
Mr. Kiley. Thank you. I yield.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady
from Texas is recognized.
Ms. Crockett. Man oh man, there has been so much today. I
truly don't know where to start. I am just going to make sure
that we startup with a few facts.
A couple of facts that we need to make clear for everyone
is that, first, Director Christopher Wray when he was appointed
to be the head of the FBI was appointed by Donald Trump.
Now, I will agree that I definitely take issue with a
number of decisions that Donald Trump made, especially when it
comes to the people that he decides to appoint to very
important positions, including this one, because I did have to
make sure that I wasn't going crazy.
When I say that you are the least qualified FBI Director in
the history of the FBI, that is real, because you are the only
one that never even served with the FBI prior to joining. Yet,
we are supposed to believe that you are--
Mr. Patel. That is false.
Ms. Crockett. --the greatest thing since sliced bread. I
didn't ask you a question. Now, what I want to go through--
Mr. Patel. That is false.
Ms. Crockett. --is to talk about why you are a failure and
why, honestly, we just need to tell you bye-bye.
I know that you got a little upset, and you put on your
show for your boss, because it seems like you are trying to
save your job when it came to talking to Senator Booker
yesterday, but let's go through some of your failures.
Before you were even confirmed--and I think one of my
colleagues from Georgia pointed out that you are already
targeting career officials so that you could direct illegal
firings. Mind you, these cases that you are so upset about,
which are the ones tied to Trump, the cases came through his
hand-picked FBI Director.
Frankly, when people sit around and say things like, oh, we
are happy because now we feel safe, I don't know who feels safe
in this country except for the White supremacists. Because I,
specifically as a Black woman, definitely don't feel safe.
Frankly, my colleagues have been real nice to you today. I
applaud them. I don't have the same demeanor, because I know
that multiple colleagues on this side of the aisle have faced
death threats. In fact, somebody tried to kill one of my
colleagues. Frankly, I don't know if this FBI or under your
leadership if those people would have been caught.
I don't have any confidence in you. If we start talking
about the reasons that I lack confidence, we can start with you
not just wanting to acknowledge some simple facts.
Simple facts like the vast majority of the threats are
coming from Right-wing extremism. I know my colleagues have
tried to stress this, but I decided that I would maybe do it in
a different way.
I have a couple of UCs. First, ``Ken Buck one of multiple
Republicans receiving death threats for voting against Jim
Jordan as House Speaker.''
Second, ``Republican lawmaker says she received death
threats after voting against Jim Jordan in Speaker's race.''
Third, there was another one from another colleague who now
is leaving Congress because they said that they were calling
his wife anonymously and threatening her life to the extent
that she ended up sleeping with a firearm.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Crockett. OK. So, here is the deal.
How are we supposed to have confidence when you are sitting
up here telling the Senate yesterday that it will take 14 years
before you can get the FBI fully staffed to do their jobs? You
are also now redirecting resources so that they can go and play
ICE agents on the street. You are getting rid of your most
qualified people.
Even when it came down to somebody that you consider to be
your friend, you were posted of having some fancy dinner to the
extent that you posted not only what erroneously, you posted
twice erroneously as it relates to catching somebody. Then, you
want to go and say let me take a victory lap.
Because, honestly, if it wasn't for parents deciding that
they were going to turn in their child, it seems like y'all
wouldn't have got there. Even though he literally confessed
online.
I am confused about what the FBI is doing except for trying
to put on a show for ``The Apprentice,'' or whatever you want
to call him.
The day after all this took place there was domestic
terrorism that was taking place at HBCUs. They were targeted.
Yet, I didn't hear anything from the FBI about what was going
on. Again, Black people kept saying how did we end up in this?
Because the numbers are so very clear that White supremacy
is a problem and, honestly, I have not heard anything out of
you today that makes me believe that you are going to do
anything about the White supremacy problem, the one that is
leading to children being killed, children being shot, as well
as members of their community as they are working--as they are
worshiping in their churches.
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentlelady has expired. If
the gentleman would like to respond to any of that? Well, I
will respond.
Kash Patel, as I said when I introduced him, public
defender, former prosecutor, top staff on the House
Intelligence Committee, Deputy Director of National
Intelligence with the National Security Council, Chief of Staff
at the Department of Defense, and FBI Director.
That is a pretty good resume for the guy who is now running
the top law enforcement agency in our country. We have seen all
the stats that he has given to the Committee on how much better
they are doing at getting the bad guys than the previous guy
was doing.
With that, I recognize the gentleman from South Carolina.
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, I think you
are witnessing some auditions, clickbait auditions for the
Academy Award from my Democratic colleagues and I see how they
fare as they are on MSNBC later on today.
Do you care, before I launch into my line of questioning,
to respond to Ms. Crockett from Texas on that very elaborate
and theatrical display?
Mr. Patel. Here is what I learned in my government service:
I don't give a damn what they say about me as long as I am
succeeding in the mission.
We are succeeding in the mission because the men and women
in the FBI have never been empowered to do more work than to
hit the streets harder than by President Trump's authorities
and resources he has given us.
All I care about is that we are capturing more child
predators than ever before, taking more drugs off the streets
than ever before, that we are capturing murderers at a
significantly historic rate, and we are delivering this country
the lowest murder rate in recorded history. That is our facts
that you cannot dispute. You can come at me all you want. I
don't care.
Mr. Fry. Thank you. Thank you, Director, for that. We
appreciate your service. We appreciate the results speak for
themselves pretty plainly, and your commitment not only to
results, but to transparency. So, we do appreciate that.
Director, who was John Durham?
Mr. Patel. He was appoint--a former Federal prosecutor,
United States Attorney and, ultimately, appointed Special
Counsel in the first Trump Administration.
Mr. Fry. Correct. There was a document that he released in
his findings called the Durham Report. What was the Durham
Report, briefly, and what were the findings, very briefly?
Mr. Patel. It was every Special Counsel that is appointed
to produce a report to the Attorney General. Special Counsel
Durham Report largely focused on Crossfire Hurricane and
included extensive summary findings in classified and
unclassified manner.
We released the classified version, finally declassifying
it for the American public and this Committee.
Mr. Fry. Correct. You released that in July of this year?
Mr. Patel. I think so.
Mr. Fry. Yes, sir. Isn't it true that in the classified
Durham Annex, as it is referred to, that in 2016 the Obama
Administration obtained intelligence information from a source
contained in two separate memoranda, one in January 2016 and
one in March? The two memoranda described confidential
conversations between DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and
two individuals from the Soros Open Society Foundation. Isn't
that true?
Mr. Patel. As written in the report. I will let it speak
for itself.
Mr. Fry. In the Durham Annex in January 2016, the
memorandum noted, in part, that President Barack Obama intended
to scuttle the FBI's investigation into Hillary Clinton's
private email server and mishandling of highly classified
information during her time as Secretary of State. Isn't that
found in the report?
Mr. Patel. I believe so.
Mr. Fry. Isn't it also found in the report that in March
2016, the memorandum also included references to the same Obama
effort to shut down the Clinton investigation, but
additionally, outline a plan to falsely connect Trump to
Russia. Isn't that in Durham Annex?
Mr. Patel. I think it is in more than the Durham Report,
but yes.
Mr. Fry. The memo also stated in part that,
The Democrat Party's opposition is focused on discrediting
Trump. Among other things, the Clinton staff, with the support
from Special Services, is preparing scandalous revelations of
business connections between Trump and the Russian Mafia.
Isn't that also found in the now unclassified Durham Annex?
Mr. Patel. I believe so, sir.
Mr. Fry. According to the Durham Annex, based on analysis
and translation of the intelligence, FBI analysts believed that
Special Services could either mean the FBI or CIA, or the Trump
Dossier author Christopher Steele. Isn't that in the Durham
Annex?
Mr. Patel. I believe so, sir.
Mr. Fry. When the Obama Administration received
intelligence in March 2018, Fusion GPS was preparing open
source opposition research regarding purported ties between
Trump and Russians. The research was paid for by the Clintons'
campaign and the DNC. Isn't that open source and also in the
Durham Annex?
Mr. Patel. I believe both.
Mr. Fry. OK. Also, in the Durham Annex, which I found
interesting, was the potential campaign plan was shared with
high-ranking career officials at DOJ. Isn't that in the Durham
Annex?
Mr. Patel. I believe so, sir.
Mr. Fry. The Durham Annex describes that in July 2016,
emails allegedly between Leonard Bernardo, Senior Vice
President of George Soros' Open Society Foundation concluded or
included data providing specificity on the Clinton plan in an
attempt to smear Donald Trump by falsely linking him to Russia.
Isn't that in the Durham Annex?
Mr. Patel. I believe so.
