Transcripts For CSPAN2 Part 1 Former FBI Director James Comey Testifies On Review Of FBI Russia... 20240712

The steel dossier and foreign interference in u. S. Elections. This is three hours and 45 minutes. Thank you for coming and we will get started with of the the hearing. I want to thank mr. James comey, the former director of the fbi, for appearing today before the committee to talk with us about crossfire hurricane and anything else the committee would like to speak with him about. So, to give a little brief introduction of why we are here and what we are trying to accomplish, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act s a tool that has been around for a very long time for our Intelligence Community, the fbi, to make sure when Foreign Agents, terrorists or agents of a Foreign Government are in our country, they can be surveilled if they are doing things that are threatening to the National Security. I think this legislation goes all the way back t to the 70s, iand its been used a lot. Its been used in tariff cases when wee suspect someone of beig a terrorist under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, we had the Legal Authority to survey all those people and you can get a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to actually follow an individual around. And i would say at least on our side, the fisa system is very much in jeopardy. The carter page warrant application is very much unnerving. The crossfire hurricane, crossfire razor investigations. I think its really shaken confidence in the system. And my goal as chair man and this will go into the next congress, no matter who is in charge, senator feinstein is that fisa needs to be reauthorized but right now, without substantial reform, i dont think we can get it reauthorized. And my goal is to understand how the system failed, how it got off the rails and be able to assure the American People and ourselves that what happened here will not happen again. So, the horwitz report is for the basis of what ive been trying to do. Mr. Horwitz is the Inspector General that the department of justice and he did a deep dive into the fisa warrant applications of carter page, ad he found 17 significant errors and admissions and the committee and its work found some other things that were pretty disturbing. So, weve tried t we tried to ue foundational document, the horwitz report, and i want to thank him and his team for their thorough examinationon of the fa carter page warrant application. They found evidence that the primary russian sub source was a single individual and they found interviews in january and march of the sub source where he basically said the dossier, which was central to getting the warrant against carter page, was all talk, hearsay, and quite frankly much worse. We found the primary sub source, a gentle man named igor, was actually suspected of being a russian agent all the way back to 2009. And what happened here is as a result of this information, the fisa court issued an order rebuking the fbi and department of justice conduct. Where is that final paragraph there. This is with the fisa court. The fbis handling of the carter page application has betrayed the report and was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above. But they expect the government to complete information with the filing of the Court Without emphasis of the fisa court cannot properly ensure that the government conduct electronic surveillance or foreign intelligence purposes only when there is a sufficient factual basis. So, we are trying to find out as the committee of oversight and the department of justice and the fbi how this happened and to make sure that it never happens again. So, the basis of the inquiry started with the horowitz report, an independent Agency Within the department of justice,th and we are going to look at the fisa rebuke and see if we can find a way to convince the court in the future that this problem has been solved quite very quickly. Carter page was on the Trump Campaign team. He was on the National Security team, and heres what we learned. If you had a photo with President Trump, you probably spent more time with him than carter page. Carter page is an interesting character, but the fbi sought a fisa warrant against carter page for suspectefour suspected tiesn intelligence operatives. They were unable to get the warrant approved internally, just based on contact with russiann operatives. Mr. Page denied knowing half the people, and there is yet to be any indication that he was lying. And the other group that he was associated with were foreign intelligence operatives of russia but he told the fbi early on, and i was working with the cia, thats why i knew these people. And the cia confirmed to the fbi that was true but later on, they doctored the information comingt over from the cia to say mr. Page was not working with the cia. During the course between october and june, october of 2016 and june of 2017, the dossier thate was central and essential to getting the warra warrant. The point is without the russian steel dossier, there wouldnt have been a warrant because they tried to just based on russian context. It wasnt until it appears on the scene that they were able to go and get a warrant. It was prepared by a man named christopher steel. It was betweenan them to do Opposition Research against candidate trump. We now know that he was suspected by the fbi back to 2009 as being a russian agent and National Security threat to the United States i not only how it became unreliable, but it lost all credibility and the court wasno never told of the information that was obtained between october and june. The fbi ignored exculpatory evidence and altered documents from the cia had interviews with the sub source about the accuracy and never submitted any of that information to the court. This to me is a stunning failure of the system to work. If they are trying to get a warrant against you or your family theres no lawyer there to protect you. The court has to rely on the agents, the department to be honest and forthright when it comes to obtaining a warrant against an american citizen or even in the fisa arena. So here is the question. What do we do when we find that the application relied upon a document that was fundamentally unsound, that the fbi ignored all of the warning signs about the document, misled the court about the author and the reliability of the document, and over andth over and over again t was used to keep an investigation of the american citizens alive that we now know had 17 irregularities. What do we do, we say thats the way it goes. Does anybody get fired or go to jail, and im saying this to my democratic friends. If it happened to us, it can happen to you. Every american should be worried about this. This isnt just an abuse of power against mr. Page and the juTrump Campaign. This is ab system failure. And you could be next. So, the joint effort of the committee in my view should be to make sure that this never happens again starting with finding out who did it, who is responsible. Ne apparently everybody is responsible, but nobody is to blame is not the right answer. So my goal is we will have a deep dive and understand how this happened and working together to assure the American People it never happened and any Political Campaign of any party and that the fisa system can survive this very sad chapter. We are turning the page on a very dangerous chapter in the history of the fisa program and we aread trying to start a new d the only way we can is to find out what happened and hold people accountable. We are not prosecutors. There are people out there that do have prosecutorial authority. Te will let them decide what to do, independent of us, but it is a responsibility of the committee to restore trust in the program that we all need. And we will start that endeavor and continue until we get to the bottom of it. I have two documents i would like to introduce for the record. I have an office of intelligence attorneys statements. This is the doj lawyer that signed off on the fisa application, and the letter says theff attorney advises that hade or she been significant of the errors and admissions identified by the Inspector General and the errors in the process, he or she would not have signed the carter page fisa applications. The attorney further advises he or she is not aware of any omissions in the applications under the crossfire hurricane investigation more than that which were not identified in the report. This is yet another person saying if i knew then what i know now, i wouldnt have signed this report. Horowitz did a really good job. Rosenstein said to this committee, who signed the warrant application, if i knew then what i know now, i wouldnt have signed this application. This is the lawyer preparing it that said the same thing. Thank you. Senator feinstein. Mr. Chair man. May we have copies of that document, please . Yes, we will submit it to heverybody. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We are here today as a part of the chair mans examination of crossfiree hurricane, the fbis russia investigation. The president has long claimed the investigation of the campaign was a witchhunt and a hoax. Contrary to the president s claim of a witchhunt, the department of justice Inspector General, michael horowitz, confirmed in a detailed report that the fbi was justified when it opened the investigation into ties between the Trump Campaign and russia. The fbi learned in july of 2016 that the Trump Campaign appeared to have advanced knowledge of russias plans to release, quote, thousands of emails, to harm Hillary Clinton and help trump. The fbi learned this one week after wikileaks published 20,000 emails russia had stolen from the Democratic National committees hacked computers. The dnc hack and the possibility that the Trump Campaign knew of the plans to interfere in the 2016 election by releasing stolen emails created a significant counterintelligence concern. Mr. Comey has said that the fbi, quote, but have been derelict not to investigate, quote, and i agree. Special Counsel Robert Mueller assumed control of crossfire hurricane after mr. Comey was fired by President Trump. Muellers findings confirmed that the fbi was correct to investigate. Mueller found that the russian government, quote, perceived it would benefit from the Trump Presidency and worked to secure that outcome, quote. And the Trump Campaign knew about, welcomed and, quote, expected it would benefit electorally from russias interference. Mueller also uncovered numerous contacts between thehe Trump Campaigns and individuals linked to russia. For example, mueller found the Trump Campaign manager, paul man afford, gave internal polling data and Campaign Strategies to constantine glu, a russian Intelligence Officer. The Senate Intelligence committee, which i am a member, recently issued the bipartisan finding that man afford was a grave counterintelligence threat because of his ties to russian intelligence. So, think about that for a moment. Thebe president s campaign manar had tieses to russian intelligee and could have used them to share confidential campaign information. Mr. Chairman, of course the fbi should have investigated. Unfortunately, the president and his allies have been trying to rewrite the russia investigation since the day that it concluded. Theyey have seized on errors in the fbis applications for fisa surveillance on carter page. To assert that the entire Russian Investigation was corrupt. Those errors were serious, but the errors and the socalled steel dossier and this is important played no part in the broader russia investigation. This was confirmed by Inspector General horowitz and former Deputy Attorney general rod rosenstein, who told the committee that none of the Mueller Reports findings of criminal charges rely on the steel dossier, none of them. President trump anpresident trus also claim that the Russian Investigation was a political witchhunt overseen by investigators who hated the president. But Inspector General horowitzwt found no evidence that political bias impacted the crossfire hurricane, and none of the ten witnesses the committee has interviewed during the chair mans investigation provided such evidence either. We should not ignore or excuse what happened in 2016. Fbi director and the Intelligence Community have warned that russia is interfering in w the 2020 electn with the aim of denigrating Vice President biden. We should condemn russias current and past interference, not downplay it, and we should insist that the president reject russias interference as well. Thank you, mr. Chair man. Thank you, mr. Feinstein. As mr. Comey, is the Technology Working today . Mr. Comey . You want to put him up on the screen . Mr. Comey, could you speak, please . I can hear you. Okay, great. Thank you. Will he be on the screen . [inaudible] can you count to ten for us please. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Well, you did your part, i dont know there we go. Eleven must have been the right magic number. Raise your right hand, please. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give the committee is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god . I do. If you would like to make an opening statement, you may. I am ready for your questions. Thank you very much. I will take a little more than five minutes here but we will try to plumb through it. Mr. Comey, on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the topoftheline great, how would you rate the crossfire hurricane investigation in terms of being done thoroughly, by the book and in investigation the fbi should be proud of . Im not sure i can apply a number scale, but it was done by the book, it was appropriate and essential that ite, be done. So youre proud of it . Overall im proud of the work. There are parts of it that are concerning which im sure we will talk about, but overall, im proud of it. Sounds good. When did you first learned of thlearn of theexistence of the r lacks. Sometime towards the end of september of 2016. Do you agree with mr. Horovitz that the dossier was central and essential to the carter page fisa warrant application being approved . I agree that it was important. I cant tell you whether it was essential. And by that, i mean, it wouldnt have been granted without the information. Lets go through the application. Theres two parts of the application. Was there an effort to get a warrant approved without using the dossier . Yes, my understanding is in the summer they asked the doj if they would support moving forward on the warrant application. And they said no, right . That is my understanding. Then you and the dossier and all of a sudden they say yes. Is that a fair statement . I think it is fair to say the doj decided to move forward after the information was part of it. Yes, so i would say that it was central based on that. Now, heresst what i would likeo ask. The context between mr. Page and the alleged russian operatives are one part of the application; is that correct . That is my recollection. Okay. Did mr. Page deny knowing people, that you accused him of having contact with . R. I dont remember. I think the horowitz report says that in the fall of 2016, speaking to an fbi source, he denied knowing certain people, but thats about all i recall. Heres the fact. He denied knowing these people, and the fbi is yet to find any evidence that he was lying. The people that he did have contact with, did he tell the fbi that he was working for the cia and thats why he had contact with these people . I dont remember [inaudible] do you have do you now agree the cia confirmed that mrg them . I know from the horowitz report that the cia confirmed he was what they call a contact. So the fbi in august of 2016 had information from the cia informing the fbi that in fact mr. Page was a resource, did you not know that . I did not know of the nature of his relationship with the cia. Its what i read in the horowitz report. Do you think it would have been fair for the fbi to tell the court that mr. Page had a reason to be talking to these people because he was working with the cia; with that have been a fair thing to tell the court . I donte agree with your characterization of what mr. Horovitz found im talking about you as the director. The fbi has in its possession in august of 2016 information from the cia confirming what mr. Page said, that in fact he was assisting the cia which explained the contacts. There was never given to the court. Should they have been informed of that, because its exculpatory to mr. Page . I believe mr. Horowitz found they should have at least considered it a should you you are the director of the fbi. Would you wish that had been done, that you had known about it . Im sorry, that what had been done . That you had informed the court that mr. Page was, in fact, working with the cia and that explains these contacts . Do you think out of a sense of fairness, the court should have been informed of that fact . Again i dont agree with your preamble. I dont think the record established he was working with the cia. He found he was a contact [inaudible] weve got the email from the cia confirming that he was a source for the cia. Are you aware of the fact that that email later on was doctored . Again, i dont accept what you said. I dont think the record establishes he was a source for the ciaoc why is mr. Kleinsmith facing criminal indictment . I only know what ive read in the Public Record, that he was accused you are the director of the fbi and you didnt know your own agency had information from the cia verifying what mr. Page told you . Shouldfb these contacts at a bas in fact because he was working with the cia, did you know that mr. Kleinsmith doctored the email for it to read that there was no association between page and the cia, that that changed, how do you feel about that . I know nothing about mr. Kleinsmith other than what i read how do you feel in general about an fbi agent doctoring an email exculpatory to somebody being surveilled . Any false statement in the course of an investigation but you didnt know anything about that. Okay. In october when the warrant was submitted, the application was submitted, what information had been made to verify the dossier in october . I dont know specifically. I know that the Intelligence Division was working to see how much they could rule out. Did they stande iruling in and ruling out regarding the dossier . I dont know. You signed the application. Whose job is it to make sure the are right when you present fisa court . Whoever is signing the affidavit does the fbi director have a responsibility to make sure the facts are right when they are given to the court . In general, the fbi director is responsible for everything being done. What we are trying to find is who gave, who provided the information to the fisa court and why was it so flawed can you give me a group of people to look at to hold accountable for misleading the court who should we be looking at. To understand the process you would start with the horowitz report where it accounts the many people in the review production and then the delivery toto the court at this application. But you dont know as the director of the fbi who actually prepared the application; is that correct . I do not. So in october, its clear, mr. Comey, there was no effort to verify the dossier before it was given to the court, do you agree . I dont know the answer to that. Well, thatsif the answer. And in january of 2017, the application was renewed. Did you sign that . I signed a certification in connection, one in january and 13 months later. Are you aware of the fact that between october and january, the fbi had found the russian sub source was on the payroll of mr. Steel and suspected of being a russian spy by the fbi all the way back to 2009 . I dont remember learning anything additional about the sources how can it be, mr. Director, that the fbi, fisa and its file, that the man that prepared the dossier was suspected of being a threat to the National Security, and it doesnt make it up towa you . I dont know. I could speculate, but i dont know. I dont want you to speculate. We will try to figure this out ourselves. Do you know who Christopher Steele was when did you find out who he was . When the steel dossier was briefed to me sometime like i said, i think sometime late september. Were you ever told he hated trump and wanted him to lose and very muchi was down on donald trump as a person lacks. Not that i recall, no. You dont remember briefing the team about his biases and you have to really watch the sky . I dont remember bruce or any do you remember friendly Foreign Governments putting us on notice that he tends to exaggerate and goes off on crusades . Did that make it to you . I dont recall. Okay. Thank you. So, should the court have been informed in a Perfect World that the primary sub source was a suspected russian spy . Att a minimum, they should have discussed whether to inform the court about that. Were you aware that in december of 2016, the cia tells erthe fbi that characterized the dossier as an internet rumor . I dont recall being informed of that. Were you ever told by the cia to be careful of the dossier and steel that this is not good . I dont remember being told anything like that. Okay. So, lets fastforward now. The warrant application is renewed in april, 2017. You signed it on january 12th. You didnt know that the primary sub source was suspected by the fbi of being a russian spy all the way back to 2009. You didnt know that the cia that told the fbi the document was an fbi rumor. Are you aware ofdn the fact the sub source was actually interviewed by the fbi in january, 2017 . I dont remember anything about the sub source. So, as the director was this an important case for the fbi or was this a kind of runofthemill thing . The overarching investigation was very important. The page slice of it was far less you have a sitting president of the United States by january, 2017. You have a dossier that is fallacious as hell and accuses the president of being involved in all kinds of sex exculpateds in russia and a bunch of other stuff. And you keep using that document over and over again to get a warrant, and here is my question. Every time you found information to put the reliability of the dossier in question, everybody seemed to ignore it and so i know in january, you are not aware of the fact that the fbi interviewed the primary sub source, iswa that your testimon . I do not remember being told should you have been told about it . I i cant answer that, becaue i wasnt and so i dont know the considerations were here is what happened. The primary sub source told the fbi in january of 2017, after the dossier had been used twice to get a warrant that the sub source has no idea of some of the language attributed to him came from and that the context never mentioned some of the information attributedo to him and that he didnt know the origins of other information that was supposedly from his contact. He said the statements were wordofmouth and hearsay conversations with friends over beer or statements made in chess that should be taken with a grain of salt. Did any of that ever get to you . Not that i recall. Do you agree thats pretty Important Information concerning the reliability of the dossier . Its information that should be weighed in light of a variety of circumstances. It is inherentlyof exculpato. The person who put the document together is telling the fbi that its bartok, its a grain of salt. They tell the fbi and keep using the same document. You know how they described to the court the sub source, you know what they told the sub source in the s application, tht he was truthful and cooperative. Do you think those terms to the court, truthful andpp cooperati, fairly reflect the interview the fbi conducted in january and march . I know the Inspector General found the disclosure was inadequate in that regard. Not only mr. Comey is it inaccurate, it is criminally inadequate. You have a document essential to getting a warrant against american citizens. Its falling apart. The cia says it is an internet rumor. The person who prepared it was onwa a jihadi against trump on e payroll of the democratic primary, the primary sub source was a russian agent. When that person was interviewed by the fbi, he does about of the reliability of the document to the point that it should never have been used again, and my question is how could the system ignore all of that and how could it be used again in april and