Without objection. Mr. Chairman, I have some unanimous consent ; from Washington is recognized. Uh I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an article titled Justice Department told Trump in May that his name is among many in the Epstein files. Without objection. Uh I have another one um that is uh a July 2025 article by The New York Times entitled how a frantic scouring of the Epstein files consumed the Justice Department stating that DOJ and FBI employees reviewing the Epstein files were instructed to flag any
mentions of Trump and other celebrities. ; Without objection. And I have another unanimous consent request to enter into the record an August 2025 article by The Guardian entitled Ghislaine Maxwell hinted at Epstein’s ties to Trump officials. Why wasn’t she pressed for names? Stating that Maxwell told Deputy US Attorney Todd Blanche that some of the quote cast of characters around Epstein are in Trump’s cabinet.
Uh without objection. Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Pennsylvania. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Patel, for coming before us to testify today. Um I am concerned by your repeated claims that you’re not able to disclose anything further about the Epstein investigation files and that there’s no evidence of a broader conspiracy or other people who should be charged because the American people aren’t buying that you’ve been transparent or that there’s nothing further to be seen.
Um in your exchange with my colleague, Mr. Roy, you reiterated something that I heard you say yesterday in your Senate testimony and that is under your direction, the FBI will always follow the money. Is that right? The money, did you say? Yes. ; Yes, you said you’ll follow the money. That’s great.
And just now you said you welcome the opportunity to investigate new evidence. So, there has been significant recent reporting just in the last couple weeks that after Jeffrey Epstein was arrested, four major banks flagged more than 1.5 billion dollars in suspicious transactions connected to him that suggested a massive conspiracy related to his child sex trafficking activities.
Director Patel, has the FBI reviewed the 1.5 billion in suspicious bank transactions flagged to the government relating to Epstein and his co-conspirators? ; I know the FBI has reviewed numerous SARs. I don’t know the totality of that number. Okay. Do you can you provide us with that number? ; I’ll get back to you. Okay.
And have you initiated any new investigation of those bank transactions since say September 8th when the new reporting came out? I’ll check with the Treasury Department because they’re the lead on that. Okay. So, Director Patel, how many individuals or entities um has the FBI interviewed, subpoenaed, or compelled to testify? Can you give us those numbers? With respect to these bank transactions.
; not off the top of my head. I’ll have to work with Treasury. Okay. Um we’re concerned, you see, because you say you’re going after child predators, but ; We are. obviously, this is how you follow the money is if you follow the bank transactions that um apparently enabled the child sex trafficking.
Would you agree? It’s one of the valuable investigative tools is to follow the money. Okay. Um have Jeffrey Epstein’s victims have asked us to ask you whether or not you’ve investigated Epstein’s lawyers, the lawyers who facilitated those payments. Have you um subpoenaed or questioned any of those lawyers? So, in 2018 and 19, what I recollect is many, if not every one of those lawyers, was part of the investigation.
But you weren’t there at that time, right? ; Okay. So, can you get us the names and the numbers of who was investigated then with respect to those lawyers? ; as I’m allowed to release it, absolutely. ; Okay. Well, if we provide you with subpoenas, I assume you can release it. Is that right? ; a current subpoena and we’re working with Congress to provide it. Okay.
Um You’ve said that the Acosta investigation had an original sin. What do you mean by that? Basically, if you’re looking at an actual pedophile ring, what you should not do is limit the time frame in which you’re legally able to collect information. So, search warrants that Mr. Acosta utilized in 2006 and 7 leading to the 2008 plea agreement had a very specific narrow window of years, I think three or four years.
And so, information pursuant to legal process wasn’t collected for 10 years or 15 years or 20 years. It also in uh subpoenas were not sent out to hundreds of witnesses at the time, hundreds of victims at the time. None of that was done. None of these people were put in grand juries. And so, the totality of information from the jump, instead of being this big, was like this.
And that, in my opinion, is not how you run an investigation if you’re trying to break a sex trafficking ring. So, you’re now in charge of the FBI. Why haven’t you done that investigation? Great question, and here’s the answer. Simply because I am not able to go back 20 years and collect information that the courts had decided was already subject to search warrants.
They have said, “This was in the investigation. There’s a non-prosecution agreement out of that plea.” And when the case was reopened, and this is where it comes into play. When the case was reopened in 2018 and 2019, the search warrants again were limited to the conduct of Jeffrey Epstein.
Now, whether that’s right or wrong, that’s a different discussion, but I’m telling you that’s the information we were given. ; that is a different discussion, and I think the discussion we’d like to have today is why you aren’t following the money with respect to the broader um conspiracy that it has been reported in The New York Times and elsewhere.
And that if you really want to attack the issue, if you wanted to attack the issue, if you wanted to get to the bottom of it, if you wanted to disclose what really was involved in the Epstein files, the Epstein cover-up, that you would be taking very different actions that you are today. Um I do want to seek unanimous consent to enter into the record the uh New York Times September 8th, 2025 article how JP Morgan enabled the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein.
Without objection. And also an article dated Sep- uh July 17th, 2025 in the Epstein case, follow the money. Without objection. Okay. Thank you. ; The gentlelady yields back her time. ; The gentleman from Maryland is recognized. Thank you much. Um pursuant to clause 2K6 of rule 11, I move that the committee subpoena the CEOs of four banks, JP Morgan, that’s Jamie Dimon, Bank of New York Mellon, Robin Vince, Bank of America, Brian Moynihan, and Deutsche Bank, Christian Sewing, uh in order to get the suspicious transaction
reports. These four banks have flagged to the government 1.5 billion dollars in suspicious transactions related to the sex trafficking crimes and conspiracy of Epstein, Maxwell, and all of their collaborators. And uh as you know, Mr. Chairman, we got the SARs reports for Hunter Biden totaling around 20 million dollars. And so, these 1.