Mr. Fry. Briefly, this additional evidence that you have
unclassified and released to the American public, what does
that purport to show or augment about the Durham Report that
you can share with the American people?
Mr. Patel. Quite simply that the FBI was weaponized.
Mr. Fry. Against a political campaign?
Mr. Patel. Yes, sir.
Mr. Fry. Thank you for that. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Ms. Crockett. I have UCs.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from Texas is recognized for a
unanimous consent.
Ms. Crockett. Yes.
First, ``Russia's ghostwriter hacker group takes aim at
German election.'' This is from Politico.
Second, Director of National Intelligence, 30 days until
election 2024, who specifically states that ``our assessments
about activities and goals of Russia, Iran, and China are
unchanged from earlier election security updates.'' That they
remain.
I've got three more. The last three are that how Russia is
using artificial intelligence to interfere in elections.
Third, ``Moscow's attempts to interfere in U.S. and other
elections are nothing new, though their tactics and strategy
are constantly evolving.''
Fourth, ``Russian interference coming soon to an election
near you.'' Quote, ``Russia pursues a systemic strategy of
undermining elections and influencing public opinion in the
West.''
Fifth, ``EU, and NATO countries must recognize that Moscow
often acts through agents within their own borders and builds
resilience to such interference.''
Chair Jordan. What is the source?
Ms. Crockett. This one is carnegieendowment.org.
Chair Jordan. OK. Without objection.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from North Carolina is
recognized.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Director Patel, I am glad that I am going a little out of
order here, because I am going to pursue some of the things
that you were just talking to Mr. Fry about and remind you
about your confirmation hearing.
At your confirmation hearing in January, you said under
oath, and I quote, ``There will be no politicization at the
FBI. There will be no retributive actions taken by the FBI
should I be confirmed.''
In your written response to the Senate questionnaire you
said, I quote,
Personnel decisions shall be based on performance and adherence
to the law. And every FBI employee will be held to the absolute
same standards, and no one will be terminated for case
assignment.
I want to just go through a couple scenarios with you to
get a sense of whether you think these are examples of
politicization of the FBI or making decisions based on the
performance and adherence to the law.
First, would hiring FBI agents, analysts, and supervisors
from only one political party be politicization of the FBI or
making personnel decisions based on performance and adherence
to the law?
Mr. Patel. We don't ask FBI people, applicants, where their
political parties are.
Ms. Ross. Mr. Patel, do you ask FBI applicants who they
voted for?
Mr. Patel. The FBI does not.
Ms. Ross. Are you aware that in the lawsuit that Mr.
Driscoll filed against you and the FBI he was asked who he
voted for?
Mr. Patel. Since that lawsuit has been filed and that is
ongoing litigation, I am not able to comment.
Ms. Ross. Well, it also means that you just said that what
happened in his situation didn't happen.
We will go on to the next question. Let me ask you an even
easier one.
Does firing agents for working on the cases that they were
assigned to and that the President didn't like, is that
politicization of the FBI or making personnel decisions based
on performance and adherence to the law.
Mr. Patel. The FBI doesn't terminate anyone based on case
assignments alone.
Ms. Ross. Has the FBI ever been sued by somebody who felt
that they were terminated based on case assignments?
Mr. Patel. In the entire history of the FBI, I'm sure they
have.
Ms. Ross. No. Since your tenure.
Mr. Patel. I am sure there is ongoing litigation.
Ms. Ross. Yes. In fact, there is ongoing litigation. In
fact, people have been asked who they voted for.
You are running an FBI for the President of the United
States rather than the people of the United States. Because my
questions were not hypothetical, they are the things you have
done during your tenure.
According to a lawsuit filed last week by long-term FBI
agents, you fired former Acting Director Brian Driscoll. He had
served with the Bureau for nearly 20 years, earned a Medal of
Honor--Medal of Valor for bravery during the dangerous ISIS
raid, and had a wealth of crisis response experience, and led
the FBI's Critical Incident Response Team.
When the Trump Administration interviewed Mr. Driscoll for
that role, they interrogated him about his political leanings
and who he voted for in the last five elections, questions Mr.
Driscoll refused to answer because those types of questions
impermissibly politicized the FBI.
You also fired Steve Jensen, who served the FBI for nearly
two decades and ran critical terrorism, counterintelligence,
and organized crime operations who you once described as
embodying what the American public demands of the FBI. He was
fired because he took part in investigating crimes committed on
January 6th. Trump's MAGA base lambasted you online for keeping
him at the FBI. He is no longer at the FBI.
You also fired a decorated combat veteran with decades of
experience in the Bureau, Special Agent Walter Giardina,
because he worked on the investigation into the Russian
interference in the 2016 Presidential election, and helped
investigate Trump's ally Peter Navarro.
Director Patel, it is very clear that you have flunked your
own test. You put saving your job--which I actually believe you
were being honest about during your confirmation hearings--over
doing what is right for the FBI and the American people. That
is not adherence to the law.
Thank you. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The time of the gentlelady has expired. The
Chair now recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. Knott. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, it is
great to have this opportunity. Thank you for being here. Thank
you for your service.
I have got to say one of the most disheartening components
of the previous administration, when I was working with local
law enforcement all over the State of North Carolina, all over
the country, people rightfully did not really care about the
inner-workings of Washington, DC.
The FBI had previously been the paramount, the sterling,
the top of the top law enforcement agency. They wanted their
FBI to fight crime. Whatever small town city, whatever it may
be, FBI was expected to deliver for the American people.
Then reports started to come out in addition to the likes
of McCabe, Comey, Clapper, Strzok, and Page, the FBI was
targeting Christian nonprofits. They were targeting parents for
protesting the radical gender theory at their schools. They
targeted Catholics, churches, and prolife organizations.
The FBI was really bruised in just modern day America. Your
focus on getting the FBI back to the streets, fighting
criminals, locking up bad guys, whether violent criminals,
whether they are sex predators, whatever they may be, that is
restoring the reputation of the FBI. I thank you for that.
In regard to the perceptions, I want to be very clear here.
You mentioned the statistics about removing dangerous illegals,
removing thousands of kilograms of drugs, violent criminal's
guns, the border is secure. These accomplishments are
noteworthy, and they are needed. At the same token, I want your
take. The fight is not over, isn't that correct? We look at
what happened in the previous administration, the number of
illegal alien criminals that made their way into this country
of every type. They are embedded. They are here. It is going to
take a sustained effort to win this battle.
Mr. Patel. That's the critical component, sustained effort.
That's the critical component when you look at what happened in
Washington, DC. We are not here for four seconds in terms of
safeguarding Washington, DC. It is a sustained initiative. We
are taking it to Memphis and wherever we decide else.
We are going to continue the mission until it is done.
Mr. Knott. In regard to offloading some of the agents from
Washington, DC, to the States, to the people, can you just
explain how tactically that is a force multiplier in the law
enforcement community around the country?
Mr. Patel. It is pretty simple. You don't even have to be
in law enforcement to know that. If you put cops with other
cops, they are going to do cop work.
Mr. Knott. Right.
Mr. Patel. What was needed in the communities out there was
more cops. What was not needed in the bloated bureaucracy of
Washington, DC, was a third of the FBI's workforce because a
third of the crime does not happen in the Washington, DC, and
CR area. The results speak for themselves.
Our State and local partners--I have always said this--are
our biggest ally----our greatest ally and partner, and we
cannot do the work without them. We have got to send our guys
to them.
Mr. Knott. Yes. That is right. In regards to the last four
years to open border policies, whether it is terrorism, drug
trafficking, human trafficking, violent crime, massive amounts
of organized retail theft, and other types of criminal
behavior, can you describe just so anyone who is listening here
can talk about how serious the levels of criminality have
become in the United States?
Mr. Patel. Well, unfortunately, to have these record-
breaking numbers of arrests and seizures, you tragically had to
have a record-breaking explosion in violent crime. It doesn't
happen overnight. It came in from all corners of the earth and
from all platforms, including social media. That is the root
cause of all these evils.
To clean it up, it is not going to happen overnight. The
men and women of the FBI, what they did in these seven months,
everybody should be talking about it. Every single district in
this dais is safer now today than it has ever been because of
that work.
Mr. Knott. In regards to the ongoing political climate,
Director Patel, how do sanctuary policies that are still being
implemented and defended in certain States, cities, and
counties, how do they help or hurt your efforts to make America
safer?
Mr. Patel. Well, if you are harboring criminals, you are
harboring our ability to keep our communities safe. It is that
simple. If you have a fugitive warrant for a violent felony
offense, and we are not able to procure you because of policies
or rules that don't allow us to go get them, and time and time
again we have heard all too many illegal immigrants who should
not have been here murdering women, murdering children, giving
drugs to our youth, and raping our children and that is
unacceptable.