again in june; do you know how that is possible . Im not going to respond to your preamble. Mr. Horowitz found that it was not disclosed in a variety of facts were not disclosed. And intentional misconduct but he found concerning failures to disclose. All i can say is there is a duty by the fbi to inform the court of exculpatory information. Theres a heightened duty of candor that includes exculpatory information and anything relevant to the courts consideration. Is it exculpatory for mr. Page for the court to know that when he said the people he met with was a result of him being associated working with the cia, do you think that would have been beneficial to mr. Page . Again, i dont agree with your predicate to the question i cant answer that. Weve got emails and i would be glad to show them about the association of the cia and mr. Page. Do you think it would be fair for only the court tot be told that the primary sub source does about the document as being rumor, bar talk, take half of it with a bar of salt, do you think theme fbi owed it to the court o tell about the stunning revelations . I think mr. Horowitz found a reasonable conclusion that they should have been how can the director of the fbi not know all of this . How is it possible that the system gathers so much exculpatory information. Its internet rumor according to the cia that the actual interview of the sub source disavows the reliability of the document, that the actual sub source was a russian spy. How can that happen and not get up to you, the director of the fbi, one of the most important investigations of the history of the fbi, how is that possible . I can only speculate, because it didnt. And as i said, the investigation overall is important. The piece that you are focused on is important but a much smaller size. Is very important to mr. Page. It should be important to every american. Is there anybody there advocating for mr. Page during the wa warrant process . [inaudible] i just want to understand this, as an x partak ex parte at means that the cops have a duty to tell the court when they find things beneficial to the person under investigation, and over and over again between october and june, all the information found about the dossier made it less reliable, not more reliable, and you kept using again and again and again. The question is was there bias and at what point in time do you putu two and two together that the people behind as he did a trump and the reason they ran all these stop signs, they didnt want to take no for an answer. So do you recall getting an inquiry from the Intelligence Committee in september, 2016 about a concern that the Clinton Campaign was going to create a scandal regarding trump and russia . I do not. You dont remember getting an investigatory lead from the Intelligence Committee hang on a second. I have a document here. September 7th, 2016. The u. S. Intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral of the fbi to the fbi director james comey and assistant director of counterintelligence regarding u. S. President ial candidate Hillary Clintons approval of a plan concerning u. S. President ial candidate donald trump and Russian Hackers tampering u. S. Elections and means of p distracting the publc from her use of a private email server. You dont remember getting that were being talked that doesnt ring a bell lacks. It doesnt ring a bell to me. That is pretty stunning that it doesnt ring a bell, but it did come to you. Lets just end with this, you get this inquiry from the Intelligence Committee to look at the Clinton Campaign, basically trying to create a distraction and using trump as being a russian agent or russian stooge or whatever to distract for your email server problems. How farfetched is that when we now know that the Democratic Party using gps hired Christopher Steele, a Foreign Agent who had a strong bias who hired a russian sub source with the fbi believed to be a russian spy to come highly dossier that was a bunch of crap to be used against an american citizen working for the Trump Campaign. You already knew that, it seems to me you would want to investigate other obligations, but you are telling me that you dont recall. Im sorry, senator. Is there a question . You dont recall this inquiry that i just read about september, 2016. No, as i said do you remember it doesnt sound familiar. Do you remember being told by the Intelligence Committee remember the episode with trump and the hotel . With the hookers and the dossier . I remember that portion. Thats pretty hardok to igno. Do you remember in december the Intelligence Committee basically said a u. S. Intelligence Committee Report contained information about the falsity of the details trumps Sexual Activity in moscow and assessed that they were the product of Russian Intelligence Services and filter infiltrating a source into steals network. So, this is from the horowitz report. In otherra words, the intelligee committee had assessed that the dossier description of a sexual escapade was actually a russian disinformation campaign. Did you know that . I am not familiar with what you are reading. And the horowitz report, i guess what im sayingat is that the report has information they had in the file that the whole scenario with trump and the sexual escapade was russian disinformation and you knew that. And you never told the court. To me, that is something that the court should know. If in fact, the russians had infiltrated steals sources to create this myth about Sexual Misconduct of the president , that, to me, seems for slowing down and stopping, not to keep using the document. All i can say is that you believed that it would be a dereliction of duty not to look at trump and russia. I am not here to argue that nobody should look. Im not here to argue that it was somebody other than the russians who hacked into the dnc. It was the russians. What im here to say is there was ample evidence of the other side being involved with russia to create a scandal around trump. They hired a Foreign Agent on the payroll of the Democratic Party who hired a russian spy to create a document that was absolutely full of misinformation and complete lies. Did you know there is no russian conflict in miami and the dossier mentions that there was one. Shouldnt they have been told part that isnt reliable . Do you also know that the adventures in prague never happened. The dossier asserts that Michael Cohen went to prague on some venture for trump and russia and it never happened. And they know it never happened. They had information from a Foreign Government saying its not true and they never told the court. They never corrected all the misinformation and the dossier. It was used over and over again and they never told the court about how unreliable it was. Is that a small thing or a big thing . Any time there are material omissions and application to a judge of any kind, but especially it is a very important issue. Did you have a duty to look at the allegations regarding russia . And i think i know what you mean. Did you look at allegations of the Trump Campaign being involved with the russians, you have a letter now from radcliffe saying about terry they intercepted information in july where Hillary Clinton approved an effort to link trump to russia and the mob. Did you have an investigation look to see whether that was true . I cant answer that. Ive read the letter which frankly i have trouble understanding. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The president and his allies argue that the fbi should never have investigated the Trump Campaigns ties to russia. However, special counsel mueller and the Senate Intelligence Committee Found that the Trump Campaign manager, Paul Manafort gave internal polling data and Campaign Strategy to a russian Intelligence Officer. The Senate Intelligence committee issued the bipartisan findings that manafort was a great of counterintelligence threat. I would like to put in the record thisor report of the selt committee on intelligence, mr. Chairman. Thank you veryse much. Would you agree that a direct tie between a Campaign Manager and a russian Intelligence Officer is a grave counterintelligence threat . Yes. Could you tell us why, please . Because someone that is occupying the role in the heart of american democracy, running a campaign is in the position to buy information about that campaign and working in the democracy to a foreign adversary. That is the definition of a counterintelligence threat. So you would agree that this type of counterintelligence threat does warrant an investigation. Yes, of course. The Senate Intelligence committee determined that manaforts presence on the campaign and proximity to trump created opportunities for Russian Intelligence Services to exert influence over and acquire confidential information on the Trump Campaign. Does the possibility that Russian Intelligence Services are exerting influence over president ial campaign create a counterintelligence risk that warrants investigation . Yes as the Senate Select committee on intelligence staff. Correct. Thank you. Special counsel mueller found that Michael Cohen, trumps personal attorney, pursued the trump tower moscow project on trumps behalf during the campaign. Is there a counterintelligence concern when a candidate for a Political Office pursues a lucrative business deal in russia at the same time he publicly claims to have zero interest in russia . Yes, because of that ability that offers to a foreign adversary to have leverage over that individual. Correct. Does this type of counterintelligence concern warrant an investigation . It may, depending what facts you have to predicate the investigation. Thank you. You told the Inspector General that you have received no request from the Obama Biden White house to investigate members of the Trump Campaign. Youve also said that if president obama or a member of his administration asks the fbi to investigate the Trump Campaign, your answer would be not only know, but hell no. Did president obama or Vice President biden ever ask you to investigate a political rival were to go easy on a political rival . Never. Why would that have been problematic . Because it would compromise the independence of the Justice Department and fbis work. If it is a criminal case or counterintelligence case, it would introduce politics into which would be a fact driven process. Thank you. U. S. Intelligence has assessed that russia is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President biden, and quote, boost President Trumps candidacy, quote. Fbi director ray said the antibiden efforts have been very active. Has said that he would take damaging information on a political opponent from a foreign adversary and that he would not commit to informing the fbi. He publicly asked china to investigate joe biden and was impeached for pressuring ukraine to investigate biden as well. Are you concerned that trump will embrace and use russian interference efforts to its advantage as he did in 2016 . Im a private citizen now, so das a private citizen, yes. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator grassley. Thank you for your appearance. Onon january 6th, 2017, the obaa administration issues Intelligence Committee assessment on russian interference and that included annex a that said they had identified and unidentified sources relating to the steel reporting and russia investigation. Prior to that, in december, 2016, the fbi had identified steals primaries of source and knew that he was a subject of counterintelligenceha investigation. You either knew or should have known that the primaryub sub source was subject to counterintelligence investigation when you made efforts to include the steel dossier in the assessment. Did you makei any effort to ensure that annex a identified that some sourcing may have been from a suspected russian spy or otherwise unsubstantiated. If not, why not . I dont remember any information reaching me about any investigation of the source of steals, and i know now from the Public Record that there was some investigation back in 2009 and it could cut both ways, so i dont know how the people working on the investigation thought about it. The primary sub source was a suspected russian spy. The sub source disavowed elements related to the dossier. He was subject to a counterintelligence investigation and offered people money for classified information. Shouldnt you have investigated thep primary sub source instead of trump, paige, flynn, papadopoulos, and from whatever else . Im not able to answer that because i do not know the details of the investigation back in 2009. Thanks to the declassified footnotes from the Inspector General, we know the following. One, the fbi knew the russians had the intent to target steel and they had the opportunity to do so by various contacts steel and with russian intelligence. Number three, we see the success of those efforts because some russian disinformation made its way into the steele dossier. It looks like both the Democratic National committee and Russian Intelligence Services manipulated the fbi under your watch. How could the worlds premier Law Enforcement agency miss all of these signs . Im sorry, senator. I disagree with a lot of the aspects of your preamble, so i cant answer that. Well, it sounds to me like you should have known, and it pretty much speaks for itself that may be you arent on top of things the way you should have been. Question number four. On february 14th, 2017, you met with the president and he allegedly asked you to let lynns case go. In any of your meetings with President Trump, did you inform him that the Michael Flynn case was supposed to be closed on january 4th, 2017, and if not, why not . I dont think i had any conversation with President Trump about Michael Flynns case except february 14th, the let it go conversation. If you had that conversation, then couldnt you have informed him that the case was supposed to be closed on january 4th, 2017 . I dont know why that would be a relevant fact for any conversation about him lying to the fbi. On january 12, 2017, email to James Klapper you stated, quote, we have concluded that the source crown is reliable. On january 12, 2017, the fbi received a report outlining in accurately relating to steeles reporting about Michael Cohen. The report also assessed that the information was part of a russian disinformation campaign. That same day, you signed a fisa renewal. The fbi received another report on february 207th, 2017 that also stated parts of the dossier were false and subject to russian disinformation. You signed another fisa renewal on april 5th, 2017. Steele is clearly not a reliable source. Why did you say otherwise, and why did you approve the fisa application in light of the evidencepp lacks. What i said about mr. Steele thatn you read the beginning of the preamble is what i believed based on what i had been told, and the rest of the reports you listed i dont remember learnig about them or being told about them, so i cant comment on whether they are accurate. Did you ever speak with president obama or Vice President biden about any aspect of crossfire hurricane; if so, what did you discuss . And to urge me to do the case in the normal way and to let him know if there is any reason that he should not be sharing Sensitive Information about russia with the trump transition. I assured him i would and i would conduct the investigation in that way. During the january 5t january 5th, 2017 meeting between obama and Vice President biden and sally yates and susan rice, did you mention flynns calls with the Russian Ambassador year legit quote unquote . I remember using the word i would have meant authentic and not fabricated but not appropriate i remember using that word. This seems more like President Trumps reelection effort with some and the committee. But realize the president does not pay taxes the economy has no time to address the pandemic taking more than 200,000 american lives. With this leftdoublequote nominee on the eve of a president ial election just a few days with us the court with millions of americans with healthcare. And then once again the investigators to raising the attack on the 2016 elections and then with the Senate Judiciary committee have never seen appropriate with any Election Committee or any others we should not be debating ourselves this way. Director colby we have known each other for a long time. Served as democratic and vrepublican administrations by express my strong disagreements as the npi director but also you any unprecedented situation. I never questioned your integrity for your loyalty to the law or the country. Ty now those that pay bounties to killer troops it seems that President Trump is incapable of criticizing so that investigation deciding not to look into the financial situation with the president of russia despite it would be relevant to the central investigation we now know President Trump is 1 million and that in 2014 the president son said the Trump Organization to not get the money from american banks and said received out of russia statement. Trump you said anything is possible may have something over the president. Why do you think thats a possibility . Have never felt this way about an american president quick. Have never felt that way of an american president i dont know if the russians have something over President Trump is difficult to explain his conduct t in his statements in any other way especially the crudest one , criticize potent even in Public Service questions are only deepened by disclosure if it is true of. Ignificant indebtedness based on your experience, thank you. Reporting over the objections the director of National Intelligence radcliffe with this information of secretary clinton it was rejected by the republicanled Senate Intelligence committee. Mr. Radcliffe refuses to testify in public. Are you concerned mr. Comey that these leaders were handpicked for loyalty with amazing by holding intelligence assessments . I understand his letter well enough to comment i think what is unverified information i really dont know what he is doing. I see my colleagues on the other side talking about the election now theyre saying that russia is trying to interfere in the 2020 election. Fbi director said the russians are very active in their efforts for the 2020 election. If you had toer convey one message to the American People message to the American People . Know that a nation that does o not have americas best interest at heart wasfe reelected donald trump. Let that sink in and guide how we should conduct ourselves going forward. Thank you. The National Security advisor was pressed by the judge with a hearing at the white house initially failing tohi claim executive privilege and to save is not receiving special treatment and then it was too cold in flynn talking to a Trump Campaign lawyer about the issue as well with the trump election effort. What is the disclosure of the Trump Administration for the Law Enforcement responsibilities . I watch this as a private citizen with the pleadings regarding former National Security advisor flynn and the departments conduct is deeply concerning because hes treated in a way nobody has been treated before. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, i have other questions for the record. Absolutely. Director comey is it appropriate for the fbi to influence a president ial election . The fbi should avoid having any impact of any kind including president ial. Are you aware of the allegation of you handling the Hillary Clinton email investigation and press conference on joyful and subsequent announcementarar basd on Anthony Weiners laptop that you are reopening that investigation leading up to the election are you aware of the allegation you are responsible for Hillary Clintons defeat . Yes. Im aware of that allegation. Does that concern you . It concerns me anybody has questions if the fbi is conducting themselves in the honest way. Did you call the steel dossier salacious and unverified. I said some of that had activity. You do not refer to it is unverified . I think salacious is not all that important but i think i reserve that for the sex part the entire dossier is what we were trying to about so to the fbi it was and when they came in the door and it was an effort to see what was true and what was not. Short of its report, are you aware ofto any verification of the steel dossier by the fbi . And understand the question. I apologize. We had a comprehensive report from Inspector General words on the steel dossier but before the Inspector Generals report which tells us what we know now, did you know that the information reported by inspector horwitz phrase questions about the reliability of the steel dossier . I learned a lot about the material and the sub source interviews from its report that i did not know before. And you will about the possibility the crossfire hurricane investigation was predicated in part on russian disinformationon . I think your colleagues on the Senate Intelligence committee and the Mueller Report and Inspector General found it was predicated information from friendly for nation ambassador. So for now we know the sub source for the steel where the steel dossier was a russian agen agent, that doesnt taint the basis for investigation . I dont agree with your publication with respect to the fbi investigation of the sub source but it wasnt based from steel bar and allied ambassador about something the trump foreignpolicy advisor said in london about the russian author to the campaign then of Hillary Clinton it wasnt until two months later the steel material came to the team. The steel dossier was used to secure the fisa warrant. Correct . Correct. In january after the election Intelligence Committee submitted an assessment. Do you recall that quick. I do from january 6 or fifth. I think thats why do we call a discussion between you and the cia whether the steel dossier should be included as part of the Intelligence Community assessment . I remember some interaction with the fellow leaders is agencies a part of that assessment i remember email or on themu phone were contributing the server and how they would approach it. You recalled director brandon said it should not be included because it has not been verified . I was brennan i was told the groups view was it was significant enough and consistent of the other intelligences should be included not corroborated to be in the body of the assessment so that a brief in. Mary of a in the annex you are where we tried to reauthorize laws like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which is l essential to our ability to protect the National Security of the United States, there are members of this body the question if congress should have that authority because they think those tools will be abuse abused. I have participated in those debates throughout my career. I know you have. Does it concern you as a former leader in the Intelligence Community that the questions that have, as the Inspector General report what we know now about the pause of the crossfire hurricane investigationws including the use of the steel dossier and less than complete Accurate Information of an attorney as part of the advocate, does that concern you the questions raised to make it harder or impossible for congress to come together to reauthorize important tools like the fisa act . Yes it concerns me even more the Inspector General found in every application he reviewed well beyond what we are talking about. Yes it concerns me. Senator durbin. Thank you mr. Chairman. s personal debt in a important consideration when an individual is seeking security clearance . Yes. Why . Because a persons financial situation can make them for the world to coercion by an adversary to Foreign Government officials we find indebted to recruit them to our side. It is a serious issuedd. Someone with substantial personal debt could be substantial to influence by a foreign adversary. A government official. Its been public reporting President Trump has a debt of over 421 million, personal debt most of which has to be repaid in the next few years resource new york times, septe times, september 27th. Are they are serious risks when someone has hundreds of millions of personal that and has access to all the classified information . It is a serious concern if anyone has the financialal o ability i dont know the president s case but in general, yes. If he disclosed his income tax returns maybe we would know more. Mrs. And Important Committee history to point of