5 billion dollars in SARs reports, we should get, especially since the director doesn’t seem to be forthcoming. And I requested that, you know, that we do this immediately. ; the director has been very forthcoming. We will hold any motion to subpoena in abeyance until the conclusion of the hearing.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Director Patel, for being here. It is quite clear is quite clear that certain members of this committee, you know, they want their 15 seconds on TV stamping and coming. Maybe it’s for fundraising. Maybe they’re struggling in their district.
They need a little bump. But they they turn a committee into a clown show, and and that’s what we’re seeing. You’re being unjustly attacked today. I watched the Senate hearings yesterday. You were attacked there. We know there’s an agenda. There’s always an agenda. It’s the same characters with the same personalities, the same objective, and that is destroy the mega movement.
You’re being attacked, Director, is because you’re effective. You highlighted what you’ve been doing in DC with the president in reducing violent crime. You’re very effective. Another individual that was very effective with meaningful debate and dialogue was Charlie Kirk. And they killed him for it. Charlie Kirk was a man of faith first and foremost.
He loved his He loved his Lord Jesus. He loved his family. Beautiful wife, beautiful children. Just a remarkable, honorable man that was silenced with this assassin’s bullet. I would say if Charlie Kirk lived in the biblical times, he’d have been the 13th disciple. He’d have been the 13th disciple. We have a new committee, if you’re not aware, a new select committee regarding January 6th.
I’m honored to be on that committee. I’m looking forward to working with other members to expose truth, questioning federal agencies that were involved on January 6th, like the FBI. Played a role, but we don’t really know, Director, to what extent. We don’t know. The January 6th sham committee was not formed by Nancy Pelosi to seek truth.
It was nothing about getting to the truth about January 6th. Their sole mission was to damage Donald J. Trump and and his political career. And everybody knows it. That’s what the purpose was. ; ; You know what’s nice where I kind of get to ask the question though, how did that work out for you? Donald J.
Trump is back in the White House and America loves him. I spent 30 years in law enforcement, a retired sheriff from large county in the great state of Texas. I have seen, Director, I have seen more enthusiasm and support for law enforcement today because of what you and Donald Trump have done over the last 8 months to protect the American people.
The American people couldn’t count on their government to protect them. Crime is rampant and now we have a president and an administration that puts the American people and their safety first. It’s interesting a few minutes ago I was, you know, I I a classmate reached out to me and sent me a I told him, I said, “Yes, we got Director Patel in front of our committee today.
” And Andy wanted me, Andy Cain wanted me to tell you, he said, quote, “Tell him we love him. Tell him we love him and all the brave warriors exposing the deep state.” Kash, you’re a great American, sir. You’re a great American. Your work as the Director of the FBI is commendable. It’s commendable and I want to thank you, sir. Thank you for your service.
Keep up the good fight, brother. Don’t let them tear you down. Keep up that good fight. You have it in you. With that, sir, I yield back. Gentleman, yield. Yield yield to me? Uh Director Patel, there there were 26 the gentleman mentioned the select committee. There were 26 confidential human sources at the Capitol on January 6th, 2021.
Four entered the Capitol and thereby broke the law. Do you know if those individuals were being paid by the Ray FBI? So, we’ve provided 600 pages of documents to this committee alone regarding January 6th. That’s 600 pages more than any of my predecessors. Generally speaking, confidential human sources are always paid by the FBI. That’s how it works.
I can’t speak to the specifics on each one and how much they make. ; We appreciate it. We reviewed some of that material and you gave us a lot of material that we didn’t get from Director Wray. That specific question I think is important to the American people. Um were people who were confidential human sources of the FBI who broke the law, one was one was recommended for prosecution, my understanding is, by the information we received from you.
Were they actually paid by the very taxpayers who may have got charged with the same same offense? I think that’s important for us to understand. I’ll get back to you on that. Thank you. Chairman now recognizes the gentleman from California. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Welcome, Director Patel. Um I’m going to focus a little bit on domestic terrorism.
We have a graph here dated to 2021, but as you can tell, domestic terrorism is is on the rise. Uh nation, our citizens under threat. We saw the assassination of Charlie Kirk, uh two assassination attempts on the president, uh school shooting Minnesota last month, and closer to home just a couple days ago, Huntington Beach, peaceful vigil for Charlie Clark infiltrated by neo-Nazis who essentially um made the local individuals attending that event fear for their safety.
Um All of us know that a lot of these domestic attacks are by lone wolves, uh but yet they do leave clues, social media or elsewhere. Director Patel, you’re it. You’re the thin blue line. The FBI, your job to protect our citizens back home from those that would harm us. You have to find the needle in the haystack.
Takes a lot of work, a lot of resources. Talked to my local sheriff this morning who said they have their concern. Federal cuts, federal cuts to local grants that helped them do the job. Then of course, let’s not forget about other threats there are coming before us like high-tech fraud. Local senior recently was talking to me about a text she had gotten demanded by the IRS to send a payment immediately or the IRS agents were on their way to arrest this individual.
Pretty gutsy stuff. Like folks probably from Europe, North Korea, Russia, China. People, okay, going after those precious savings our senior citizens rely on. Yet the president’s proposing a budget cut of $500 million or more to your organization, the FBI. You’ve said that that’ll essentially equate to about 1,300 less jobs at the FBI.
So, I’m going to ask you essentially, what is it that we can do to help you do your job? Little concerned. Friday night lights, one of the events I love to do on Friday nights, go to local high school football game. Sit there at the stadium and and you always say, “What if?” What if you’re the thin blue line? Can you do your job cutting $500 million from your budget? Thank you, sir.
I think we we are doing our job and the distinction is with the budget that we have, we are flexing more resources to the field. California is receiving the largest FBI plus up of any state in the union due to that plus up. They’re not getting a reduction. No state is getting a reduction. Every state is getting a plus up.