Mr. Knott. Straightly put, can you separate immigration
enforcement from fighting crime?
Mr. Patel. They are intertwined.
Mr. Knott. Thank you. In regard to policies like cashless
bail, how does that help or hurt your efforts?
Mr. Patel. Criminals know that there are certain
jurisdictions where if they shoot someone, they will be out the
door within the next hour to do it again. That is an ethos, and
a system, that has been built out over years that we are
combating.
Mr. Knott. How is defunding the police around the country,
how does that help or hurt?
Mr. Patel. As long as I am in this seat, we are not
defunding any cops.
Mr. Knott. Good. Thank you, Director. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Garcia is
recognized.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Chair Jordan. Welcome, again,
Director Patel.
As Members of the Judiciary Committee we have a
responsibility to conduct oversight of the FBI and assess
whether or not you are doing a good job in a responsible and
impartial manner or whether you are just the henchman for
Donald Trump, who is weaponizing the Bureau at the expense of
public safety.
As Congressman Correa highlighted, one of the many
concerning issues during your tenure is the Bureau's expanded
role in low level noncriminal immigration enforcement.
I have a report here from the conservative Cato Institute.
They have obtained ICE documents showing that over 2,500 FBI
personnel are now working on immigration enforcement.
A yes or no question. Did you sign off on this?
Mr. Patel. The 2,500 FBI employees are not currently
working on immigration enforcement.
Mr. Garcia. Did you sign off on this?
Mr. Patel. The Cato Report?
Mr. Garcia. The 2,500 FBI personnel that have been reported
to now being working on immigration enforcement.
Mr. Patel. I couldn't have signed off on it because it is
not happening.
Mr. Garcia. You can call it whatever you want, but the
reality is that over 2,000 personnel, individuals, are now
working at ICE instead of their jobs.
I want to followup on something that Senator Durbin asked
you about yesterday. This article from MSNBC reports that
nearly every agent on Baltimore's Domestic Terrorism Unit, who
was, by the way, investigating the 764 Network of child
predators, was diverted to work on immigration enforcement full
time. That forced them to, and I quote him, ``walk away from
investigations of a network of violent predators that targets
and exploits children online.''
Yes or no, were you aware that this happened and did you
sign off on it?
Mr. Patel. The premise is false. The 764 Network in
Baltimore was taken down. The FBI agents do double and triple
duty all the time.
Mr. Garcia. I am reclaiming my time. You told Senator
Durbin yesterday you didn't know about it. Your testimony is
inconsistent today.
Mr. Patel. No, I found out.
Mr. Garcia. My final question. Let me ask you again a yes
or no question. Are you aware that agents have been told by
supervisors not to document their shifting of resources toward
immigration related work?
Mr. Patel. That is a literal--another falsehood. It is
impossible for me to move a human being without documenting
that work.
Mr. Garcia. As FBI Director, you must be transparent with
Congress. You need to provide us information about how many
agents have been diverted to noncriminal immigration
enforcement, why the Baltimore Unit was dismantled, and whether
there is a cover-up of what is happening under your leadership
because this goes to the heart of whether or not you are
carrying out the stated mission of the FBI, keeping our
communities safe.
Diverting FBI agents from investigating violent child
predators doesn't make us safer. Using FBI resources to target
parents, children, and other immigrants for low level,
noncriminal enforcement doesn't make us safer. Enabling
violent, lawless conduct by Federal enforcement doesn't make us
safer as we saw last week when an ICE officer killed one of my
constituents.
I know that the FBI has been involved in that
investigation. Yesterday, ICE did a raid in the suburb of Elgin
where two U.S. citizens were arrested. Who accompanied them in
the filming of that show? Secretary Noem. Shameful conduct.
Weaponizing the FBI to serve Donald Trump's political
agenda instead of the American people does not make us safer.
Before I yield back.
Mr. Chair, I request unanimous consent to submit the
following documents for the record.
First, a report from the Cato Institute, which I referenced
earlier, where ``ICE has diverted over 2,500 officers from
their jobs.''
Second, an article from MSNBC titled, ``Trump's
Deportations Divert FBI Agents Off Child Predator Cases.''
Third, an article from CNN entitled, ``White House Pressure
for Increased Immigration Arrests Strains Law Enforcement
Agencies.''
Thank you. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. Without objection, the gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
Mr. Grothman. Thank you. Thank you by the way for coming
over here. Sorry you have to put up with all this. I know when
you took over, the FBI's reputation in a lot of circles perhaps
had never been lower.
Part of that is brazen involvement in political activity,
the Foreign Influence Task Force getting involved and trying to
suppress news stories in the New York Post. Crossfire Hurricane
coming up with bogus stories to try to flip the 2016 election.
The FBI downplaying stories of Hilary Clinton's emails in the
2016 election. That is their overt involvement in political
activity.
A strong antireligious bias. We talked about the stories
and anti-Catholic bias in there. I know I have talked to people
about horrific overreaction at the big Hindu Temple in New
Jersey in which--just so people understand, they had a rectory
in the temple area. The religious leaders taken out at
gunpoint. Big problems. Finally, the FBI trying to turn
America's viewpoint on certain political issues.
When I talk about that, I am talking about what was done in
Mexico with regard to shipping weapons, Fast and Furious,
shipping weapons into Mexico in an effort to try to turn
Americans against the First Amendment.
In any event, what scares me is, and all these horrible
things that were done in the past, there were individual FBI
agents who participated in them, which apparently their
supervisors told them this is OK or even admirable.
What am I going to ask you, are you able to do anything to
make sure that in the future these corrupted FBI agents
understand the importance of religion in our life, and they are
not be viewed with suspicion. They understand parental rights
and the idea that traditionally in America parents have the
ability to object when their young 5-6-year-old children or a
year older, very young children are getting what most people
consider highly inappropriate sexual contact.
What are we doing there to try to make sure we don't have
problems with these FBI agents again? Or make sure that in
future administrations they would object if they were asked to
behave in such an immoral fashion?
Mr. Patel. Two things, if you are corrupt, you don't work
at the FBI. It is that simple. We don't tolerate any form of
corruption or any deviation from our high standards, whether
you are an agent, an intel analyst, or whatnot.
Just to show the American public, the resurrection that the
FBI has had in these seven months, you don't have to believe
me. Our applicant pool has doubled month over month every year
from the highest point it has ever been. More people want to
work at this FBI than ever before in U.S. history.
Mr. Grothman. I am sure that it is because of you. You
anticipated my next question. I talked to retired FBI agents in
my area who sometimes retired in part because they hated the
woke, anticonservative culture at the FBI. They are concerned,
the retiring agents, about new agents, not on your watch, but
before this, being corrupted in the universities before they
were hired. They were very worried about what would happen with
the new agents.
You are answering my question. Do you feel you will be able
to a certain extent solve the problem of inappropriately woke
agents filling up with the agency in the past because now you
are going to have a larger pool to draw from?
Mr. Patel. Everybody that comes to work at the FBI is
allowed to have their own belief system. They are not allowed
to bring that belief system into the workplace. Anyone that
does, won't work at the FBI.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Very good. Now, recently, I will show you
another potential scandal, I guess, a politically motivated
thing, Arctic Frost. Do you want to comment on that? It appears
one more time perhaps the FBI was getting involved in what
would normally be considered political events.
Mr. Patel. We are not getting involved in political events,
except this one.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Final thing, with regard to prejudice
against Catholics, what happened in the big Hindu Temple there
in New Jersey, do you think--have you ever--has anybody ever
apologized to the Catholic Church or apologized to that temple?
Mr. Patel. I don't know, sir.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Is that something you think perhaps would
be a good idea to do in the future?
Mr. Patel. I think leadership should address it.
Mr. Grothman. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman's time has expired. The
gentleman yields back the--oh, so we got the gentleman from
North Carolina, Mr. Harris.
Mr. Harris. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you,
Director Patel, for your endurance and your perseverance
throughout the day's hearing and for all you have shared.
First, let me start by saying that I was very grateful and
glad to see that the FBI has joined the investigation of the
tragic and brutal murder of Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, which
is just right by my District.
This woman, as you know, fled the war in Ukraine only to be
killed in cold blood by a man who had no business being on the
streets whatsoever. This man who had been seen stabbing Iryna
to death on video had been arrested 14 previous times, served
prison time, and was diagnosed with a severe mental illness. In
response to the previous offense, the magistrate over his case
released him to roam the streets with a zero-dollar bond and a
simple written promise to appear in court.
Mr. Patel, let me just ask you, should judges apply the
most lenient bail standards to people with extensive criminal
history?
Mr. Patel. Do they apply the most lenient? I'm sorry.
Mr. Harris. Should they apply the most lenient bail
standards to people with extensive criminal history?