the Senate Judiciary committee was a leading Investigative Committee coming senate itted states is entirely appropriate we are meeting today to discuss russian influence on American Elections i cannot think of anything more insidious than Vladimir Putin to affect the outcome of the election to the verdict of democracy a problem today with focusing on the wrong election with focusing 2016 instead of 2020 that is five weeks away. Fbi director ray testified earlier this month russia is very active in the 2020 election and is exerting maligned foreign influence an effort to hurt the Biden Campaign to record. That would seem to be something the Senate Judiciary committee would be interested in not only a possibility of interference with American People voting in the United States but coming from a foreign source of russia when they have their favorite in the race that seems to be the usincumbent president. But yet we dont look at that today but a trip down memory lane four years ago to decide whether or not certain documents are handled properly. I will concede, some were not. Lets be honest. We were doing your job will be talking about the 2020 election america law is adequate to discourage intervention and what steps we take as a nation to protect the integrity of the election process. We are not doing that because the agenda is a dossier written five or six years ago that is of interest to some but not most of the American People. Comes down to fundamental questions. Free are embarking on this escapade what preceded the russian interference in our election when we wouldnt reject effort to include the poem in fort Campaign Manager papers . Why would we subpoena them but this committee decided not to. Not interested. We were lots of questions today for director comey with you read every document and when and what impact it had on him but when it came to the two key witnesses whose names appear over and over and over in the russian interference of the 2016 election this party willll this committee rejected subpoena of these two individuals. Is there information we dont want to know . I think there is a lot of questions unanswered. So the notion of the steel dossier, was that the reason the fbi began looking into russian interference in the 2016 election . No. Are you aware director comey not one of the 37 indictments of the 199 criminal counts resulting from the Mueller Investigation relied on the steel dossier . Ri i read that. That makes the case all of this attention is as fascinating as it may be does not have direct relevance on the conclusion russians are interfering or the indictments are followed from the Mueller Investigation. Let me ask with the statement made by the attorney general on may 18 the attorney general gave a press conference and said what happened to the president of the 2016 election throughout the first two years of his administration was important grave injusticelele oe aberrant and that the Law Enforcement and intelligence apparatus weret involved in advancing a false and baseless narrative against the president then he went on to say. The proper investigative standards of the department of justice were abused in my view in order to reach a particular result. Comey comment on that statement that the men and women of the Justice Department . You said that a lot i know what on earth hes talking about. This is an investigation predicated and opened that had to be opened and conducted in the right way picked up with a special counsel by dozens of people in a finding by your colleagues in the senate the head of Trumps Campaign was a grave counterintelligence threat to the United States of america because he was giving in her information to a known Intelligence Officer they alieve that wasnt legitimate thing to investigate mystifies me. Just about the committee im not here to suggest the russians and i interfere the 2016 election. They did. With a try to interfere in 2020 . They did. They are. Is china . Yes. We have had briefings about it. I am concerned about it but i supported legislation with my colleagues s on both sides of the aisle to make sure mr. Mueller to do his job without political interference. After two and half years and 25,000,000. 60 fbi agents that job is done not one person has been charged with colluding with the russians in the trump world. Not one. Now, when we look into the work product and i have asked mr. Mueller to come and tell us about the Mueller Investigation. He has chosen not to come into a mr. Wiseman to come i would invite him the committee is trying to save the fisa system the fisa warrant application against carter page should make every american concerned how off the rails the system got. The document necessary together for the warrant against an american citizen was prepared by somebody on the democratic payroll who hired a russian suspected spy and all the information in the dossier fell apart over time in the court was never informed of this commentary evidenced is what astounds me the most is the director of the fbi in charge of this investigation with a sitting president is completely clueless about any information obtained by his agency with suspicion over the document is a suspected russian agent. He said it was all hearsay should be taken with a grain of salt the cia said internet rumor how is a none of this information that is damning to the case against mr. Paige never makes it to the top and you want me to authorize this with a system like that . Everybody is responsible that nobody is. Somebody needs to be responsible for misleading the recourt with colluding information to the court that was exculpatory would have mattered. How would you like your client to be treated like this . My point is i am trying my best to understand how the warrant application failed so many times, how the court was abused over months and nobody seems to be as concerned about it as im. Count me in about concerned about russian interference in 2016 and 2020 but if the committee does nothing else , it is up to us to find out how to go off the rails and how a document that was exculpatory to the subject of the investigation be charged with a crime. How could that happen if there are no checks and balances if theres no duty to be candid with the t court for something exculpatory how do you present a document full of information . The russian consulate in miami . You du had information and nevr made it to the court how are we supposed to trust the system without fundamentally changing and Holding People accountable . One last s question to you director comey. Knowing then what you know now about all the things we have come to find would you have still signed the warrant application against carter page. No i would want a much more complete understanding. Thank you very much. Senator lee. That technical thing but when you speak of the witness your voice blacks out on blocks outaiai what the witness said sorbet hopeful in a regular hearing. Can you repeat your answer . Im sorry. Repeat your answer. The answer is no, not without a much more discussion to the court. Thank you very much. Thank you senator white hous house. Thank you mr. Chairman. An issue that has concerned me a long time the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has problems. They have been on live display today over the last few year years, and over the last decade to reforms them. To have a number of muscles to do precisely that most recently with the amendment passing the senate and would have passed the house canceled i hope to get that passed. It is a dangerous thing to have enormous investigative power for the United States government with that authority in a private set of secret proceedings we have to reform them. I remember mr. Comey when first nominatedom i had been in the senate a few years by then i had had a lot of previous interactions with you. But i knew you and i thought i knew you well. I remember fondly interaction with you as a young prosecutor. Visiting the Us Attorneys Office in Salt Lake City hou and gave us an encouraging speech in which you gave your heartfelt sentiments of what it means to be an assistant United States attorney. I remember specifically your admonition its important in a job like that to see things that people shouldnt have to see its important to. Your eyes and cross your tease. I remember something inspiring you said serving as a Deputy Attorney general or the Criminal Division im not sure which come in the middle of the night if someone woke me up and said who are you . I would identify myself as assistant United States attorney because deep down thats who i am. That inspired me for many years a level of commitment as a representative of the government to make sure i was the row for that reason when you are nominated to the position of fbi director, even though i had grave concerns with the fbi how it was administering fisa at the time i trusted you believing you would act in goodit faith when asked you in my office and in Committee Hearings in your confirmation hearing and all subsequent oversight hearings what you would do to help make sure the fisa process was respected and are manipulated and you gave me your word establishing a brief relationship with you i trusted you. Today im very disappointed to see that those promises announced to me seemed very insecure so with all due respect you dont seem to know anything about an investigation that you ran. So now how can you as a private citizen and former fbi director show up and then speculate freely any alleged ties between president putin and President Trump . I heard you say a moment ago please correct p me, i think i heard you say you still speculate they may have something on President Trump because of how he refers or doesnt refer to president clinton in public. This takes into account one president ten in public. You did not identify the inaccuracies subsequently to the fisa court. Acknowledges nothing and why leading to a leader in a certain tone when the fact this is the song one the same tone trying to other world leadersor we have had some issues. So obviously, how can you as a private citizen come to us now in your capacity as former fbi director to speculate the alleged ties . You dont seem to know anything about this investigation that youou ran. Im sorry senator as a private citizen i have eyes and ears that is how it strikes me watching thend president against his own Intelligence Community so i separate the two i agree there are serious reasons to worry about the fisa process l the Inspector General found errors in every application thats important thing to dig into. Im glad to hear we sure thats in common so when do you not thank you have a duty to provide all the information to the fisa court . You signed the renewal application did you not . The certification is very narrow. What does that mean cracks what the heck does the certification mean . If you did not know what was in there . It had no duty to provide all the information to the court what does certification mean . The certification is narrow that doesnt change the fact the fbi has a duty of heightened candor to the pfizer on the fisa court and that was not met not based on those i individual investigations i know people care aboutl that but why were they are material omissions from all applications at the Inspector General lookedth at that is an important question. The only reason that i did this come i am confident withinnt one of the reasons we know that and then to see tlitical motives coming into consideration. But in many instances not to have any chance of getting caught they believe Hillary Clinton would win and in all probability none of this would light how does this strike the American People the average citizen knowing that any american citizen and then become the subject of the investigation rooted in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act never comes to a in the circumstance there was is a possibility and it did because the individual connected to the investigation became president despite the best efforts of those conducting the investigation. How do we have any confidence in the pfizer process when certifications were provided . On the duty of candor to the court was not met and no one seems to take accountability for anything in the entire process is handled in