And so, I’m utilizing the money that we have to first plus it up. And the empty vacancies that that we have, those haven’t been filled in years, not in my under my leadership. ; Here’s here’s my concern. You’re going to do well. You’re doing more with less is what you’re saying. Yet we’re about to vote on a budget that has $88 million more to protect members of Congress, the executive branch, and the Supreme Court.
I’m There’s a contradiction here. Back on Main Street, we’re saying you can do more with less. You can protect them with less money. Yet here in Washington, we’re saying we need more money to protect members of Congress. It’s a little contradiction here or maybe, sir, you ought to talk to leadership about coming in with your management style to protect the Supreme Court, Congress, and the administration.
Otherwise, it’s essentially a hypocritical situation. We need more protection, yet folks on Main Street can do with less. My concern is folks on Main Street. Whereas we also were I think we received over 300 million in the big beautiful bill and we’re also receiving pots of money from our interagency.
So, this sort of 500 cut isn’t entirely accurate. ; getting cut 200 million plus. You’re still moving your agents to do ICE work. So, you are leaving a lot of bases uncovered. And I’m not going to be argumentative with you, Director Patel. I’m just saying if that thin blue line does not hold, people on Main Street will pay the price.
; I agree with you, sir. ; And I just look forward to working with you because I am very concerned that these kinds of budget cuts are short-sighted, especially when my local sheriff calls me and says, “We need more support and we’re looking at budget cuts.” ; I’ll work with you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield time. Mr.
Chairman, I have another unanimous consent request. ; Gentleman yields back. The gentleman from New York is recognized for unanimous consent. Uh I would seek to introduce a December 2024 uh OIG report from the Department of Justice which confirms the conclusion of the Bill Barr Justice Department that the so-called whistleblower, a disgruntled former employee of the Intelligence Committee, was not a credible witness and there were no further actions taken.
Uh without objection. ; Mr. Chair, I’d like to submit some items for the record. ; You bet. Gentleman from California. ; First one, Trump’s deportation diverts FBI agents off child predator cases. Second one, FBI Director backtracks on administration’s proposed budget cuts. And number three, Trump administration says 70% of ICE detainees do not have criminal convictions.
; Without objection. Gentleman from Texas is recognized. Thank you. Director, earlier this year the committee learned of new documents tied to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation and the Russia collusion hoax against President Trump. Your efforts in declassifying key documents tied to this investigation allowed the committee to acquire thousands of pages that it did not have previously.
Did any of your predecessors make any effort to declassify these documents? Not to the extent we have. Did any of your predecessors share or leak any details that were classified at the time? There are ongoing leak investigations um across the board um at the Bureau related to this. I believe one of those is Mr.
Comey and I thank you for continuing that investigation. Among the declassified documents are the Durham report annex, the Crossfire binder, and the Nellie Ohr criminal referral. Could you summarize for those watching that what we know about the Russia collusion hoax so far? Well, sir, I think the the record will speak that um the Russia collusion matter was perpetrated by a political party to go overseas and obtain information from a foreign intelligence asset only to have that information, which was demonstrably false, turned over to the FBI, who walked into
a federal FISA secret court and asked for a secret surveillance court order, and lied to the federal court, and we know that because someone was convicted of it, and only to surveil the political opponent. So, that is a massive scandal. We helped expose it. And in terms of the pages of productions, I provided 1,400 pages of production related to Crossfire Hurricane, and my predecessors have provided zero.
I appreciate that, and I appreciate your courage and commitment to declassifying these important documents for our review, and hope that you’ll continue with this commitment. Can we expect to see more declassification efforts regarding the Crossfire Hurricane and Russian collusion hoax? Yes. Thank you.
I yield the remaining balance of my time to Chairman Jordan. ; I I thank the gentleman for yielding, and Director, that’s where it all started, right? The whole Russia that That’s when it all began, and then it was Mueller, then it was impeachment, then it was Jack Smith and Fani Willis and Alvin Bragg, and you name it. But it all started then, and that’s why I thank the gentleman from Texas wants to make sure we get all the information there, and I want to go back to when it was changed.
We talked about this earlier. Just want to read to you what the CIA officer said to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, quote, “Brennan refused to remove the dossier, and when confronted with the dossier’s main flaws, he responded, ‘Yes, but doesn’t it ring true?'” So, that’s what he initially said, and then when he was talking to this committee, he said, “The CIA was very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele dossier in the Intelligence Community Assessment.
” So, on one hand, you got a witness who was there who said he refused to remove it even though he knew it was garbage, and then he’s on the other hand telling the committee, “No, no, no, we didn’t want anything to do with it. It shouldn’t have been a part of the Intelligence Community Assessment.” Which we know it was. You know it was.
You found out. Those are two entirely different stories. I think Mr. Brennan has some explaining to do. Frankly, what happened there? And I think you said earlier that this whole thing, and I think you said to Mr. Gooden, this whole thing is being looked at as part of this grand conspiracy to undermine the president, whether it’s Comey, Brennan, Clapper, former head of the Intelligence Committee, now Senator from Whoever it is, that’s all being looked at.
Is that accurate? Yes, sir. Well, we appreciate that. And part of what’s also being looked at, and I think the gentleman from Wisconsin brought this up earlier, what is a burn bag for, by the way? Uh generally speaking, the Intelligence Community obviously utilizes and possesses classified documents, but drafts of those classified documents and even ultimate finished products of those classified documents have to be recorded and or discarded.
And if they are discarded, the only way to we do that, the hard copies, is we literally put them in burn bags that are identified specifically for that purpose, and there is a very exact courier system in which those burn bags are obtained and the material inside is destroyed. So, it’s to get rid of the material, right? Yes, sir.
