[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 27, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1001-S1003]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                        Oversight Investigations

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I want to take the time of my 
colleagues to set the record straight, yet again, about an FBI 
investigative report that has been generated that goes by the number 
1023, and I do this because the breathless media misreporting requires 
that I come to the floor to give a historical reorientation of the 
facts and the evidence.
  As I have said all along on the Senate floor, I and Chairman Comer of 
the House, made the 1023 document public for this single purpose; that 
purpose is to force the FBI to do what the taxpayers pay the FBI to do, 
and that is investigate, in this case, the information contained in 
that document that goes by the number of 1023.
  It is all pretty simple. I didn't promote or vouch for the 
allegations in 1023 as the truth, like some confused Democrats and the 
partisan media have falsely said. I pushed the FBI to do their job 
because that is my responsibility to the taxpayers and the people of 
Iowa.

[[Page S1002]]

  Now some confused Democrats and partisan media have returned to their 
favorite line, falsely saying that our effort to get the FBI to do 
their job is somehow peddling Russian disinformation. It is kind of 
like a nervous tic to all of them.
  For years, they falsely said the same thing about my and Senator 
Johnson's Biden family investigation, even though our investigation was 
based on Obama and Biden administration records and, really, on 
authentic bank records.
  Some Democrats and the partisan media apparently don't care about 
observing and reading the facts. Well, this Senator does care about 
that. So let's discuss the facts of the matter that they either missed 
or, more likely, are choosing to ignore because it doesn't fit their 
narrative.
  The whistleblowers within the Justice Department who came to me said 
the FBI had this document, the 1023, in their possession, now 3 years 
ago, June of 2020--3.5 years ago, in fact, because that document is 
dated June 30, 2020. Those whistleblowers that came to me were right.
  Whistleblowers said that the FBI considered its confidential human 
source to be credible. That confidential human source--which I will 
simply describe today as the FBI's source--formed the basis of the 
1023.
  If you are following television, we now know the name of that FBI 
source. But until he was arrested, I did not know his name.
  The FBI said the same to Congress and used the credibility of that 
source, the credibility assessment of that individual, to withhold the 
1023 from Congress when we first asked for it. Even Ranking Member 
Raskin of the House Committee confirmed that the FBI told Congress that 
the FBI source was credible.
  The FBI found their source so credible that the FBI gave their source 
the authority even to engage in illegal activity for the FBI's criminal 
investigation. And, yes, I want to make clear: The FBI said that he 
could do illegal things in his work for the FBI. The FBI told him that 
he may even have to testify in court based on the information he 
provided.
  In fact, the FBI said that this source was so credible that the 
public release of the unclassified 1023 could put his life at risk, 
another excuse that they used.
  Now let me be clear: The FBI consistently and publicly vouched for 
their source. Then the other week, the Biden Justice made this source's 
name public for the world to see. So if you watch television, you get 
his name off of television. Apparently, the FBI's excuse to withhold 
the document from Congress, as you can see, was pure smoke. Remember, 
the FBI said releasing the 1023 could put their confidential human 
source's life in danger.
  The FBI's conduct is, of course, obviously absurd and a disservice to 
the American people--that means a disservice to the American people 
when the FBI doesn't do its job of following up on investigative 
reports, as they didn't in this case for 3 years.
  So you can see those same whistleblowers were right about the FBI 
believing that their source was credible. Whistleblower said the FBI's 
source served as a source for many years, dating to the Obama 
administration. According to the Justice Department indictment, the 
FBI's source worked for the Federal Government and was paid by the 
Federal Government since 2010. So, again, those whistleblowers at the 
Justice Department were right.
  Whistleblowers said the FBI failed to investigate the allegations in 
the document. So let me refresh this history by giving the timeline: 
According to the Justice Department indictment, the FBI finally 
interviewed the FBI source on September 27 last year. We made the 1023 
public just a few months prior on July 20, 2023.
  Clearly, the FBI finally acted because of our release of the 
document. In other words, we embarrassed them. And by that time, as I 
have said, by my timeline, the document was over 3 years old--3 years 
they didn't do their job that the FBI ought to have been following up 
on.
  So the 1023 sat with the FBI collecting dust until we in Congress 
acted. My releasing the 1023 got the FBI to do its job that they should 
have been doing 3 years before. So I think it is legitimate in this 
political climate we are in this year, a presidential year, to ask the 
question: Would Special Counsel Jack Smith have waited years to act if 
the 1023 was about former President Trump?
  Those whistleblowers were right about the FBI's failure to 
investigate. I started my oversight relating to the FBI's failure to 
investigate the 1023 on October 13, 2022. So I didn't have the document 
in my possession. I knew about it from the whistleblowers, but what 
information I got from the whistleblowers was without actually reading 
the document.
  I sent a letter to Attorney General Garland, Director Wray, and U.S. 
Attorney Weiss to ask this very simple question:

       What have the FBI and the Justice Department, to include 
     U.S. Attorney Weiss, done to investigate?

  I also asked for an array of documents, including travel documents 
that the Justice Department has used to indict the source, and I also 
asked, before I had read the document, for the same records. Again, 
this would have been after we released the document, so I correct 
myself. I asked for the same records again on October 24, 2023.

  I said this on May 3, a year earlier:

       What we don't know is what, if anything, the FBI has done 
     to verify these claims or investigate further.

  I asked on May 5, 2023, about the 1023:

       I wish I could say I knew it was true or untrue.