Mr. Patel. That has not been my experience. That should not
happen.
Mr. Harris. Is America a place where young women should
fear to ride public transit?
Mr. Patel. No.
Mr. Harris. Was Iryna Zarutska's death, would you say,
possibly the result of Democrat's procrime policies?
Mr. Patel. That investigation and matter is in open trial,
so I don't want to stylize the evidence.
Mr. Harris. I understand. Well, Mr. Patel, let me just say,
taking over the FBI after the Biden Administration's blatant
weaponi-
zation of the Agency is no feat as we have recognized
throughout this hearing today.
For four years, we have witnessed the Biden Administration
targeting regular Americans rather than violent criminals.
For example, the Biden Administration's FBI spent its time
and resources going after churches and Christians. We know that
the FBI used an undercover agent to collect information about a
parishioner. We know that the FBI investigated and surveilled a
Catholic priest. All this was in response to First Amendment
protected activity.
Mr. Patel, I want to ask you. Should the FBI use its
resources to spy on Catholics?
Mr. Patel. Never.
Mr. Harris. What does it say about the culture of the Biden
FBI that law enforcement resources were used to go after
Catholics and some FBI employees were comfortable with taking
such actions?
Mr. Patel. Well, pursuant to my transparency initiative in
working with Congress on oversight, those documents, that is
it. Those documents are available for the American public to
see and read and hold people accountable. That is what I am
committed to.
Mr. Harris. Have you been able to hold accountable those at
the FBI who went after law-abiding Catholic church members?
Mr. Patel. If they did so improperly, yes.
Mr. Harris. Well, I have been a pastor for 36 years. I have
constantly stood up for life and stood up for family amidst a
culture that is increasingly hostile to both of those things.
If the Biden Administration targeted Catholics, could I have
been targeted by the Wray FBI as well?
Mr. Patel. Well, I don't know. I am not going to target
you.
Mr. Harris. Well, I know that President Trump respects
religious liberty and that his administration is seeking to
right the wrongs of the Biden Administration, securing our
freedoms and protecting faith leaders and communities requires
a multipronged approach.
What would you say in just the last few moments, what does
the FBI under your leadership going to do to make sure that our
religious liberty and religious leaders can rest comfortable
this evening?
Mr. Patel. Zealously protecting our First Amendment rights.
Zealously going after those that abuse that right that leads to
criminal conduct. You will be investigated. You will be looked
at and referred to prosecution every single time the evidence
warrants.
Mr. Harris. Thank you, sir. One final area, I do want to
draw attention, Mr. Patel, to Waxhaw, North Carolina, a town in
my district that just fell victim to a cyberattack on September
12th, that interrupted emergency services.
Waxhaw is working with State partners, and the FBI has been
notified on this attack. I certainly pray they are able to help
out with the ongoing investigation.
Could you just speak to what the FBI is doing to bolster
our community's cybersecurity to defend against any future
cyberattacks?
Mr. Patel. Well, in North Carolina, you are slated to get a
plus up of 22 FBI employees, and they are already on the way.
That encompasses cyber counter intel, counterterrorism field
agents, and intel operatives. What we are doing on a macro
level on the counter intel and cyber front is going after the
people that fund these operations on these online platforms and
breaking their banks because once we do that successfully
across the board, they won't have the ability to attack us.
Mr. Harris. Well, thank you, Director Patel. Let me just
add my comments to those of my colleagues that are very
grateful for your leadership, grateful for your courage, your
consistency, and for being willing to stand in the gap for us.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
Missouri is recognized.
Mr. Onder. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, thank you
for being here with us today.
Over the past few years, we have seen a disturbing increase
of attacks on Christians and conservatives. Since the leak of
the Dobbs' decision, there have been 354 attacks on Catholic
churches. In the first year following the leak, there were more
than 100 attacks against prolife pregnancy care centers. The
shadowy pro-abortion group Jane's Revenge claimed
responsibility for two dozen of these attacks.
Meanwhile, the Biden FBI focused resources on attacking
Catholics and peaceful prolife protestors like Mark Hopkin and
Paul Vaughn. Many of these attacks on Christians and
conservatives were coordinated or praised by dark Leftist cells
who lurk on the online chat rooms of Reddit, Discord, and Game
Sites. This is a war room for Antifa and violent transgender
activists.
There have been essentially no incidents of violence by
Catholics, prolifers, or parents at school board meetings.
There have, unfortunately, been multiple shootings motivated by
Leftist and trans-
gender ideology including recent attacks in Nashville, Colorado
Springs, Denver, and Aberdeen.
Worse, the targeted violence reached a boiling point this
past month, a few weeks ago when an anti-Christian transgender
terrorist murdered two children and injured 17 in a shooting at
a Catholic mass.
The last week, while we were sitting in this Committee room
almost to the hour, Charlie Kirk was assassinated by a 22-year-
old who appears to have been motivated by Leftist and
transgender ideology.
As you confirmed yesterday to my Senate colleagues, he may
not have acted alone. You testified that in his online chat
room of more than 20 transidealogues that you were aware, I
believe you said many more, many were aware of and possibly
complicit in the assassination.
Director Patel in light of the increased violence emanating
from the far Left, is your FBI investigating this violent trend
of antireligious, Antifa, and transgender driven violence?
Mr. Patel. All of it across the board is being zealously
investigated no matter what your motivation or bias is behind
it.
Mr. Onder. Very good. We have also noticed a dramatic surge
in the number of clinics offering so-called gender affirming
care. Whistleblowers in a recent NIH study confirmed that these
clinics pray on some of the most mentally ill children and
young adults in our society. These clinics are quick to
prescribe life-altering puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones,
and surgery.
Often these patients get worse rather than better.
Unfortunately, some have become violent, and some have even
committed mass shootings. The partner of one of them
assassinated Charlie Kirk.
Director Patel, is the FBI looking into the role that these
gender clinics may have in the recent attacks in making these
mentally ill individuals violent?
Mr. Patel. We are looking at the entire spiderweb for any
of these attacks, be it Denver or Charlie or where have you.
That's why our investigations are ongoing. We don't have a
final product yet.
Mr. Onder. One of my Democratic colleagues as an aside
mentioned ``the Federal takeover of our cities.'' I don't know
whether my Democrat colleagues for some reason liked
Washington, DC, better when it was more dangerous and more
violent, when there were more robberies, car jackings, murders,
and rapes. What has the crime picture in Washington, DC, looked
like since the so-called Federal takeover?
Mr. Patel. There are 2,100 arrests, 37 percent decrease in
violent crime same time last year, 60 percent decrease in gun
crime, 74 percent decrease in carjackings, and 53 percent
reduction in homicides in Washington, DC, in the last month
alone.
Mr. Onder. Very good. Thank you so much for your testimony.
I know it has been a long day. I will give you a little break
and yield back the rest of my time.
Chair Jordan. Does the gentleman yield?
Mr. Onder. Yes.
Chair Jordan. Director Patel, what is a 302?
Mr. Patel. It is a report, the number of the report,
whenever an FBI agent goes out and interviews someone.
Chair Jordan. Are you familiar with the 302 where the FBI
agent interviewed the whistleblower who has come forward and
talked about the former Chair of the Intel Committee here in
the House pushing staff members to leak classified information.
Well, I will just read from it: ``Staffers were instructed
to''--this is from the 302 interview of this person. ``Staffers
were instructed to use any sources that had developed within
the United States intelligence community to gather information
which would then be made public through the media in order to
compel public opinion.''
Are you familiar with that?
Mr. Patel. I am.
Chair Jordan. Yes, that is how they played the game, wasn't
it? Leaking information, classified or otherwise, true or
otherwise, to create this public opinion to compel action to
undermine the President. Is that accurate?
Mr. Patel. I believe so.
Chair Jordan. Just one other point I would make from this.
This witness also said in the 302 that the agent recorded that
the witness provided the interviewing agents with copies of
both his handwritten notes and an email. He gave them the stuff
he wrote and at the actual time this was taking place. That is
all in the 302, right?
Mr. Patel. Yes. sir.
Chair Jordan. All right.
Mr. Onder. Mr. Chair? Mr. Chair?
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from--
Mr. Onder. Mr. Chair, I would like to submit for the record
an article from The Hill, ``Massive Crime Drop in DC, City Sees
Zero Murder Week,'' dated August 25, 2025. Also, I would also
like to submit for the record an article from The New York
Times dated April 18, 2025, ``Man Who Set Fire to Shapiro's
Mansion Cited Treatment of Palestinians, Police Say.''
Chair Jordan. Yes, thank you. Without objection. The
gentlelady from Texas and then Pennsylvania.
Ms. Crockett. My first UC is the FBI AA letter to Congress
on summary terminations where it states,
Denying fundamental due process and summarily dismissing
special agents will only make it harder to protect our Nation.