And it looks like the annex that Mr. Durham in his investigation had was put into a burn bag by your predecessor, I assume, to be destroyed. Is that accurate? Without getting into the stylization of the evidence, anything that’s put in a burn bag is for purposes of destruction. Do you find that interesting that the Durham annex was placed in a burn bag, that you would discover that when you took over as the head of the FBI? We found a lot of information in a lot of burn bags.
Well, we appreciate appreciate you finding that. We’d like to know a little bit more about that, and we look forward to that information coming forward, and I appreciate the gentleman yielding. With that, we now recognize the gentleman from Colorado. Thank you Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing.
Thank you, Director Patel, for being here today. I have a couple of questions regarding a terrible shooting that occurred in Colorado, the state that you may know that I represent. You’ve testified previously about I think what you would describe as your efforts to provide more information regarding the investigation with respect to the horrific assassination of Mr. Kirk.
And so, in that same vein, I’m hoping you can provide this committee and my constituents in Colorado with some clarity. Absolutely. I think as my colleagues know, in Evergreen, Colorado, Jefferson County, a county that I proudly represent, at Evergreen High School, a shooter ultimately injured two students.
We’re praying for their swift recovery. There’s an article here from Colorado Public Radio. The title is, quote, “FBI was already investigating an account that may have been linked to the Evergreen shooter.” You’re familiar with the circumstances generally, Director, regarding this terrible Of course. ; tragedy.
So, my understanding from the public reporting is that an organization reported to the FBI in July of this year Should we hear from the article that the FBI opened an assessment into a social media account user whose identity was unknown, and who was discussing the planning of a mass shooting with threats non-specific in nature.
This is the FBI’s statement to the press, and that the FBI continued to work this assessment investigation to identify the name and location of the user up until September 10th, 2025, which is the day of the tragedy. Can you provide us some clarity on what were the impediments to finding, you know, the account user, and maybe describe in greater detail the FBI’s work in that Generally speaking, yes, cuz I know even though the shooter’s deceased, the investigation is we’re not done.
Um and so, the impediments to finding these individuals, and you highlight a great point. We had two huge tragedies in the span of days in this country. Um the school shooting in Evergreen, Colorado, being one of them. Um and proactively going out onto these social media platforms, which are so large, is our biggest impediment.
And we need to rely on the service providers. There’s actual legislation, I can’t remember the name of it, that’s up for renewal, ; [snorts] ; which will, and I think at the end of the month, which gives service providers the ability to report that information in from their end without liability. We need that to continue, because while the FBI has so many people and the police are great at doing it, there’s just too many platforms to cover down on.
I appreciate that, Director Patel, and I think we’re certainly I’m I’m interested in continuing this conversation, because I think the reporting suggests that this that there’s a pattern, and that ultimately, we want to make sure that law enforcement is able to prevent this kind of tragedy from happening in the future.
I have a question. It’s not meant as a gotcha question. So, it just frame it there. But it is regards in regards to some reporting around periodic transaction report that you had filed earlier. A periodic transaction report that you had filed earlier this year. So, this is in July, pursuant to the ethical obligations as a senior executive official.
On You remember filing that in July? Yes. Yeah. It’s So, in that report, as best as I can surmise, you disclosed that you divested I’ll, you know, $100,000 or more in a variety of different stocks, which I presume was pursuant to the ethics agreement that you negotiated with the Department of Justice. In that same report, there’s a disclosure regarding purchases of two different uh well, rather, two different transactions.
So, between 15 to $50,000 in a national coffee house chain, and between 50 to $100,000 in a semiconductor company on May 19th and May 12th. Are those transactions that you’re doing personally, or are these through a stock broker, or are these transactions that you’re handling yourself? So, how they happen is I submit proposals under DOJ guidance to say, “Hey, we I would like to trade this or that.
” And they run their review, and the FBI runs a review, and then they come back and say yes or no, and then I make the transaction. Is there a reason that you decided to make the purchases in the those two companies? Uh generally speaking, I before I got this job, I was, um, you know, trading stocks, but not a lot, like most people, and I just follow certain industries, you know, and, um, I thought they would be a good investment.
So, my the reason why I ask, right, because you had divested in other companies, and I presume that that wasn’t because there were actual conflicts. It’s just that you wanted to avoid an appearance of impropriety. It was both. Both. But not all of the companies were conflicts. Whatever they They make the I don’t make the call, they make the call.
; I guess my point would be The reason why I ask is why I said it’s not a gotcha question. I have for years led an effort here in Congress to try to ban members of Congress, senior executive officials, from trading stocks. And it’s bipartisan in nature. We’re working really hard to get that done, Republicans and Democrats.
And you can understand, I think, given your role, given the nature of the position that you hold as the leader of the largest law enforcement agency in our country, that divesting entirely, not, you know, doing day trading now, I think would be something that would be in the interest of the American people. So, I just would hope you consider that, and that moving forward, that perhaps not purchasing stocks in individual companies, I would think would be something that would be worth pursuing.
Gentleman Gentleman’s time is up. ; I’m happy to give the witness an opportunity to Thank you. I’ll work with you on it. Gentleman from Alabama is recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Director Patel, for being here today. Newly declassified documents confirm that the Intelligence Community, under President Barack Obama, knowingly relied on unverified and fraudulent evidence to manufacture a false claim that Russia in fact meddled in the 2016 election.
Is there more to be done to uncover the depths and origins of the Russian collusion hoax? There is, and we’re doing it. Why should Americans still care about that, Director Patel? Everybody wants to talk about a weaponized bureaucracy. But when we put out the facts about a weaponized not because I said so, but because we found the FISA documents, because we found the 302s and 1023s, then it becomes a political football.
My job is to continue to put out that information and let the American public read it for themselves when I’m lawfully able to do so. And that’s been my commitment on any subject, Russiagate or otherwise. Wherever the law allows me to do it, I will do it. You know, the one when I first came in in 2020, the number one concern as I was doing town halls was the weaponization of the government against the American citizen.