  On May 9, 2023, I said:

       My focus right now is on the FBI and the Department of 
     Justice. What have they done with this [1023] document?

  On June 1, 2023, I said:

       We're responsible for making sure the FBI does its job, and 
     that's what we want to know.

  I came to this floor of the Senate on June 12, 2023, to say to my 
colleagues this:

       Here, with this 1023 document I've been referring to 
     throughout my remarks, the Biden Justice Department and FBI 
     must explain to Congress and the American people what, if 
     anything, they have done with this information. And they need 
     to show their work. We are not accepting their word anymore. 
     We are seeking documentary proof of what they did to 
     investigate the matter or their failure to do so.

  Then, after Comer and I publicly released the document, I said this 
on July 25, 2023:

       I want to make clear what my oversight focus is and will 
     be: holding the Biden Justice Department and FBI accountable 
     to explain to the American people what they did to 
     investigate and what they found.
       What did the Justice Department and FBI do to investigate 
     the information contained in the 1023? Did the Justice 
     Department and [the] FBI follow normal investigative process 
     and procedure or try to sweep it all under the rug because of 
     political bias? More precisely, did the FBI and DOJ seek to 
     obtain the evidence referenced in the document?
       Did [the Department of Justice] and FBI seek to interview 
     individuals relating to the 1023? If not, why not? If so, one 
     way or the other, what did they find?

  And that is the end of the quote from what I said here on the floor 
of the Senate last year on this very subject.
  Let me say that one line again so everyone hears me. ``One way or the 
other, what did they'' meaning the FBI, ``find?''
  All of these partisan media outlets, if they had a shred of 
intellectual honesty and decency, would report these facts and hold the 
FBI accountable for their failures. And, of course, one congressional 
request after another went unanswered by the Justice Department and the 
FBI.
  So, considering that deafening silence and the FBI's assertions that 
the source was credible, we made the 1023 public to force the FBI to do 
what they are paid to do--to do their job. They were supposed to be 
investigating this matter 3 years ago and doing it not for Chuck 
Grassley but for the American people.
  If Congress didn't ask for transparency and accountability--in other 
words, we in the Congress doing our oversight work--we would break 
faith with the American people, just like the FBI that didn't do its 
job and broke faith with the American people.
  And do you know what else? The Biden administration hasn't answered 
my and Senator Johnson's oversight requests. Let's not forget, there is 
a larger investigative picture here other than just 1023. Senator 
Johnson and I released two reports in 2020 as part of our Biden family 
investigation. We

[[Page S1003]]

gave a series of floor speeches introducing bank records connecting the 
Biden family to communist China financial interests. Then, on October 
26, 2022, we sent hundreds of pages of those bank records to U.S. 
Attorney Weiss.
  So then this question is appropriate: To my Democratic colleagues 
and, more importantly, the partisan media that is not doing their job, 
are those authentic bank records that Johnson and I made public--is 
that Russian disinformation?
  Now, Chairmen Comer, Jordan, and Smith have built and advanced upon 
the foundation created by Senator Johnson and this Senator.
  So here is the question: Where is the Biden Justice Department 
regarding those bank records and potential money laundering?
  Where is the Biden Justice Department regarding Biden family members 
registering under the Foreign Agents Registration Act?
  Another question: The Biden Justice Department appears concerned 
about their FBI source's contact with foreign nationals; so where is 
that same concern regarding the Biden family's foreign connections? Are 
the Justice Department and FBI sitting on it just like they did with 
the 1023 for at least 3 years?
  Here is another question to pose to the media and my colleagues: If 
we didn't make the 1023 public, would the FBI have interviewed the FBI 
source or would he remain on the taxpayers' payroll for another 10 
years, continuing to misinform the FBI? And by misinforming, I presume 
that is the reason why he is sitting in jail right now in Los Angeles, 
awaiting trial or waiting on whatever they have to do to follow up on 
the arrest.
  What will happen to the defendants if this source's information was 
used for a conviction or a plea deal?
  This is really quite the mess for the Justice Department and the FBI, 
and it is one of their own making.
  My oversight investigations are done without regard to power, party, 
or privilege, and I back that statement up with asking you to remember, 
I am the Senator who did a transcribed interview with Donald Trump, 
Jr., when Donald Trump was President of the United States. That is when 
I was chairman of the Judiciary Committee. I also ordered my staff to 
interview other Republicans during my Crossfire Hurricane 
investigation, and you know what? If I had the gavel today, I would 
bring more Bidens to Congress to testify because the American people 
really deserve the kind of nonpartisan oversight that I have been 
conducting for years.
  And remember this--and it is pretty simple--If the FBI came clean 
years ago about this document 1023, we wouldn't have had to release 
that very document. I wouldn't have had to rely on whistleblowers to 
make this public. So this guy still could be working for the FBI for 
another 10 years.

  Instead, these people played games, withheld the document from 
Congress, and provided false and misleading information to Congress and 
the American people, not wanting to come clean on what they did with 
1023.
  We all know that transparency in government brings accountability. 
Now, folks are being held accountable because of my congressional 
oversight.
  My oversight will continue.
  The FBI has a lot of explaining to do for their continued 
shortcomings and actions in this case.
  When will the media ask the FBI to explain?
  I just explained it for the American people. I would like to see the 
media cover this instead of talking about Russian disinformation when 
this issue is discussed in print media and on television.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that that I be 
permitted to speak for up to 40 minutes and Senator Peters be permitted 
to speak up to 3 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.