secret with the malleable standard almost without accountability. Should they have any confidence in the fisa court for those government lawyers appearing before us . I will not address the long preamble i have a significant disagreement with. The American People should always know how the governments powers are used especially in secret. How is it checked, overseen, balanced. And we know because you have been around, periodically we discover problems with any expert to process the American People should have confidence that the Inspector General especially in this committee that is totally appropriate. My time is expired you dont put a nest in your childs bedroom in the be surprised when the wasp bites the child you dont take that expert a process and then express surprise and outrage when it goes completely unsupervised it off the rails is one that neither you nor conservative they constitutional issue a moral issue we have big problems and we need to reform or eliminate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act thank you. Mr. Chairman i am particularly sensitive with that declassification because i have to go through being on the receiving end with the Intelligence Committee and i will tell you it is extremely frustrating to have that information declassified out of the white house that is completely blown up that has not been declassified to declassify information so i hope nobody had a hand in generating this letter we were recipients only but with wirespect with the dnc that is an establisheded fact with a from the advisor claiming interference by the Russian Security services that is an established fact and he was president ial candidate and hackers hampering us elections is also an established fact. And now is being offered to the committee this brings bells about the dangers of the selected declassification. Second, and we have made public statements of the fbi appears to have a policy released a pattern to refusing to answer question or q f r. And you take that claim seriously enough with the Deputy Attorney general and on june 15 here we are nearly into october do know how many answers i have gotten since that meeting . Zero not a single one so the doj. Giving the unprecedented access including deliberative documents and 18 supper productions with those 550 pages so that seems to be getting highspeed special treatment when in other areas there is a complete wall of silence and shutdown. And that they invited to participate and dishonorable and unfair access to documents and our partisan private briefings coming back to my letter to you of june 4th about the hazards of this investigation. I just needed to say that i agree with you mr. Chairman it is worth looking into the question what is going on with the fisati process across a whole array of cases. But it is also interesting to read the paper retired federal judge on behalf of a federal judge accuse the department of justice under the attorney general to run political errands for the president to protect the political supporter and friend of his mr. Flynn and even attention is paid to that that is a fairly serious matter of interest equivalent to pfizer but nothing the current fbi director talks about present russian interferenceth in this election right now as we speak electedresident trump where is the hearing on that . Where is the documents on that wheres the declassified material on that . None of that. Because i dont have any information the fbi has given me none, it appears to be a bogus tip line in the kavanaugh investigation. Maybe it was are not but i think that is something worth answering. And yes it is important so it does stand in sharp contrast to other issues with the fbi that are swept under the rug and continually stonewalls modesto mold. I will ask again because direct economy has done a lot of investigations. If you have an investigation and determined with the oversight if there is a flaw or the omission in the warrant application obviously you should not file that with the court. The problem is they always ended their they would not sit if that was the case and then just because there is a flaw doesnt mean you and the investigation. You are nodding your head. You agree that the end of the day to look at whether the investigation was otherwise predicated and everything accurate needs to be done and if then there was probable cause do you then not proceed with the investigation with a cleaned up warrant rather than get off scott free for something that never reach the court . That is called the franks process to establish probable cause. That is a standard fbi practice . Across the board. Thank you. Center white house it has reason to be concerned from testimony in the department of justice official and we will keep plugging away with a legitimate inquiry. Just to be clear, yes im very concerned of the antitrust investigation and was behind it to violate those rules and norms and with that antitrust investigation it was supposed to be today but i gather indefinitely postponed i hope you get thosese documents the list again to the Deputy Attorney general of all the cure for our and questions and answers goes well beyond that one issue of fake investigation of the auto companies. Just to make it clear the carter page warrant application was incredibly flawed doesnt mean you cant look at other things. The question for me has always been, work at all things trump and the dossier accuse carter page to have a relationship with manafort carter page never talk to manafort. Its the things the court should know and allegations being made. Dossier wasthe for russian disinformation the fbi took russian disinformation from a Political Party and got a warrant against an american citizen and that is pretty stunning. Somebody needs to go to jail i get fired over that. Did the fbi have the same zeal looking at trump . Peoples lives were turned upside down nobles overcharge with colluding with questions on the trump m side. With the other side involved to create a problem for political purposes . We know Christopher Steele was on the payroll of the Democratic Party. He was working with fusion gps working with the russian spy if he was willing to do that would you do more . There is an intercept out there russian Intelligence Analyst the Clinton Campaign has a strategy to try trump to pressure. Did they look at that . Director paul me has told me he doesnt remember getting the inquiry from the Intelligence Community about tas the Clinton Campaign to change the subject of the server to trump russia. He doesnt remember that. What kind of system do we have . All things trump all the time that wewe keep looking when we are told is not reliable we keep using it and there are suggestions the other side is up to no good we ignore it thats why it is important to be beginning to understand there was a twotiered system with trump there was no rules ignore everything like if you need to handle or documents. And clinton it is a completely different standard knowing the campaign had on its payroll a four oh one a former agenti to get the dirt on trump. That is a concern i have. We cannot live in a world where you turn the world upside down against one campaign and give a other campaign a complete pass amgarding russia. Since you responded to me may i have a moment . Be brief. If you look at the radcliffe letter if that is to be believed at all and then to be scheming in the election nor the Trump Campaign. Okay great. That predicated back seems to be the established truth and what director ray is saying right now and what was said all along. So to call a campaigns effort to blow the whistle on the other side to support the candidate with the actual efforts to do that they are not the same thing. I have a completely different view of. All i know is the cia built that obama needed to know about this and i take a completely different they tied it to trump for their political strategy. Since i was brought up a want to respond to the point senator white house originally scheduled the oversightt hearing for today and that could not occur to be in Constant Contact with the assistant attorneyve general who is an outstanding lawyer that ive known for 20 years and know perhaps we see that differently not only willing but eager to come and testify to set the record straight on these issues. He has responded to your letter and also told me last night there are more documents he just sent you are are about you. Nd this is saying evasive what has he notg answered . To my knowledgeas he has responded you might not like those that i will get you the list. We will resolve this. Its important that we do this. But i want them to come in and i have the chance to do a question for a meaningful hearing t. I get that. Maybe you can help us with the ranking on the subcommittee i was willing to do it tomorrow or any day next week. It looks like webe will be back. Its important we go forward major tech investigations the head of the ftc and antitrust division so i hope we can eschedule this. It is unfortunate it got canceled because of this hearing. I thinktu this hearing is important in yours is important. Somehow we will get there. Thank you mr. Chairman. Returning to mr. Comey, you testified earlier today and then not to operate in a competent and honest way. The way they handled the Russian Investigation of the campaign and the microphone investigation was a handled in a competent and honest way . There was knowledge of the Trump Campaign of that overall investigation with the russian interferencef to be conducted in the independent way. You are saying that i assume you have read the report that found 17 significant errors or omissions in the carter page fisa application. So when you view 17 mistakes is competent and honest . I believe they concluded there were lies but significant and important feelings in the way the carter page five as i was paired and renewed. Now go directly to rise. The Inspector General concluded an attorney that work for you and the fbi deliberately altered the email to see if carter it was t tource they said yes he was and then you earlier altered that to add the words not a source to make it say cicely the opportunity of what the cia said in a fraudulent document wasas used as a basis for a fraudulent submission that is honest and competent . I thank you have offered an accurate summary of the finding findings. I have the right in front of me page 254 describes how specifically the words and not a source were inserted in the response directly reversing what the cia says with to fortunately alter evidence that you submit to the federal court . Not to alter anything presented to the court. But the investigation that featured fraudulent evidence is competent and honest. Lets move on to something else. The predicate of this investigation was the steel dossier totally discredited is garbage. And in and it was funded by the dnc and the Clinton Campaign . Your predicate is inaccurate. I first learned of the steel dossier late september 2016 and understood it was funded by political opposition to kennedy trump. I didnt know the specifics of which part of the opposition but it was political Opposition Research funding. When . About the time i was enbriefed maybe the third week of september. You are personally aware of the political oppositionme whether dnc clinton it was the opposing party you are aware ofy y that in september. Why didnt you tell the fisa court you omitted that over and over to the court deserve to know that quick. My recollection it was alluded it was a politically biased report. You recollection is false that is the omissions it was funded by the dnc that is needed repeatedly to the federal court. That is not what i just said. What did you just say . My recollection the court was alluded there was political bias in this reporting. Political biases different to say funded by the Clinton Campaign. You said you were specifically aware of that but yet you did not repeatedly inform the Court Getting the order to weaponize essentially the democratic Opposition Research. Went into the primary sensors will sub source was a suspectedy russian asset . I remember ever being informed of any prior investigation including the primary sub source. You are not aware today . I am because i read in the public