And so, are there things that you’re doing, structural reforms that implementing so that the FBI cannot be weaponized again, whether it’s against President Trump or future elected presidents? ; Well, it shouldn’t be weaponized against anyone. And the structural reform is simple. If you’re going to go after a political individual or someone seeking political office, there has to be a grounded basis in law and fact to open up a criminal investigation.
And if there’s not, the investigation isn’t even opened. And I’ve also gone back and reviewed other cases that were opened in prior administrations related to public officials, and we’ve closed a number of them because we felt that some of these actions were weaponized on either side of the aisle.
I felt it wholly inappropriate for the FBI to be playing umpire and referee amongst these decision makers when there was no factual or legal basis to continue those investigations. So, I shut them down. And I think that’s so desperately needed because we need to restore trust in law enforcement and certainly in the DOJ and the FBI so the American people don’t fear the very government that is supposed to protect them.
And so, thank you for doing that. On August 11th, you released to the committee documents concerning leak investigations that began in 2017. Do you believe these leaks were accidental or were they intentional in order to influence public opinion against President Trump? ; When I can publicly make a final decision on that, I just through a recommendation of charging that the DOJ makes or findings that I have, I’m able to do so, but they’re still not complete.
Why did the FBI under Director Comey want to undermine the Trump administration? I don’t know, you’ll have to ask him. Do you think it might have been political? How will Director Comey be held accountable for his leaks in classified information concerning the Russian collusion hoax? Well, anyone, doesn’t matter what you did before or what seat you were in.
If you leak classified information, that’s illegal. And we will investigate it fully. And if we can bring enough evidence to recommend charges to the Department of Justice, we will. But as you know, in these leak investigations, it’s very difficult to produce the information necessary. We know leaks happen.
They literally happen every week. It’s one of the most destructive things to this country. Media receives classified information beneficial to one side or the other. I’m a fan of none of it, and I want to shut all of it down. Um and we need to bring some real cases to deter individuals from doing that, and that’s my focus. What was Comey’s role in creating the ICA? You know, speaking from my memory as the head of the FBI, he was charged um under uh then uh Director Brennan and Director Clapper and the other IC elements to come in with the NSA, CIA,
FBI, um and ODNI and put together a collection of information on how um the information sort of surrounding Russiagate came together. So, he represented the FBI in that. Was former Director of CIA John Brennan, he he’s denied that the Steele dossier was used in creating the ICA. Is that true? Well, it’s Without commenting on him, the FISA has been released and the dossier was in the FISA. It was in four FISAs.
So, I’ll let the public decide. Well, former Director Brennan actually denied repeatedly that he pushed for the Steele dossier to be included in the ICA. Is that true? Denied. I’ll let his testimony speak for itself, but then Deputy Director Andy McCabe also testified to the House Intelligence Committee, which has now been declassified, that were there no Steele dossier, there would have been no FISA.
Well, my time’s getting close, but uh let me tell you this, sir, and I’ll what my colleague from Texas said, thank you for the job you’re doing. You’re making the American people safe. You’re making you’re restoring trust in these agencies that we so many of us had lost trust in. So, thank you for the work you’re doing.
That thin blue line, you’re doing a fine job and and we want to let you know we appreciate it. Thank you. God bless you. Lady from California is recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Director, for coming here today. And actually, thank you for your ; ; response to my colleague from New York who asked you earlier about violent extremism, and you said that there is violent extreme ideology on both sides, and I think you um actually alluded to that same statement yesterday in the Senate.
So, I too have some questions I’d like to ask you. These are not gotcha questions, and um just deny, please, what you deem to be false. So, Dylann Roof, uh who followed white supremacist propaganda, murdered nine black parishioners in Charleston in 2015. Do you deny this? I’m sorry. Um Dylann Roof?
Roof. Roof. Can you give me uh some more information? Uh you do you do you head of the FBI, you probably know this. If you don’t know, that’s fine. I can Okay. ; give me a reminder, I’ve got a lot in front of me. ; It was national news. Uh Robert Bowers murdered 11 Jewish worshipers in Pittsburgh in 2018. ; that. ; And it was the deadliest anti-Semitic attack.
So, do you do you admit that that happened? Yeah, I’m not saying the other thing didn’t happen. I’m just asking for a little information. Patrick Crusius, who posted a manifesto about a Hispanic invasion, walked into a Walmart in El Paso, Texas in 2019 and began firing. He murdered 23 people that day, and the youngest was 15.
Um do you admit or deny that that happened? I’ll take your presentation as accurate. All right. Well, I have to say all of these cases have been adjudicated. As I said, they are not gotcha questions. These incidents were national news. Um so, and as Director of the FBI, you have access to all of this information.
So, in 2022, Payton Gendron walked into a supermarket in a black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York and started shooting. He murdered 10 people that day. And on September 10th, uh your friend Charlie Kirk was assassinated. Tyler Robinson has been taken into custody and charged, but also on that day, Desmond Holly, a 16-year-old white male, shot and injured two students at a high school in Colorado before killing himself.
And according to the Anti-Defamation League, he had a fascination with mass shootings and white supremacy. So, do you admit to deny these facts? Those happened. Okay. Your predecessor, former FBI Director Christopher Christopher Wray, said that one of the most dangerous concerns is that racially motivated violent extremism, especially white supremacists, has been the biggest chunk of our domestic terrorism cases and is responsible for the most lethal attacks over the last decade.
Do you Do you admit or deny A, that he said this? I’ll let the record reflect that. Whatever he said was what he said. ; And do you agree? That there is racially motivated crimes being committed in America, yes. Yes, especially white supremacists, which is the biggest chunk of our domestic terrorism.