These actions distract agents from their work, foster fear that
their assignments could cost them their careers either now or
under the next administration and increase the risk of criminal
and national security threats by undermining unity and morale
within the bureau.
The next one is an CNN article, ``FBI Agents are Again
Pulled from Their Day Jobs to Address a Trump Priority.'' It
states,
Morale is the worst I have seen said one law enforcement
source. The Bureau is becoming unrecognizable. Lots of people
are weighing really difficult decisions right now.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentlelady from
Pennsylvania is recognized.
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I request unanimous
consent to introduce into the record a September 16, 2025,
article in The New Republic entitled, ``DOJ Quietly Deletes
Study on Politics of Domestic Terrorism.'' The Justice
Department has taken down a study that proves Republicans'
entire narrative wrong about Left-wing violence.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Washington is recognized.
Mr. Baumgartner. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you,
Director, for being here. I think without question we can say
that Donald Trump has been tougher on crime and tougher on
international terrorism than any president in American history.
I imagine that brings you a lot of satisfaction and pride as
the Director of America's foremost law enforcement agency.
Recently, President Trump conducted very strategic and
important strikes on Iran's nuclear apparatus in that country.
We also know that there are concerns of significant Iranian
sleeper terror cells here in the U.S., perhaps exacerbated by
the open border during the Biden Administration.
What can you tell Congress and the American people about
what the FBI is doing to safeguard us from a potential
terrorist attack by Iranian cells?
Mr. Patel. Our Counterterrorism Division, which is fully
stocked up, watches for reflections in the intelligence streams
that our intelligence community collects and produces and works
hand in glove with our partners at the CIA and elsewhere to
make sure that any threat, even if it's hearsay, double
hearsay, triple hearsay, or totally incredible is not only
fully run down, but we also take our duties to notifying in
defensive briefings to those who are mentioned in those
intelligence reports to make sure that we do both our
notification obligation and our investigatory obligation.
Mr. Baumgartner. Thank you. The FBI is also the foremost
counterintelligence apparatus here in the U.S. We know the U.S.
faces a more complex array of global threats at any time than
perhaps World War II or even superseding that time.
As America continues to be under attack from various
intelligence agencies globally, what can you tell us about the
counterintelligence operations of the FBI's core function?
Mr. Patel. This is why the CI mission is so important to
the FBI because, like you said, no one else can do it. No one
else has the authority to do it. Even if they did, they don't
have the capabilities to do it.
The CI mission has to be headquartered in Washington but
have far-reaching capabilities because we have to face against
our adversaries in DPRK, in Russia, China, Iran, and elsewhere.
To do that, we have to have dedicated intelligence
professionals on those target sets.
Since I have become the Director, I have demanded not only
a dismantling and disruption of networks, but a public display
of how we are doing it so the world knows that our adversary is
(A) attacking us, and (B) we are stopping them.
That is why you have seen these dramatic increases in
counterintelligence arrests in the PRC by 33 percent, in Russia
83 percent, in Iran 60 percent. We are showing the world that
they are trying to engage in espionage activities against us,
and we are holding them accountable publicly.
Mr. Baumgartner. There has been increasing concern about
the Maduro regime of Venezuela, both their potential support of
terrorist activity, criminal drug networks, and potential
espionage entities here within the U.S. What can you tell us
about your activities regarding the Maduro regime of Venezuela?
Mr. Patel. Generally speaking, one of the largest
transshipment points and shipment points for narcotics out of
South America, Colombia, obviously, and also Venezuela, is
being utilized heavily by the narco traffickers to send up
cocaine, meth, fentanyl, and all the other illegal narcotics
through the island chain in the Caribbean Ocean and ultimately
for America.
There has to be more work done in the region to stop those
navigable waterways from being traversed with drugs bound for
America.
Mr. Baumgartner. Finally, Mr. Director, what is the one
thing that Congress could most do in terms of passing the law
to best support the FBI in making America safer and more
secure?
Mr. Patel. Give us more authorities to get online, to get
onto social media companies, gaming platforms, have legal
access, and also have private partnerships with the FBI of
those companies and allow them to report into us on a daily
basis. There is no human being or AI system on earth that can
go out there and cover down on the threat in those theaters. We
need the assistance and we need more authorities. We need the
private sector to double down.
Mr. Baumgartner. Well, thank you very much for all you are
doing, all the men and women of the FBI are doing, to keep us
safe. I yield back.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back. I have a UC
request from the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an article titled,
``FBI Flooded with Record Number of New Agent Applications.''
Kash Patel's first month, the FBI saw 5,577 new agent
applications for March and more than 10,000 since January.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentleman from Kansas
is recognized.
Mr. Schmidt. Thank you, Mr. Chair and the Director, thank
you for being here.
I have listened carefully to all the discussion in this
hearing. I have reached two top-line conclusions. First, I am
glad I don't have your job. Second, I am glad you do. Thank you
for being willing to step up and serve in this role.
I would like to plow a little bit of ground that we have
not spent a lot of time on so far and explore--you have
mentioned, and I am well aware of your strong commitment to
partnering with State and local law enforcement authorities.
Obviously, one of the missions is in the counterdrug space.
Another is in the forensic laboratory space where both you and
a lot of local and State agencies cooperate in terms of
evidence analysis.
From the State side, programs such as the HIDTA programs,
very, very important in counterdrug, such as the Coverdell
grants, very, very important in maintaining State laboratory
capacities.
Would I be correct in concluding that if we are able to
maintain robust funding for those types of programs, including
both Coverdell and HIDTA that would contribute to the safety of
the United States and to your mission?
Mr. Patel. Absolutely.
Mr. Schmidt. Director, you have talked a little bit about
some of the counterdrug work that you have been doing. One
thing we haven't talked about yet. The President, in one of his
first actions on taking office back in January, designated a
number of the cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. That
is not just a paper transaction. I believe the list has been
expanded since those first actions.
In terms of America's military engagement with the cartels
abroad in terms of our intelligence engagement with them
abroad, that designation has had real meaning and has affected
some of the thinking and approaches of our military and our
intelligence community.
Can you talk a bit about how that designation might be
affecting or should be affecting the FBI's approach to dealing
with the domestic activities of the cartels?
Mr. Patel. The simple way to analogize it is after 9/11 and
the manhunt for the foreign terrorist organizations overseas in
places like Afghanistan and Iraq, the FBI received certain
authorities to go out there and dedicate a mission to go after
them both lawfully and investigatorily and collect evidence and
provide it to our agents or agency partners.
Once the foreign terrorist organization designation was
labeled over to the Mexican drug cartels, we can now do that
here and in Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, and anywhere else they
are. So that is the best analogy I have.
What we are able to do is take our counterterrorism
platform, traditionally used for global terrorist manhunting,
and bring it into this hemisphere against a very real threat,
which is the drug traffickers. They are foreign terrorist
organizations. We just have so many more resources and
authorities now directed at them.
Mr. Schmidt. For example, Director, in the regions, from
the vantage point of local law enforcement, there are
structures that have historically handled those partnerships
separately. HIDTA, for example, is an example on the drug
trafficking side. The JTTFs are an example on the terrorism
side.
How is the thinking evolving in terms of whether it is on a
regional basis either merging or not merging those structures
now that the targets in many ways are merged?
Mr. Patel. The JTTFs are kind of our forward operating base
across every single State in this country to take on that
mission. Any time you are labeled a foreign terrorist
organization, you come right under the authority of the JTTF,
the task force officers, and the State and local level police
work that gets done in those JTTFs.
The Homeland Security Task Force layer on top of that, I
think 25-30 across the country, specifically working with DHS
and Secretary Noem to go after the drug trafficking foreign
terrorist organizations because they have unique capabilities
and authorities dedicated to that mission. That is the beauty
of HSCFs.
Mr. Schmidt. Let me ask you an adjacent question, Director.
I noticed in your written testimony--I don't think we have
talked about it yet--you brought to our attention an expiring
authority. It is in 6 U.S.C. 124n with respect to counter-UAS
drones. You point out that this authority expires in statute at
the end of this month.
Mr. Patel. Yes.
Mr. Schmidt. You impressed on it is your interest in seeing
it extended in some manner. Can you talk a little bit about the
FBI's role in counter-UAS work over American air space?
I represent a district that is going to host some of the
FIFA World Cup activities coming up. We are obviously very
interested in security. There are limits on what our State and
local authorities have the capacity to do or what our military
has the capacity to do once the threat is domestic.
Mr. Patel. It is critically important. Both the FBI and DHS
have those capabilities. I will speak to the FBI, of course,
only. You raise the World Cup. That is exactly what we need it
for.