smear and a summary memo the department of justice sent to the judiciary committee. I would note the primary sub source was subject to fbi investigation counterintelligence 2009 from 2011 and i would read that the investigation was that approach to those individuals to indicate if they did get a job in the government and that access to classified information wanted to make extra money that primary sub source is trying to recruit spies against the Us Government yetet a russian agent is the basis and the fbi investigated them your testimony is you didnt know . Do you have any Due Diligence at all . I remember anything about the facts revealed of the sub source it cuts both ways but i dont know how people thought about i it. You didnt tell the fisa court that either i suspect they would had a very different assessmenta t been te basis for your application is what you were told from a suspected russian asset. Moving to another topic. R testimony is youve neverer authorized anyone and when he says contrary isnt telling the truth is that correct . Notea going to characterize y testimony, but minera is the sae today. I wantrut to make a final pot because mine is expired. This investigation was corrupt, the fbi, the department of justice and weaponize and in my opinion there are only two possibilities that you are deliberately corrupt or woefully incompetent. And i dont believe that you were. Incompetent. This is done Severe Damage to the professionals and the honorable men and women at the fbi because Law Enforcement shouldnt be used as political weapons and that is the legacy that you have left. Senator blumenthal. Im sorry, senator klobuchar. Thank you director comey for being here again. I think a lot of people are wondering why we are having this hearing right now. Most people would think we should be talking about other things except a be President Trump and i understand the chairs statements about wanting to move on the fisa reform. I would point out the republicans have been running the senate for the last four years. Theyve had their own internal disagreements on fisa. The president has been present for the last four years and i havent heard him talking about the fisa reform repeatedly as one of hise major priorities. Im sure if he wanted to make this a major priority in the party it could have gotten done. But instead, we are having this hearing right now. And i will get to you, mr. Comey. He has appeared before the Committee Many times. If you look at all of these reports about what he did in his time in office, i dont agree with everything that he did. I could call him anytime and ask him things but i also know he had the respect of a lot of people that worked for him. We all have fixed legacies and things that we regret and things that we are proud of, but i know one of his legacies he did have support for Law Enforcement. I know some people in minnesota and i would note that he was fired. Wouldnt you have fired mr. Comey . You find out you were fired by the president . In los angeles. I found out on television. I know you went around the country talking to Law Enforcement,t, is that right, during your time as the head of the fbi . Yes. Are you proud of the work that you did in the fbi . Enormously. It was one of the highlights of my life to be associated. Thank you. So, what im thinking as people watch this not that many people are, but if they are, thinking first of all theres an election coming up in a few weeks. As senator durbin hasng pointed out, there are a lot of concerns right now about russia. Not about what mr. Comey was involved in and that investigation years ago, but whats happening right now. We have director ray himself, the current fbi director, appointed by President Trump, saying russia is very active in the 2020 election, primarily through what we would call my influence in an attempt to undermine joe biden. To denigrate Vice President biden. That is a quote. Mueller, we know this the russian government interfered in the 201616 election and the trup campaign knew about it. We know that we have director codes saying, former director codes, saying they are the most aggressive. From the former senator here, the warning lights are blinking red again and then we have the cia World Intelligence review. We assessed the seniormost officials are directing the influence operation aimed at denigrating the u. S. Vice president supporting the u. S. President and public discord ahead of the u. S. Election in november. So thats the hearing we should be having right now. Or as was pointed out by senator whitehouse, we could be having thed hearing we were supposed o be having right now, which is the head of the antitrust division of the Justice Department and the head of the ftc. Where we have fraud going on during the pandemic we could be asking about innocent people being hurt. We could be asking about, as senator whitehouse pointed out, what in the world is going on at the antitrust division and why they devoted resources to marijuana mergers and we could the results of their tech investigation which is now basically 20 of the stock market. Those are pretty important things. Or we could instead of being here rehashing this, of someone asking, fired by their job, along with so many other people, we could be trying to figure out what we should be doing for the American People during this pandemic. 850 people a day. 850 people a day dying from the coronavirus. 800 businesses closed every single day. But here we are. So to me if anyone watched the debate last night, because i believe that is why we are having this hearing. We are just a few weeks out. If anyone watched the debate and saw last nightbe and saw the president and all of his haggling glory, i think what they saw s is someone who is trying to undermine our election, spreading falsehoods about so many people in this building and republican governors across the country have said its perfectly safe to vote by mail. Refusing to condemn White Supremacy in front of the entire nation thats not something you clean up the next day. All of this is done to wreak havoc right before an election. So, thats what i think we should be talking about today. But instead, we are here with you, director comey. So i will ask you some quick questions. When you were fbi director, did you become aware some point prior to the president ial election that russia launched a sophisticated effort to disrupt and interfere in the u. S. Election . Yes. Have the fbi and intelligence agencies learning about that threat, did you also become aware of efforts by the russians to pass information into the Trump Campaign that they believed would be helpful . Yes. Is it true that there were more than 120 contacts between the Trump Campaign and individuals linked t to russia . I think that is the number i recall from the senate intel report and the Mueller Report, somewhere in that area. Do you agree with o the Trump Administration intelligence officials that i just quoted, including your successor at the fbi that President Trump appointed that russia is emboldened and trying it again . Yes, ite accept what the fbi director said. Hes a person of integrity, which makes his life difficult now, but the American People can trust him. Does coordinating with a foreign power as a part of a Political Campaign, especially an adversary like russia pose a serious threat to the National Security . Yes. And why do you think, since again we have chosen to have this hearing, literally weeks before the election, drawing aside all other subjects that we could be devoted to at the time why do you think that nearly 500 National Securityou experts, including former military leaders, have said that the current president has demonstrated that he is not equal to the enormous responsibilities of his office . Why do you think that republicans, democrats and independents have said this . Those are people with commitment to integrity and see an absolute absence of that with the current commanderinchief, and that concerns all of them, regardless of politics. Thank you, mr. Comey. I will okay senator sass and give mr. Comey about a ten minute break. Okay, mr. Comey. One response to senator klobuchar who i consider aey friend. I will be honest with you, you would be having this hearing and everybody in the world knows it. The horowitz report which was damning, was never before the house judiciary committee. You dont care. As a party, you seem to only be worried about trump and russia and when theres evidence coming outt of every corner of the word that the russians played the fbi relay dnc operative, that is just of no consequence. Let the American People know. If you were in charge, we wouldnt know any of this. Senator sass. Director comey, i think that the horowitz report is not just saddening and infuriating, its also really embarrassing. As somebody who cares deeply about the fbi and its culture and its workers, we have a whole bunch of american patriotic heroes that work inside of that institution, and they have lost standing. Theyve lost respect in the eyes of thehe American People. A lot of trust has evaporated. I have fought hard to defend the fbi and its culture, and i was embarrassed to read the horowitz report. When you read it, what are the top two or three things that you are embarrassed by . I think i share in your reaction, senator sasse. The collection of omissions, failures to consider updates, to communicate between the team trying to figure out whats true and whats not true and the Team Investigating carter page, its embarrassing. Ut its sloppy ive run out of words. There is no indication and the Inspector General wouldnt say it if he founded, that people were doing bad things on purpose, but that doesnt make it any less concerning or embarrassing. But doesnt that point at you . You and i have spoken multiple times over my five and a half years here or i guess from arriving in january of 2015 through your departure in 2017. You and i had many discussions about the future of cyber and Information Operations against not just the United States government, but against institutions more broadly. That would so distrust. You and i agree the fbi had not just an incredibly important omission in that space, but a hard mission. There was a lot of work to be done to make sure we were prepared to play defense against the kind of cyber information we are talking about here today. And we said, you and i agreed on this, the public trust was at risk. And as we listen to you testify today, repeatedly, you say things like i was unaware. There is a passive voice about these things happening in the bureau. It was your culture. You were the leader. You were to maintain and build up that culture and you understood the nature of the challenge. Isnt the horowitz report i was the leader of that institution, so this reflects on me entirely. Its my responsibility. That is a separate question from whether i was briefed on a particular aspect of an investigation. Im not looking to share responsibility, the director is responsible. I appreciate that. That is a real answer. But my question wasnt just about the particular investigation that is the headline of today. Y it is the ig horowitz report ithat talks about a five is a process that is riddled with errors. Every single place they looked it was crap. You were in charge. How was it possible that the fisa process is that bad . I have defended the fisa process. I thought against many of the particular reforms that some of my particular colleagues wanted to advance because i believed the checks and balances in the system were real. You were responsible for those checks and balances. You . E were that is a greatal question. Me in particular took complexity of the layers of the review and oversight associated with fisa, and i actually think, given that they found problems in every fisa application, that what we thought was a good thing was actually a bad thing. And i hope that looking to return the model one closer to criminal wiretaps where a single agent and single lawyer are responsible and may feel the squeeze of signing their name. What happened i think is through awa lot of years of creating oversights responsibility was diffused instead of concentrating on human beings. I hope that is something the Inspector General and the director or looking