I’m glad that you you said this. So, last week, uh President Trump was asked if there were extremists on both the left and the right. Uh he was actually asked this by Fox and Friends, and his exact words were, “I’ll tell you something that’s going to get me in trouble, but I couldn’t care less. The radicals on the right often times are radical because they don’t want to see crime.
The radicals on the left are the problem, and they’re vicious, and they’re horrible, and they’re politically savvy.” Do you agree with the president? I don’t speak for the president. The president speaks for himself. ; Do you agree with the president? I don’t On what matter? On the question that I just asked. Do you agree with his statement about the radical left? ; That there’s ideology that’s driving violence on both sides, yes. That’s what he acknowledged.
No, he he didn’t. He didn’t. But I’m I’m glad that you’re saying that and actually creating some separation between you and the president. And I’m glad that you ; not what happened. acknowledging that there’s violent extremism on both sides. What’s interesting is that the research arm of the Department of Justice, the National Institute of Justice, do you know what that is? I’m familiar with them.
; Okay, great. It is the research arm of the Department of Justice, and it published an article in 2024 devoted to domestic radical radicalization, violent extremism, and terrorism. I I I have it. It’s interesting that it’s no longer on the website. It has been scrubbed, but I ask these questions because what makes a strong, qualified director of any business, of any household, of the FBI, what makes a reputable prosecutor, is not lapdog loyalty, but a commitment to the creed that evidence is agnostic, and
that the evidence will lead you to making the right decisions. And your job, no one’s job is to like the data or the evidence. It is to collect it. That is how you gain trust. And Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter into the record, if I may, white supremacist group stands by racist ideology. I would unanimous consent.
; Without objection. Dylann Roof, the radicalization of the alt-right and ritual ritualized racial violence. Without objection. Thank you. Another article, how Robert Bowers went from conservative to white nationalist. I’d like to enter that into the record with me. ; Without objection. Patrick Crusius believed he was fulfilling Trump’s wishes in El Paso attack, his attorney said.
I’d like to enter into the record? Without objection. Buffalo shooting, how far-right killers are radicalized online. I’d like to enter that into the record? Without objection. Evergreen High School shooter’s online activity reveals fascination with mass shootings, white supremacy. I’d like to enter that into the record? Without objection.
Murder and extremism in the United States in 2024, a report by the Anti-Defamation League. I’d like to enter that into the record? ; Without objection. And the article, the report that was scrubbed from the DOJ just recently, National Institute of Justice Journal focusing on domestic radicalization, violent extremism, and terrorism.
I’d like to enter that into the record? Without objection. And lastly, the libertarian think tank Cato and their analysis on violent extremism and the right rising in extremist acts. I’d like to enter that into the record? Without objection. Thank you and I yield back. The lady yields back. Gentle gentle lady from Wyoming is recognized.
Uh just very quickly, um Director Patel, thank you for being here, for your service to this country, and for the transparency that you have brought to the FBI and for the American people. Uh transparency that was absolutely non-existent in the Biden administration and FBI. I believe that you might have been asked earlier about whether you had had an opportunity to visit with any of Epstein’s legal counsel.
Were you asked that question earlier? I I think so. Okay. Um one of the legal counsels or legal fixtures for Mr. Epstein was Stacey Plaskett, the Democrat delegate to Congress from the Virgin Islands. So perhaps for those on the other side who are interested in talking to Jeffrey Epstein’s attorneys, they could sure visit with one of their own colleagues.
Um I want to focus on something that I think is very important that has not been addressed enough today, and that is related to the consequences of the Biden open border. One consequence of the Biden border crisis is the impact that it continues to have on our tribal communities with the um cartels taking advantage of our open borders, our the Mexican drug cartels uh by infiltrating our reservations and bringing violence, drugs, murder, trafficking, and more.
Last year when I questioned the Attorney General Garland about what the DOJ was doing to protect these communities, he simply defected responsibility and said that Congress had not appropriated sufficient resources uh for them to be able to protect our tribal communities. Mr.
Patel, what is the Trump FBI doing to counter the drug cartel infiltration and other violent crime targeting our Native American communities? Thank you. It only took more than half of this proceeding to talk about one of the priorities that the FBI has, which is crimes on tribal lands. Every single crime that we have been talking about, whether it’s predatory child predators, human trafficking, narco-traffickers, murder, they all happen on tribal lands as well.
And I’ve said since the beginning, it is a priority, which is why we launched Operation Not Forgotten on tribal [snorts] lands. And I’m the first FBI director to meet with the staff and tribal leaders here in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere, and invited them into my office and headquarters to see them because I need engagement with tribal leadership, and I need our police and FBI agents to be engaging with tribal leadership, otherwise we’re not going to break through.
We have 1,900 Indian country cases open right now. We’ve got 600 indictments this year alone. We cannot tribal lands. Every single one of those people lives in the United States of America, and it is an absolute priority to protect them and their children just as it is anyone else. So I think it’s fair to say that what Merrick Garland said testified to, that they didn’t that the FBI and DOJ did not have the resources to address that, I think that that was an absolutely false statement.
Would you agree with me? It’s a decision by him not to do so. That’s not my decision. At the end of August, the U.S. Attorney and FBI announced that nearly 100 personnel representing members of the Safe Trails Task Force operated near Wyoming’s Wind River Reservation to assist with reducing drug trafficking and illegal guns.
Director Patel, you have routinely stated that it is your mission to partner with and strengthen local and state law enforcement partners. How does the task force and other FBI efforts bring tribal law enforcement into this process? The major problem with tribal lands is the sheer tyranny of geography and the amount of coverage that they have on land versus the personnel they have to do it.