The Club World Cup, which just happened, was 32 games in at
least a dozen different cities across the country, the largest
sporting events consecutively on American history. We used our
counter-drone capabilities to not only inspect and secure
stadium locations, but where fans were hovering in what we call
base camps.
Thankfully because of the success of the FBI and DHS, we
had no significant security incidences.
Flipping to the World Cup, which is going to be three times
as large, and obviously the largest we have ever had, and
running into the LA Olympics in 2028, our counter-UAS
capabilities are going to be the ones that enable us to have a
literal bird's-eye view of the threat dynamic around so many of
these cities, which are going to see literally tens and
hundreds of thousands of people flock to them. We have to have
it.
Mr. Schmidt. Making sure the bad guys don't have the same.
Mr. Patel. Exactly.
Mr. Schmidt. Very good. I yield back and thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Director, you have been amazing. You have been here four
hours and 41 minutes without a break. We appreciate that. I
think we have one more Member with a UC request and then we
will let you go. We appreciate that.
The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. Gill. Thank you again for taking the time, Director
Patel, and for Chair Jordan for holding this hearing. Thank you
for depoliticizing the FBI and getting it back to its original
mission as well.
Director Patel, do you agree that we have a problem in the
United States with politically motivated violence?
Mr. Patel. Absolutely.
Mr. Gill. I very much agree. We can all agree that
political violence is wrong. It is evil. Regardless of which
side it comes from and whether we can all adamantly and
vehemently reject it or we certainly should. One of the things
that we have noticed recently is that affinity and tolerance
for political violence is not equally distributed on both sides
of the aisle. In fact, right now social media is filled with
Leftists who are cheering on the murder of an iconic
conservative political figure, Charlie Kirk.
It is not just random people on Twitter doing this now.
There is a YouGov poll released just a few days ago which
stated that 25 percent of those who identify as very liberal
believe that political violence can sometimes be justified.
That is far too many, is it not?
Mr. Patel. That is far too many.
Mr. Gill. One is far too many. That is right. Only three
percent of very conservative said the same thing. We can agree
that three percent is far too many. There is an astounding
difference between 25 percent on the Left accepting and
tolerating political violence and three percent on the Right.
I would hope that our colleagues on the other side of the
aisle would also recognize that there is a systemic problem on
their side of the aisle with tolerance for violence against
people with whom they politically disagree. That there is a
cultural rot on their side of the aisle that needs to be
addressed desperately.
Would you agree with that?
Mr. Patel. Yes.
Mr. Gill. One of the most astounding aspects of this is
that it is not just people. This comes from the very top, from
their political leaders.
Just a few days ago, a Member of Congress, of this body,
Ilhan Omar, shared a video on her social media account about
Charlie Kirk's murder. I will quote what it said. It said,
``Charlie Kirk was Dr. Frankenstein, and his monster shot him
through the neck.'' In other words, Charlie had it coming to
him. The words that he said naturally led to his assassination.
That is a reprehensible thing for a Member of Congress to
say, to suggest, and to promote in any capacity. There are
people across this country who are losing their jobs for far
less than this. That, by the way, is a just response to
acceptance and tolerance of political violence.
It is amazing to me that the political Left today, who are
the originators and the cheerleaders of cancel culture now have
the backbone to attack conservatives for defending their
assassinated friend.
There is a key difference here. Democrats want to silence
conservatives for speaking obvious self-evidence ontological
truths like that men aren't women and men can't get pregnant.
That seems pretty basic. That seems like a basic truth that we
should all be able to agree on.
Republicans by contrast are recognizing that a
constitutional republic depends on the free and open exchange
of ideas that we can debate without violence. That
assassinating a political rival is evil. It is wrong. It should
not be glorified, promoted, or justified in any way, including
in the way that Congressman Ilhan Omar did.
Mr. Patel, thank you again, for being here. I would like
to, with the remainder of my time, just get your opinion. Does
the FBI recognize the rising threat of political violence in
America and what can you guys do to address it?
Mr. Patel. Yes, we do. What we can do to address it,
Congressman, is we need to get online partnerships with these
companies in the public space, on these gaming sites, and on
these social media sites.
As I was saying earlier, there is no way to triage the
amount of information generated on these sites by the FBI
alone, and we need the public-private partnership. There is
another law that is expiring at the end of this month, which I
believe we need renewed that allows private sector companies to
report into the FBI without liability for criminal
investigatory purposes. That is the kind of stuff we need to
keep going.
Mr. Gill. Thank you, Director Patel. We really appreciate
it.
Mr. Patel. Thank you.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chair?
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. Biggs. I have some UCs.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman will State his request.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you. The first one is a piece entitled,
``Review of Domestic Terrorism After Kirk Murder Shows Biden
Politicized the Issue, the Intel and Fudged the Data.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Biggs. I make a motion to table.
Chair Jordan. We have got to recognize the Ranking Member
for his motion.
Mr. Rankin. It is just a UC request.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman is recognized for a UC request.
Mr. Rankin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the ADL report
issued February 21, 2025, titled, ``Murder and Extremism in the
United States in 2024,'' concluding that for the third year in
a row every extremist-related murder in the United States in
2024 was committed by Right-wing extremists, eight of the 13
involving White supremacists and five having connections to
far-Right antigovernment extremists.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. The gentlelady from
Pennsylvania is recognized for unanimous consent.
Ms. Scanlon. Yes. Thank you. I have a couple articles here.
First, a New York Post article, July 17, 2025, ``Democrat
Senator Ron Wyden Claims Big Epstein File Full of Actionable
Information Locked in Treasury Department Drawer.''
Second, is The Guardian, May 18, 2023. ``Deutsche Bank
agrees to pay $75 million to settle Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit.''
Third, Fox Business, September 10, 2025. ``JPMorgan
processed over 1 billion for Jeffrey Epstein despite internal
concerns over sex offender status.''
Fourth, The New York Times, ``Bank of America flagged
suspicious payments to Epstein only after he died.''
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. I also have a motion, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady is recognized. We are going to
come back to the motion I thought was made by Mr.--I want to
dismiss our witness.
Mr. Raskin. Can we do the motion before he goes? Mainly, I
just wanted to press the motion I originally had.
Chair Jordan. We are going to bring that up. Is that what
this is? Are you doing that?
Ms. Scanlon. No, this is another motion.
Chair Jordan. OK. Well, I am going to recognize first the
gentleman because we held that motion in abeyance.
Mr. Biggs. I still have a UC, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So look. There are four
banks, JPMorgan, Bank of New York, Bank of America, and
Deutsche Bank who--
Chair Jordan. If the gentleman can state his motion.
Mr. Raskin. Yes, the motion is to subpoena the CEOs of
these four banks to bring in all records relating to the
relationship top Jeffrey Epstein and to produce all records
reflecting it.
These four banks have flagged to the government $1.5
billion in suspicious transactions relating to--
Mr. Biggs. Motion to table.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Dimon just released a statement saying--
Mr. Biggs. Chair, you don't need to--
Chair Jordan. Motion to table the motion offered by the
gentleman from Maryland. The motion to table is not debatable.
The question occurs on the motion to table.
Those in favor say, aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion
of the Chair, the ayes have it. The motion is tabled.
Mr. Raskin. I would like a recorded vote if we could, Mr.
Chair.
Chair Jordan. With a recorded vote being requested, the
clerk will call. We got to get the clerk here. Oh, the clerk is
right here. The clerk will call the role.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan.
Chair Jordan. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Issa.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. McClintock.
Mr. McClintock. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. McClintock votes aye.
Mr. Tiffany.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Massie.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Roy.
Mr. Roy. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Roy votes aye.
Mr. Fitzgerald.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Cline votes aye.
Mr. Gooden.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Van Drew.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nehls.
Mr. Nehls. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nehls votes yes.
Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moore votes yes.
Mr. Kiley.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Hageman.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lee.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Hunt.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fry.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Grothman.
Mr. Grothman. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Grothman votes aye.
Mr. Knott.
Mr. Knott. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Knott votes aye.
Mr. Harris.
Mr. Harris. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Harris votes aye.
Mr. Onder.
Mr. Onder. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Onder votes aye.
Mr. Schmidt.
Mr. Schmidt. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Schmidt votes aye.
Mr. Gill.
Mr. Gill. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gill votes aye.
Mr. Baumgartner.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Raskin.
Mr. Raskin. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Mr. Nadler.
Mr. Nadler. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nadler votes no.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lofgren.
Ms. Lofgren. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lofgren votes no.
Mr. Cohen.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson votes no.
Mr. Swalwell.
Mr. Swalwell. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Swalwell votes no.
Mr. Lieu.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Jayapal.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Correa.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon.
Ms. Scanlon. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon votes no.
Mr. Neguse.
Mr. Neguse. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Neguse votes no.
