Transcripts For CSPAN FBI 20240704 : vimarsana.com

Removing people from the chain of command. The gentleladys time has expired. Director, we are going to take a 30minute break for votes. We will be back. I will try to start right at 2 15. Unanimous the gentlelady from missouri is recognized. Thank you, mister chairman. Thank you for being here, director wray. Before i get into the primary topic of my remarks, i want to separate issue. On june 16th, my esteemed colleague, Ranking Member raskin of the oversight committee, sent you a letter asking the fbi to publicly reiterate certain nonclassified information that it provided in the briefing about four fd 10 23 subpoenaed by oversight chairman comer. It has now been almost a month since mr. Raskin sent his letter. When can he expect a response . I will have to check with my staff because weve gotten so many letters from so many members and each one of them is important to me, but we will get back to you on that. More importantly, we will get back. Thank you and we will follow up. Especially because i did ask directly of your staff. So, we will follow up. And now, st. Louis and i are here today in continuing solidarity with the protesters the, advocates, and movements that are actually targeted by surveillance and other lot enforcement abuses in your country. Director wray, i know that you are aware of the fbis long and sordid history of targeting black protesters and activists. At a hearing before this committee, in december of 2017, you characterized the abuses related to cointelpro as, quote, one of the darkest moments in the fbis history. It is something we are not proud of, but it is also something we have learned from, and quote. But director wray, isnt it true that an fbi agent improperly ran a batch query of an minimize visa information using the identifiers of 133 individuals arrested in connection with the protests after the murder of george floyd in 2020 . Just a yes or no is fine. Well, im aware of the instance you are talking about. Whether or not that correctly describes it or not, im not 100 sure. I know its in the most recent fiscal opinion, but what i will tell you is that that incident is noncompliance. I consider it unacceptable. And most importantly, most importantly, it predates all of these fixes and corrective measures, and performs that weve put in place, which i think wouldve prevented it from happening now. Thank you. But and now on to zero fox. Isnt it true a firm hired on the 14 Million Dollar contract by the fbi, which weve heard already today, to monitor social media threats previously labeled black lives matter activists as threat actors requiring constant surveillance . Yes or no . Im not sure thats a correct description of the way we do work with zero fox. But i do not know that thats a correct description of how we do it. So, did the fbi hire the firm . But my understanding of zero foxs it has a tool which allows us to, in certain instances, engage in social media searches to prevent threats. So, they werent hired . Well, i dont know, again, the terms of our arrangement, like, whether its a retention or what. But ive heard the term zero fox before. And my general experience is, its usually use in connection with preventing violence at a particular critical incident. So, to the tune of 14 million, though, there is reporting that threat actors was actually what they labeled black lives matter activists, two of them i know very well. And i served more than 400 days on the ground during the ferguson uprising myself, more than 400 days, many of those days with those two people that were named. And who are not violent. Isnt it true that the fbi has been actively involved in the Law Enforcement response to people protesting the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center . A response that has included state charges of domestic terrorism against protesters . Yes or no . Well, the f r Atlanta Division is working in support of our state local partners, when it comes to violence and threats of violence that occur amid the unrest that you are referring to. So, the fbi is involved. These are not isolated incidents and as i said, they are part of a long history of abuses by the fbi against black and brown communities and progressive movements. These are real, the real oversight issues. They matter to my district, but there is real and justified skepticism of whether the sieve lights of black and brown people are adequately protected. I know this from personal experience in the ferguson uprising and from other protest movements that i have been a part of. That is why i ask you about the targeting of protesters last time that you are before us, because they also included me. But what my district is not concerned about is the republican conspiracy theories and selective targeting of Law Enforcement agencies who try to hold their twice impeached, twice indicted cult leader, donald trump, accountable. The insurrection caucus wants to use this hearing to score immediate political points. They want to invade oversight, they do not want to conduct it. We are talking about real issues, real reform that could actually save lives. So once again, i urge my republican colleagues who claim they care about government overreach and weaponization to do the exact same. I yield back. Gentlelady yields back. I would remind the lady what weve actually like to do is work with you to protect americans privacy, whether theyve been targeted who are on the left. Mister chairman, point of order, point of order,. Gentleman may state his point of order. Its not your time. I appreciate the point of order and i was just getting ready to yield to the gentleman from north carolina. Thank you, mister chairman. I greatly appreciated. I appreciate the reminder. I want to follow up the director wray about the Foreign Influence Task force, there have been exchanges with mr. Johnson