So what we’ve done is constantly surge resources to tribal lands across this country on a 30-60-90 day rotating basis reporting back to us saying who needs more. And what we found is that most of these lands can be assisted by our counter-UAS program, our drone capabilities, and we’re going to do it because what’s happening is the Mexican drug cartels are literally flying overhead, dropping their cargo, their narcotics onto this land where no one’s looking, and then it’s being disseminated to children, to youth,
through adults on that land and killing them. We got to stop it before it gets dropped off. Well, and your testimony proves that the Biden administration did not lack the resources to address drug drug and violent crime in tribal communities or around the United States. It instead expended and wasted these resources investigating parents, Catholics, we now find out Turning Point USA, the RNC, and Republican organizations rather than protecting our Native Americans by closing the border.
Is that fair? I think so. Wonderful. Thank you and I uh I do appreciate the work that you’ve done in this regard. I was previously the chairman of the subcommittee on Indian and insular insular affairs with the Natural Resources Committee, and safety and security on our reservations and for our tribal members has been one of our priorities, one of my priorities, and I very much appreciate the work that the FBI has done.
Let me know if there’s anything else I can do to help you, and with that, I yield back. ; I will, ma’am. The gentle lady yields back. The gentle lady from Georgia is recognized. Thank you, uh Chairman, and thank you for coming in today, Mr. Patel. In the past few months, the country has experienced a a string of horrific, high-profile attacks that have been motivated by racial hatred or political ideology.
Shooter attacked the CDC headquarters, firing hundreds of rounds and killing a police officer. An arsonist set fire to the Pennsylvania Governor’s uh Josh Shapiro’s residence with the governor and his family actually inside. Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband were assassinated earlier this year.
Clark and Charlie Kirk was murdered last week. Bomb threats have been made against HBCUs and the DNC, and just the list goes on and on. And we have just a few minutes today, so I don’t want to take a lot of time to go into all the countless and devastating violent crimes and incidents that have happened at our schools or on our streets and in our communities that have just been happening all year long. Mr.
Patel, just yes or no, is this type of political violence ever acceptable in your eyes? No. I’m glad that we agree that these heinous acts designed to instill fear and division in our nation are never, ever acceptable, yet each of these incidents has recently taken place under your watch. The FBI’s website states that protecting the United States from terrorist acts is the FBI’s number one priority, including from domestic terrorists.
Is this still your number one priority? Domestic terrorism? Preventing domestic terrorism. Our number one priorities are protecting the homeland and international terrorism and crushing violent crime, and domestic terrorism sort of interlays between both of those. Okay. So well, then I’m glad that you’re giving us the right answer, but unfortunately, your actions kind of tell a different story.
Earlier this year, you granted the ranks of the FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Operations Section. This is the section of the F- FBI that is most directly responsible for addressing political violence in our country by preventing attacks from occurring and effectively responding to them if they do. The agents in this section are the ones who stopped an individual stockpiling weapons, who planned to attack schools and churches in Florida, and seized bombs made by an ISIS sympathizer in New Orleans.
And instead of ensuring that this section has all the resources that it needs at a time when its mission is critical, you fired its decorated, veteran FBI agents who have served their country proudly under Republican and both Democratic presidents, and you scrapped the tools that they developed to fight domestic terrorism, including the National Domestic Ter- Terrorism Incident Database.
I mean, most of that is just not true. We have 1,700 current DT-managed programs. We’re up 300% in the amount of cases we brought against nihilistic, violent extremists, including 764 wishing to harm our children. The FBI and the men and women are getting after that problem set more than ever because I’ve unleashed them to do so.
And any situation that these tragic occurrences across the country are somehow singularly my fault are disgusting because that watership goes down to the men and women of the FBI, ; Mr. Patel, I’m going to reclaim my time. Mr. Chairman, I’m going to reclaim my time. Mr. Chairman, I’m going to reclaim my time. ; ; The gentle lady controls the Unanimous consent request.
She’ll state her request. ; Into the record, an article from Reuters titled FBI scales back staffing and tracking of domestic terrorism probes, sources say. Thank you very much. I object. ; that. So, Mr. Patel, and it isn’t just a domestic terrorism operations section. Under your watch, agents are fully diverting their attention to these anti-immigrant and city takeover operations, leaving our children vulnerable to dangerous networks of online predators, both domestic and international.
You pulled more than 120 FBI agents from their normal duties to operate sobriety checks and conduct traffic stops, exposing the FBI’s fleet of unmarked cars and thereby making it harder for the FBI to combat violent criminal gangs, foreign intelligence services, and drug traffickers in the process. That’s simply not true.
If we were not able to do two things at one time, how would we be seizing record amounts of fentanyl? 23,000 violent felons have been arrested twice as many as last year. Thank you very much. And this request basically is uh it is an article from Reuters which quotes law enforcement officers familiar with agents who once covered child exploitation cases but now focus on immigration child exclusive, thousands of agents diverted to Trump immigration track down. Mr.
Patel, in the short time I have left, your tenure as director of FBI has been somewhat problematic. Americans are left safe, left definitely less less safe under your watch. You have gutted the FBI’s ability to keep safe uh from domestic terrorism. You have sent FBI agents to conduct traffic stops and round up hardworking immigrants who pose no danger to public safety, people even President Trump referred to as good long time workers.
Your job is to protect and serve the American Time to the gentle lady. You spend your time protecting heinous individuals and using the FBI to serve as a political circus. You at times have appeared unequipped and this country deserves better and I yield. The gentle lady yields back. ; May I respond? You sure can.
Simply put, what is it? Are we failing? If we’re failing, how are you arresting 23,000 violent felons, twice as many as this time last year? Are we failing? Cuz if we’re failing, how are we seizing 1,500 kg of meth, 25% increase from last year? Are we failing? Cuz we captured four top 10 FBI most wanted from around the world in 7 months.