Ms. McBath.
Ms. McBath. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. McBath votes no.
Ms. Ross.
Ms. Ross. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Ross votes no.
Ms. Balint.
Ms. Balint. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Balint votes no.
Mr. Garcia.
Mr. Garcia. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moskowitz.
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Mr. Goldman.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Crockett.
Ms. Crockett. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Gooden.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gooden.
Mr. Gooden. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gooden votes yes.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chair, how am I recorded?
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from New York.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Goldman, you are not recorded.
Mr. Goldman. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from Washington.
Ms. Jayapal. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Jayapal votes no.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from California.
Mr. Lieu. No.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from California.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Lieu votes no.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove votes no.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. Massie. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Massie votes no.
Chair Jordan. Director, I want to thank you again for being
here. While we are waiting for Members to get back to record
their vote, you don't need to stay around for these kind of
motions.
We appreciate the service you are providing the country. We
appreciate your testimony today, and we appreciate the fact
that you did it in five hours straight. That is amazing. God
bless you and keep up the good work.
The witness is dismissed. I know, but I am dismissing the
witness. I don't think--nothing at all.
Mr. Raskin. I just put it in the record, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. We are still waiting for Members to come back
to record their vote on the motion offered by the gentleman
from--
Mr. Raskin. As a point of order, I just wanted to establish
that the dismissal of the witness doesn't affect the viability
of the motions.
Chair Jordan. The Committee is still going.
Ms. Crockett. Madam Clerk, point of order. What is the
current vote?
Mr. Raskin. Point of order.
Chair Jordan. The vote is open. We will be waiting for
Members to get back to record their vote.
The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fitzgerald votes aye.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. Kiley. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Kiley votes aye.
Mr. Raskin. The gentleman from California, Mr. Chair, is he
going to be recognized?
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Correa?
Mr. Correa. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Correa votes no.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chair, point of order.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman may State his point.
Mr. Raskin. A number of Members have conflicting markups
and Committee hearings are going on right now. I am just
wondering how long we are going to hold this open. My read on
the vote is that right now it is 18-14-17 or 19-16?
Chair Jordan. We are going to give Members an opportunity.
As you point out, as the Ranking Members points out, Members
have numerous obligations, different Committees going on. We
want to give everyone an opportunity to record their vote and
that is why we are waiting.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chair, point of order.
Chair Jordan. State your point of order.
Ms. Crockett. Couldn't we just be debating instead of
sitting here waiting?
Chair Jordan. There is a motion on the table. There was a
motion offered by the Ranking Member, a motion to table offered
by a Member. That is what is on the table right now.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Van Dew, you are not recorded.
Mr. Van Drew. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Van Drew votes yes.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from Wyoming.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lee.
Ms. Lee. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lee votes yes.
Ms. Hageman.
Ms. Hageman. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Hageman votes yes.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from Florida and Wyoming.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Knott, you are recorded as yes.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Wisconsin.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Tiffany.
Mr. Tiffany. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Tiffany votes aye.
Chair Jordan. The clerk will report.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Chair, there are 20 ayes and 19 noes.
Chair Jordan. The ayes have it. The motion is tabled. The
gentlelady is recognized from Pennsylvania.
Ms. Scanlon. Thank you, Mr.--
Chair Jordan. For what purpose?
Ms. Scanlon. I have a motion.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady may State the motion.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. Pursuant to clause 2(k)(6) of Rule 11, I
move that the Committee subpoena U.S. Treasury Secretary
Bessent to produce or otherwise make available to the committee
all suspicious activity reports in the possession of the
Treasury Department identifying the roughly the $1.5 billion in
suspicious transactions.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. McClintock. I move to delay the motion on the table.
Chair Jordan. The motion is not debatable.
Ms. Scanlon. I didn't finish.
Mr. Raskin. She didn't complete the motion. It is improper
to cut it off before it is completed, Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. Finish your last sentence there. The
gentlelady can finish.
Ms. Scanlon. OK. We are asking them to identify the roughly
$1.5 billion in suspicious transactions related to the sex-
trafficking crimes of Epstein, Maxwell, and their co-
conspirators. As we know, Mr. Patel said that the Treasury--
Mr. McClintock. I move to delay the motion on the table.
Chair Jordan. The motion is not debatable, the question
occurs on the motion to table.
Those in favor say, aye. Those opposed, no.
Ms. Scanlon. I request a recorded vote.
Chair Jordan. A recorded vote being requested, the clerk
will call the roll.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan.
Chair Jordan. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Issa.
Mr. Issa. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Issa votes yes.
Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Mr. McClintock.
Mr. McClintock. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. McClintock votes aye.
Mr. Tiffany.
Mr. Tiffany. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Tiffany votes aye.
Mr. Massie.
Mr. Massie. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Massie votes no.
Mr. Roy.
Mr. Roy. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Roy votes aye.
Mr. Fitzgerald.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fitzgerald votes aye.
Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Cline votes aye.
Mr. Gooden.
Mr. Gooden. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gooden votes aye.
Mr. Van Drew.
Mr. Van Drew. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Van Drew votes yes.
Mr. Nehls.
Mr. Nehls. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nehls votes yes.
Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moore votes yes.
Mr. Kiley.
Mr. Kiley. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Kiley votes aye.
Ms. Hageman.
Ms. Hageman. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Hageman votes aye.
Ms. Lee.
Ms. Lee. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lee votes aye.
Mr. Hunt.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fry.
Mr. Fry. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mr. Grothman.
Mr. Grothman. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Grothman votes aye.
Mr. Knott.
Mr. Knott. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Knott votes aye.
Mr. Harris.
Mr. Harris. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Harris votes aye.
Mr. Onder.
Mr. Onder. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Onder votes aye.
Mr. Schmidt.
Mr. Schmidt. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Schmidt votes aye.
Mr. Gill.
Mr. Gill. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gill votes aye.
Mr. Baumgartner.
Mr. Baumgartner. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Baumgartner votes aye.
Mr. Raskin.
Mr. Raskin. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Mr. Nadler.
Mr. Nadler. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nadler votes no.
Ms. Lofgren.
Ms. Lofgren. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lofgren votes no.
Mr. Cohen.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson votes no.
Mr. Swalwell.
Mr. Swalwell. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Swalwell votes no.
Mr. Lieu.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Jayapal.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Correa.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon.
Ms. Scanlon. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon votes no.
Mr. Neguse.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. McBath.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Ross.
Ms. Ross. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Ross votes no.
Ms. Balint.
Ms. Balint. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Balint votes no.
Mr. Garcia.
Mr. Garcia. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moskowitz.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Ms. Crockett.
Ms. Crockett. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Ms. Jayapal. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Jayapal votes no.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from California.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. How am I recorded?
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Kamlager-Dove is not recorded.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Kamlager-Dove votes no.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from California.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Lieu, you are not recorded.
Mr. Lieu. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Lieu votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz.
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Chair Jordan. The clerk will report.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Chair, there are 23 ayes and 16 noes.
Chair Jordan. The motion to table carries.
Mr. Swalwell. Mr. Chair, I have a motion.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman can state his motion--he is
recognized to State his motion.
Mr. Swalwell. Great. I hope that champion of free speech,
Mr. McClintock, lets me read it.
Mr. Chair, pursuant to clause 2(k)(6) of Rule 11, I move
that the Committee subpoena Deputy FBI Director, Dan Bongino,
to produce and testify why the Director is unwilling to discuss
and share with Congress the files related to Jeffrey Epstein,
including witness interview records, including FBI Forms 302,
search warrant materials, records relating to the initiation
and investigations, records relating to financial transactions
and payments, evidence collected from wire taps. The FBI
Director said today that they have already released these
documents. Bongino has reportedly considered resigning his
position over the refusal to release the full Epstein files.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. McClintock. I am delighted to see that my colleague can
read, and I move to lay his motion on the table.
Chair Jordan. The motion is not debatable. The question
occurs on the motion to table.
Those in favor will say aye. Those opposed, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. The motion
is tabled.
Mr. Swalwell. I also can call for a vote, Mr. Chair, a
recorded vote.
Chair Jordan. A recorded vote being requested, the clerk
will call the roll.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan.
Chair Jordan. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Issa.
Mr. Issa. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Issa votes yes.
Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Mr. McClintock.
Mr. McClintock. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. McClintock votes aye.
Mr. Tiffany.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Massie.
Mr. Massie. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Massie votes no.
Mr. Roy.
Mr. Roy. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Roy votes aye.
Mr. Fitzgerald.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fitzgerald votes aye.
Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Cline votes aye.
Mr. Gooden.
Mr. Gooden. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gooden votes aye.
Mr. Van Drew.
Mr. Van Drew. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Van Drew votes yes.
Mr. Nehls.