of louisiana, mr. And i understand that the difference. I want to respect the differences in characterization. Earlier this week in denying a state the federal Court Essentially said, this isnt complicated. Follow the law as articulated by the United States Supreme Court area, the First Amendment, and that was it. As far as it was concerned. The Foreign Influence Task force is not a predecessors decision. You set that up, right . Yes. Okay and you have known about continuous interaction with social Media Companies. Youve known about, i mean, im sure you know about the testimony of agent elvis chan, correct . I mean, i dont know everything hes testified to, but im aware that he was did you read his testimony . Every parts of it, yes. And there were thousands of posts that were flagged on social Media Companies, these meetings with social media continued across time on a periodic basis. This court has found, and understand where the point of disagreement is, i guess, at this stage is, i believe its fairly common sense, that if you got a constant expectant suggestions from the fbi to social Media Companies with respect to social media posts. At some point in time, it becomes a government decision or it becomes coercive in nature. Thats what the courts preliminary found. That apparently is the line you decided to walk in setting this up. Today, its striking that you come in, you sort of casually acknowledge that among other things, that we did pass through, i think you said, information from the ukrainian fsb you to social media, as if its normal for the fbi to serve effectively as the agent of foreign power, to help pull information out of circulation to which americans otherwise would have access. Because the Foreign Intel Service doesnt like it. Now, those are my characterizations. I have tried to be a little bit more neutral in my language and youve been different with them, but heres what im wondering. Why would you walk that fine line, with respect to americans fundamental constitutional rights, at scale . Especially with knowledge of past abuses by the fbi like cointelpro . You said, earlier, that the fbi wasnt even concerned about disinformation, per se, but the foreign origins of the information. Assuming so, how does that comport with lamont versus posts as well, im not going to try to engage on Supreme Court jurisprudence, but what i can tell you is that well, thats the point. Director wray. Let me just ask you, do you know about that case . You know that case . I have heard the case. Right in the heart of the cold war, at the behest of an american plaintive, a communist, by the way, Supreme Court said that americans have a First Amendment right of access to information, even if it is propaganda originating abroad. And in that case, the United States Postal Service could not entertain it. Do you know that . In essence. Again, im not familiar with the holding of the case. I would have to review it to be sure of that. That seems to be the trouble. I keep wondering as i read all these revelations how that could be. Or then let me go to this. You know that the fbi engaged with the social Media Companies continuously warning them of hacking leak operations in 2020, not 2018, by the way . But before the 2020 election. A lot of warnings about hacking leak, you are aware of that . Im aware that we gave them lots of information about intelligence that we were receiving from at the time you are giving them those warnings, the fbi had had the hunter biden laptop for more than nine months and of course, cointelpro itself was the mother of all hack and leak operations. Active leftist activists at the time broke into the fbis headquarter office in media, pennsylvania, stole the files, give them to the media, newspapers publish them. And you are bound to be aware of New York Times Company Versus United States, the pentagon papers case. Yes. It says even if information had been stolen or in appropriately taken, you cant get a prior restraint in almost any circumstance to prevent their being distributed. So, how is it that your Foreign Influence Task force is out warning of hack and leak operations to innocent, not involved in the attack. That would be criminal. But news organizations or social media organizations where information may be circulating. First off, we are not engaging in any prior restraint. Second, second, wow. If i could finish, please. Second, there is no serious dispute that foreign adversaries have, and continued, to attempt to interfere in our elections and that they use social media to do it. President trump himself in 2018 declared a National Emergency so that very effect and the Senate Intelligence committee, in an overwhelmingly bipartisan way, by the way, not only found the same thing, but called for more information sharing. I hate to say this, director. I hear you, but it doesnt justify trampling the establish First Amendment rights of americans as the Supreme Court has declared them. Whether or not, frankly, i agree with him or you agree with them. And i just dont, thats what i dont get you coming in here and the comments are sort of blase answers, accountability is always down the road, we never arrive. And i guess im joining the gang up, but what im concerned about, and i think americans are concerned about, is they just never see it. I dont know if an answer other than to take an appropriation from you thats very significant or to do something to take your intel powers away, put them in another agency. I honestly want to know. Mister chairman. I think americans want to know. I yield. You sure do. Gentlemen from maryland who keeps us on time is recognized. Until it is my turn, then im going to run over. Wait till we get into this five minutes. Gentlemans time is about ready to start. Thank you, mister chairman. Director, i appreciate you coming in today. I saw a characterization of this hearing as