at, but i share your concern. Its a really important question. I think thats insufficient. I have a lotth of neighbors in nebraska who believe there is a massive deep state conspiracy. I dont believe most of those conspiracy theories, though that is really hard to understand how that many special agents and i want to be clear, the vast majority of agents are wonderful, hardworking humans who have lots of opportunities to earn more money and have scheduled control if they weree doingge something else. The fbi is filled with men and women who could do great stuff for the American People. I want to fight hard against impugning so many of them, and yet it appears at the top of your organization, there was a culture where many of the people who should have been doing the hard work to make sure the were carriedlances out didnt think there was any chance they would get caught and so they could be sloppy and malicious. A lot of people in this room and watching at home and whos read the horowitz report could have different views about how much of this is incompetent. But somewhere on that continuum, there was a hell of a lot of people at the top of your organization who never actually thought they were going to be held accountable. What did you do to manage the fisa process so that you dont just have the passive voice that we have heard in the vast majority of your answers today . I was unaware this happened. This was an individual particular error, but it didnt speak systemically. The truth is, you are responsible fordu systemically d systematically managing thate culture. What did you do to make sure the fisa process would work . First, senator, the notion of a deep state i hope people that think that would take a look at the fact the Inspector General found mistakes in fisa applications across the counterintelligence and counterterrorism, all matters of cases, very difficult to reconcile that finding with the notion of the deep state. But it doess indicate there is a problem with attention to the requirements of preparing an adequate fisa. I clearly didnt do enough and i believe the process, which i kept myself closely informed about was robust, well staffed, had great manuals and all those things. I was clearly wrong about that and had too much confidence in that oversight regime. And i think based on my experiences that the problem may well be simple, the response ability was spread among dozens of people instead of being focused the way that it is in a criminal case. About the leadership in your office didnt have oversight of the dozens of people who would sign off on the most important investigations. The bureau has done Amazing Things in its century of existence, and theres been lots of highprofile investigations. But this one was one of the high most highprofile investigations ever conducted. And the people atof the top didt think that they would actually have their work checked. Mr. Chairman, i continue to elieve that we have to explain to the American People why the fisa process is important. The russia challenges that we in 2016 and that we are clearly facing again in 2020 are a big deal. But the much bigger deal is the Chinese Communist party attacks on the American Election that are coming over the next decade. Putin is clunky as heck and how he does everything he does. When they do all that they are capable of doing it is going to make russia interference look like childs play. As the fbi and broader Intelligence Community have a vitally Important Role to play in helping to protect the American People, and we have to explain to the public why the fisa process is so critically important and we have to reform this culture. I am a big Amy Klobuchar van and lots of ways, but i disagree with the line of argument that this i broad hearing topic is in importance. The reality is we are headed towards a world where if we dont fix the National Security branch and counterintelligence pieces of the fbi, we are not going to have an Intelligence Community that will have the trust of the American People when they have to employ more farreaching Digital Tools in the future. Thank you. Senator kunz, i think you wanted to have questions before we break. Can i just respond, since my name was invoked . Sure. Pretty positively. Ji have no issue with having ts hearing. And i think it is something many people up here agree. My only point was there have been years to fix it since this happened, and we were not running the senate. That was my point. I will turn over to senator kunz and then we will take a ten minute break. I want to put a fine point on this. In fbi lawyean fbi lawyer altert in a fashion to be damning to an american citizen. Thats not sloppy. That is a crime. And when does it become obvious to anybody that the people in charge across fire hurricane had abv deepseated bias against trump. They thought he was an idiot. They thought supporters were smelly. The person who altered the email claimed ton be part of te resistance. When it becomes obvious that the reason this thing was so screwed up, that the reason every stop sign was run, was because they didnt want to take no for the answer. That is obvious to me. That isnt in every other fisa application. There are problems in the procedure but we havent found one where a lawyer altered the document, and every time there was exculpatory information, it was withheld from the court. And what kind of system is it that the fbi director has no cluei about the most important investigation may be in the history of the fbi . If you want to believe that and just write this off, i think you do so at your own peril. And mr. Chairman, just to underscore your point, every one of the 17 material omissions was against President Trump and against the campaign. They were not random. They were all politically oriented against the president they were trying to take down. Senator kunz. Thank you mr. Chairman and mr. Comey for your testimony today for engaging in this vigorous and thoroughh review of matters that occur now four and five years ago but that remain relevant and important. But i want to remind all of us the context in which this hearing is taking place. We have 34 days to the president ial election. More than half the states have already started voting. We are in the middle of a pandemic, and economic crisis, a time of heightened racial tensionf and concern about criminal justice. And instead of dedicating the next week or two to finalizing the next round of relief, we are going to be spending our time at least here not looking at Election Security for 2020, not odedicating our time to the next round of pandemic relief, but participating in a rushed and partisan process to confirm the next Supreme Court justice. Its important to remind folks that our elections are being attacked at this very moment. That we know from reason testimony by the current fbi director that there continues to be a foreign interference in our elections. And so, i think at some level there is irony in light of the fact thatec last night we had a theidential debate in which current serving president said and did things to undermine some n of the legitimacy of the upcoming election. Let me start with just a few questions about that if i might, mr. Comey. Current fbi director ray said the fbi hasnt seen evidence of any coordinated voter fraud effort over 30 Million People voted by mail or absentee four years ago in 2016. In your time is fbi director, did you see any evidence of widespread or coordinatedag votr fraud . No. And last night, repeated allegations were made by President Trump of mailin voting being subject to widespread fraud. Do comments like this work to undermine democratic legitimacy and in any way serve the interest ofli our opponents who are seeking to spread disinformation and attack mailin voting . Ime not going to i dont think imm qualified to speak on the particular comment. The adversaries, especially russia, have their primary goal dividing us and dirtying up the democratic enterprise. Let me just say to the core issues that have been discussed and debated here. I joined senatorser lahey and le in an amendment to try to promote fisa reform. I agree that we need the process to be sound and transparent and something the American People can believe in. And i think the Inspector Generals recommendations address some of these issues and give us a roadmap for a number of the things that have to be addressed. But i also, frankly, am concerned about the way the current fbi director has been lsunder relentless criticism and assault, and it seems to me to be from the president and politicalization. President trump repeatedly referred to something he calls obama gate. He said its worse than watergate. Are you. Aware of any evidence president obama or former Vice President biden committed any crimes . No. Did you ever see any evidence that obama or biden targeted any individual for investigation based on politics or political views . Never. There was a january, 2015 meeting at the white house. Was peter struck at that meeting in the white house . No. At the meeting did either president obama or Vice President biden suggest prosecuting the Lieutenant General under the logan act would you remember if that suggestion had been made to you . I would remember because it would be highly inappropriate for a president or Vice President t to suggest prosecutin or investigation of anyone. And that did not happen. At that meeting on january 5th that th at the whit, and this is in 2017, did president obama gave any indication that he wanted to direct the course of a criminals investigation into general flynns conduct . No. When you left the meeting, did you believe politics would play a role in the case . Know, i knew it would play a role. During your time at the fbi under the previous administration, were you ever pressured to take an investigative step or support a conclusion that was not based on a fact in the law . No. But only weeks after his inauguration, my recollection is President Trump asked you to drop the investigation into Lieutenant General flynn and to let my this go. Is that accurate . Yes, february 14. So, my concern broadly speaking is that we have seen politics injected into our Justice System countless times over the last four years. Is there any doubt in your mind that Lieutenant General flynn lied to the fbi about his conversations with the russians . I saw publicly [inaudible] can you explain why lying to the fbi strikes at the heart of the Justice System . The ability to figure out whats going on in a criminal investigation or counterintelligence investigation is at the core of the ability to protect the American People. We dont hear the truth, see the truth, gather the truth, we cant achieve the mission. Theres been a lot of discussion today about the socalled steele m dossier. Did the Crossfire Hurricane Team rely on information from the dossier and its decision to open up the investigation . No, not at all. Was the team even aware of the investigation when they opened it . No. I think it wasn two months later that the information came to the Crossfire Hurricane Team. When you said earlier this was an appropriately predicated toen investigation, its because of the difference in time and sources and the basis on which the decisions were made . Correct. The Inspector General found in opening it that we complied with the policies and recommendation that govern the opening of the investigation. We should have been fired or a hearing if we didnt have the by given the friendly Foreign Government. And last, when he testified to the committee in june, rosenstein suggested that of the 199 criminal counts that resulted from s the Mueller Investigation relied on information provided by steele. Doe you have any reason to doubt that . I have no reason to doubt that. I want to thank you for your appearance today. Theres many urgent things we could and should be working on. Together it is my hope we will get back to them. I do agree the fisa process requires transparency and improvement. But frankly, i think there is a connect the dots game going on that doesnt connect, and i am greatly concerned about ongoing efforts to denigrate and politicize the fbi today. Thank you, mr. Comey, for your dtestimony. We are going to come back at 12 45 and give the witness a