Mr. Nehls. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nehls votes yes.
Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moore votes yes.
Mr. Kiley.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Hageman.
Ms. Hageman. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Hageman votes yes.
Ms. Lee.
Ms. Lee. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lee votes aye.
Mr. Hunt.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fry.
Mr. Fry. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mr. Grothman.
Mr. Grothman. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Grothman votes aye.
Mr. Knott.
Mr. Knott. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Knott votes aye.
Mr. Harris.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Onder.
Mr. Onder. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Onder votes aye.
Mr. Schmidt.
Mr. Schmidt. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Schmidt votes aye.
Mr. Gill.
Mr. Gill. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gill votes aye.
Mr. Baumgartner.
Mr. Baumgartner. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Baumgartner votes aye.
Mr. Raskin.
Mr. Raskin. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Mr. Nadler.
Mr. Nadler. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nadler votes no.
Ms. Lofgren.
Ms. Lofgren. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lofgren votes no.
Mr. Cohen.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson votes no.
Mr. Swalwell.
Mr. Swalwell. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Swalwell votes no.
Mr. Lieu.
Mr. Lieu. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Lieu votes no.
Ms. Jayapal.
Ms. Jayapal. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Jayapal votes no.
Mr. Correa.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon.
Ms. Scanlon. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon votes no.
Mr. Neguse.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. McBath.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Ross.
Ms. Ross. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Ross votes no.
Ms. Balint.
Ms. Balint. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Balint votes no.
Mr. Garcia.
Mr. Garcia. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Kamlager-Dove votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz.
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Ms. Crockett.
Ms. Crockett. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. Tiffany. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Tiffany votes aye.
Chair Jordan. The clerk will report.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Chair, there are 23 ayes and 16 noes.
Chair Jordan. The motion to table is successful. That
concludes today's--
Ms. Crockett. No. I have got one.
Chair Jordan. The gentlelady from Texas is recognized.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will tell you when I
am done reading. Mr. Chair, pursuant to Clause 2(k)(6) of Rule
11, I move that the Committee subpoena the head of the Bureau
of Prisons, William K. Marshall to discuss and produce all
records relating to the transfer of Jeffrey Epstein
coconspirator and child sex trafficker, Ghislaine Maxwell, in
apparent violation of BOP policies regarding sex offenders to
include all BOP communications with DOJ, FBI, and the White
House, BOP transferred Maxwell to a minimum security camp
following her interview with President Trump's former personal
attorney and now Deputy Attorney General Ty Blanche.
Mr. McClintock. Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. McClintock. I move to lay the motion on the table.
Chair Jordan. The motion is on the table.
Ms. Crockett. I am done reading now.
Chair Jordan. The motion is not debatable. The question
occurs on the motion to table.
Those in favor will say aye. Those opposed, no.
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it.
Ms. Crockett. I would ask for a recorded vote.
Chair Jordan. A recorded vote being requested, the clerk
will call the roll.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan.
Chair Jordan. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Issa.
Mr. Issa. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Issa votes yes.
Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Mr. McClintock.
Mr. McClintock. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. McClintock votes aye.
Mr. Tiffany.
Mr. Tiffany. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Tiffany votes aye.
Mr. Massie.
Mr. Massie. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Massie votes no.
Mr. Roy
Mr. Roy. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Roy votes aye.
Mr. Fitzgerald.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fitzgerald votes aye.
Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Cline votes aye.
Mr. Gooden.
Mr. Gooden. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gooden votes aye.
Mr. Van Drew.
Mr. Van Drew. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Van Drew votes yes.
Mr. Nehls.
Mr. Nehls. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nehls votes yes.
Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moore votes yes.
Mr. Kiley.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Hageman.
Ms. Hageman. Yes.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Hageman votes yes.
Ms. Lee.
Ms. Lee. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lee votes aye.
Mr. Hunt.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fry.
Mr. Fry. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mr. Grothman.
Mr. Grothman. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Grothman votes aye.
Mr. Knott.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Harris.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Knott.
Mr. Knott. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Knott votes aye.
Mr. Harris.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman.Mr. Onder.
Mr. Onder. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Onder votes aye.
Mr. Schmidt.
Mr. Schmidt. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Schmidt votes aye.
Mr. Gill.
Mr. Gill. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Gill votes aye.
Mr. Baumgartner.
Mr. Baumgartner. Aye.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Baumgartner votes aye.
Mr. Raskin.
Mr. Raskin. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Mr. Nadler.
Mr. Nadler. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Nadler votes no.
Ms. Lofgren.
Ms. Lofgren. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Lofgren votes no.
Mr. Cohen.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Johnson votes no.
Mr. Swalwell.
Mr. Swalwell. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Swalwell votes no.
Mr. Lieu.
Mr. Lieu. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Lieu votes no.
Ms. Jayapal.
Ms. Jayapal. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Jayapal votes no.
Mr. Correa.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon.
Ms. Scanlon. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Scanlon votes no.
Mr. Neguse.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. McBath.
[No response.]
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Ross.
Ms. Ross. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Ross votes no.
Ms. Balint.
Ms. Balint. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Balint votes no.
Mr. Garcia.
Mr. Garcia. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove.
Ms. Kamlager-Dove. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Kamlager-Dove votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz.
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Ms. Crockett.
Ms. Crockett. No.
Ms. Bidelman. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Chair Jordan. The clerk will report.
Ms. Bidelman. Mr. Chair, there are 21 ayes and 16 noes.
Chair Jordan. The motion to table is agreed to.
Mr. Roy. Mr. Chair? Point of inquiry.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman will State his point.
Mr. Roy. Am I correct that the House Oversight Committee
led by Chair Comer is issuing a significant number of subpoenas
along the lines of some of the things we have been talking
about today, but in general terms of pursuing a lot of the
questions that are being raised here today and others?
Chair Jordan. That is accurate. Specifically, the SARs,
they are actually getting the SARs from the Treasury
Department, which is something that we think is important. That
material is going to the Oversight Committee.
Mr. Garcia. May I ask a followup question? Over here.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from New York is recognized.
Mr. Garcia. Is it your understanding that the Oversight
Committee has requested the documents listed in Mr. Swalwell's
subpoena, the recordings, the witness statements, the
photographs, and the materials seized by search warrant.
Chair Jordan. I have to look at those carefully. I know
that it is a broad subpoena, and it includes all kinds of
files.
Mr. Garcia. Oddly enough, it excludes all those essential
documents that are in the possession of the FBI.
Chair Jordan. I think that would be included in the case
files that have been subpoenaed,
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. Biggs. I have a UC--several UCs.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman can state his unanimous consent
request.
Mr. Biggs. Yes. First, ``Democrat Running for Attorney
General Issues Profanity Laced Charlie Kirk Post.''
Second, ``Cleveland Fire Chief Removed from Duty Over
Incendiary Charlie Kirk Social Media Post.''
Third, ``Generic Combinations of Political Violence Won't
Stop the Left from Escalating It.''
Fourth, ``2 weeks before Charlie Kirk was assassinated,''
CNN runs widely viewed interview with Destiny describing
Charlie Kirk as spawn of Satan.
Let's see here. The next one is--I am having trouble
finding it, sir. I will submit it for the record later, the
rest of these. I have another 30 so I will just submit those
later.
Chair Jordan. Without objection.
Mr. Moskowitz. Mr. Chair.
Chair Jordan. The gentleman from New York is recognized for
what purpose?
Mr. Nadler. Point of information. With respect to
everything that Mr. Biggs just read, so what? It is all free
speech.
Chair Jordan. First amendment is alive and well in this
very country and thank the good Lord for that. The gentleman
from Florida. For what purpose does the gentleman seek
recognition.
Mr. Moskowitz. Point of information. To the question that
Mr. Roy was raising about that is being done in the Oversight
Committee, I am just curious. Was Mr. Roy asking because he
believes that should be done in the Judiciary Committee instead
or he was just confirming that it is being done in general?
Chair Jordan. I don't know the motives behind Mr. Roy's
statement. I just know what Mr. Roy said.
Mr. Moskowitz. I think Mr. Roy is here.
Chair Jordan. Yes. That concludes--well, you can talk to
him. You can go talk to him. You can walk right across the
thing.
That concludes today's hearing.
Mr. Raskin. I have a UC.
Chair Jordan. Man, this is a record day for UCs. Go ahead.
The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for the final UC.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you. This is it. ``Timeline suggests
Trump team changed its tune on Epstein files after Trump was
told he was in them.'' CNN Politics.
Chair Jordan. Without objection. Without objection, all
Members will have five legislative days to submit additional
written questions for the witness or additional materials for
the record. Without objection, the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:12 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by Members of the
Committee on the Judiciary can be found at: https://
docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=118612.
[all]