a gop fbi grudge match, but i must say that the only grudge thats been seen here is from the republican side. I think youve done an outstanding job with your testimony today. Even when youve been, you know, admitting that there are shortcomings by your office and the mistakes have been made, i appreciate the fact that you are willing to do that because its not easy for agency heads to do that and also, more importantly, to point out the changes that you made to try and address those concerns. I want to say this to. There are a couple points that have been made here about you were just talking about the Foreign Influence Task force. And i know theres a lot of talk about this as being some kind of prior restraint or First Amendment violation, but i want to say that im on the side that thinks this is a very important tool for the fbi and the United States government to add, especially with respect to potential intervention or interference, especially by russian state actors, with respect to american elections. There are some people who think, and im kind of starting to agree, that one of the reasons some of my colleagues are pushing so hard against this, and other aspects of information protection within the United States, is because they want to have russian interference in the 2024 election. Oh, please. I certainly dont. So, i certainly thank you for continuing your efforts on that front. There was an issue that was raised about whistleblowers earlier in the hearing, and i wanted to bring this up. I know you cannot speak to this, mister director, but these are two checks that were written to some of these witnesses, two of the witnesses that have testified here. And they are for over 250,000. Now they, came after they gave their testimony. I think by a few days. But from my perspective, this is something that the American Public should know. When they evaluate the testimony of these individuals. And hopefully, i dont know if the majority knew about this, but didnt disclose it at the time or what was going on with it, but in my book, this really brings the credibility of these witnesses testimony into question. And i think we should keep this in mind when we evaluate the allegations that they have made. Also want to say this as well. My republican colleagues have come a long ways from the law and order days of the Republican Party back when i was a kid. Now we are at defund the fbi. I think one of them is selling tshirts to try and raise money using that slogan. Another colleague is talking about abolish the atf, another one is saying defund the department of justice. But as you mentioned in your testimony earlier, the fbi is doing a lot of great work protecting the country from terrorism, foreign intelligence threats, international cartels, weapons of mass destruction that you mentioned in your testimony, and i appreciate that. Also, theres been a great deal of talk about the domestic terror threats. You know, for me, the planned attempt to kidnap the governor of michigan and apparently kill her was chilling to the extreme and i appreciate the fact that you all were able to intervene on that. I want to say this quickly as well. Im running short on time, but the misinformation and weaponization claims that have been made by my republican colleagues, i want to offer these two articles. One is called, its by aaron blake of the washington post. All the ways trump, not his foes sought to weaponize the government. And then another one, this is philip bump. This is on the missouri v. Biden case, which was quoted extensively at the beginning of the hearing. Deeply ironic reinforcement of rightwing information. The point of this article is that the missouri v. Biden decision, which, and i know you cant comment on, it because its been in litigation, but i also think is being challenged by the department of justice. And rightly so because its riddled with factual inaccuracies and legal inaccuracies as well. One other article for the record is by lee lippman and lawrence tried. Restricting the government for speaking to tech will spread disinformation and harm democracy. I would like all of those admitted. Then lastly, with respect to the hunter biden issue, there is a letter from abbe lowell, who represents mr. Biden. This is to representative jason smith, but i think also to chairman jordan as well that raises the pushback on the allegations, you know . Points out that the investigation began during the Republican Trump administration, was supervised by two Republican Attorney generals. Was carried over by a whole load of a u. S. Republican attorneys. Last point i want to make, i promise i wont run over my time much, i happen to represent the district where we contain two of the sites for the fbi headquarters could be moved to. The chairman made a reference to maybe not wanting to fund the move, but i must say, i think i had an office near your building. Theyve got a net surrounded to key parts of the building from falling down and hurting pedestrians. If the move is important and also, it would give you a chance to consolidate hopefully will bring into prince georges county, we will save it one billion dollars for the taxpayers. With that, i yield back. Gentleman yields back. Gentlelady from indiana is recognized. Thank you, mister chairman. Director wray, fbis mission is to protect the American People and uphold the u. S. Constitution, correct . Yes. Okay. So, we had, a couple of years ago, it was in hearing and i actually looked at all of the concerns that ive seen who are really abuses of section 72 of fisa. I compare your agents to kgb and spending two years in this committee, ive read a lot of reports, doing a lot of hearings. Im really shocked that you agencies involved in not just unlawful surveillance of american citizens, intimidation of american citizens, censorship of american citizens, potential coverups of convenient p