That’s more than the entirety of the last administration. Are we failing? Cuz we put 1,500 child predators in prison. Are we failing cuz we dismantled 300 human trafficking networks. Which is it? You don’t like me, that’s fine. But don’t you dare disparage the men and women of the FBI that are producing record results in historic fashion to protect this country.
They are kicking ass for America and they’re going to continue to do so. And we appreciate your leadership. The gentle lady from Florida is recognized. When I was home recently, I met with the agents leading the Tampa office of the FBI and I saw what they’re focused on in my community, stopping drug traffickers, rescuing children from exploitation, fighting cybercrime, protecting us from acts of terrorism, foreign and domestic.
And I know from my time as a federal prosecutor and a judge that this work by the bureau doesn’t make headlines, but it is happening every single day. At the top, accountability is necessary, transparency is critical, but today we’ve seen an effort not just to diminish but to distort the work of Director Patel and the agents he leads.
If we really care about transparency and about truth, then what we owe to the American people is this reality that thousands of dedicated professionals at the FBI wake up every single day thinking not about themselves but about this country and keeping every single one of us and our children safe from harm.
And Director Patel, I would like to hear from you the facts about what the FBI is doing and your efforts to fight crime. Director Patel, isn’t it correct that since January 20th, 2025, the FBI has made over 25,000 immigration-related arrests, including 350 members of Tren de Aragua and 195 members of MS-13? Those numbers are accurate.
The Tren de Aragua numbers are up over 350% from the year before. And during that same period, hasn’t the FBI seized over 66,000 kilos of cocaine, 6,000 kilos of meth, and 1,500 kilos of fentanyl? Uh not to be nitpicky, but it’s 89,000 kilos of cocaine and 7,300 kg of meth. And isn’t it also true that the FBI Tampa Division’s Panama Express Strike Force specifically seized nearly 67,000 kilos of cocaine valued at more than $1.
6 billion from illicit maritime vessels? ; One of our best operations out of the Port of Tampa and I was down there in South Florida when Pan Ex did their work. Director Patel, since October 7th, 2023 Hamas attack, the FBI has been a co-leader of the Joint Task Force October 7th. Isn’t it correct that this task force is actively working to bring justice for victims and to prevent terrorist infiltration at our borders? ; Yes, ma’am.
Since January 20th, hasn’t the FBI arrested 59 foreign intelligence operatives for spying or smuggling dangerous material into the United States? Yes, we have and that’s on track to be more than 25% than ever before. And the FBI has also been leading operations against major cyber threat actors, including those from Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.
Isn’t that right? 17% increase from year-to-date last year. Director Patel, the FBI’s Child Exploitation Task Force has continued to investigate predators who target children online and across our communities. How significant is that threat today and what results have you seen under your tenure in bringing these offenders to justice? We have under Operation Greyskull dismantled dark web units that are operating online, not just in the United States, but across the world to do our children harm.
We have taken into custody more suspects than ever before on those who seek to harm our children. That is what the men and women of the FBI do and that’s what they’re going to continue to do. Those are the real results when you let good cops be cops and when you let us get on these platforms and expose them to the public and show them the harms of these predators on these online gaming systems and social media systems and we need more help from Congress to allow us more authorities to do that work.
The FBI Laboratory manages the Combined DNA Index System or CODIS, which compares over 25 million DNA profiles and aids more than 125 investigations each day. Director Patel, why is this important to law enforcement nationwide? All of law enforcement relies on our CJIS operation out of West Virginia and all and what that does is allow 19,000 agencies to come in and say, “Hey, does this guy have a criminal history? Hey, is this an illegal firearm? Do we have a DNA hit?” Like we did in these recent um assassinations. That’s what the FBI
brings to bear because local and state law enforcement agencies don’t have that capability and we’re doing it 24/7, 365. CJIS does not close for 1 minute. In your testimony, you noted that the FBI has ongoing counterintelligence investigations into China, Iran, and Russia across all 55 field offices. Why is it essential to maintain that scope of coverage and what success can you point to in disrupting nation-state actors? Our biggest threats involving nation-state actors are the PRC, Russia, and China and they are up 33%, 83%, and
60% respectively in arrests alone this year. Those nation-state actors wish to do harm in our infrastructure, our critical infrastructure system, our energy, our water supply, and also go after and target individuals and senior citizens and take their money through online pig butchering schemes, which we’ve exposed in Cambodia by way of the CCP.
This is groundbreaking work that the American public should be seeing that their FBI is doing and I’m happy to have the opportunity report on it. Thank you, Director Patel. I yield back. Uh the gentle lady yields back. The gentle lady from Mr. Chairman, I have a couple Unanimous consent? Thank you so much. I appreciate it. In response to Mr.
Patel’s making the remarks that um that maybe our colleagues are disparaging the men and women of the FBI, I’d like to intro into the record three unanimous consent requests. One is uh entitled FBI using polygraphs to test a officials’ loyalty. Uh the second is Kash Patel knowingly broke law when firing top officials, lawsuit alleges, published by NBC.
And the third is FBI forces out more leaders, including extra ex-director who fought Trump demand for January 6th agents’ names. I object. Thank you. The gentle lady from Vermont is recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director Patel, thank you for being with us today. Appreciate your time.
Uh let me say at the top, political violence should have no place in this country and I strongly, unequivocally condemn the killing of Charlie Kirk last week. And this is exactly the kind of case that warrants a swift and thorough investigation by the FBI. What shouldn’t be happening, however, is this administration’s seeming attempt to exploit Wait, Mr.
Kirk’s death. Within minutes of this horrible, horrible assassination, dividing us even further without knowing enough about the killer’s complicated, confused political ideology and the extent of his motivation. And this week, Vice President Vance claimed that this is, quote, an extremely destructive movement of left-wing extremism and said that, quote, it’s part of the reason why Charlie was killed.
He pledged to go after organizations on the left. But Director Patel, it was just 3 months ago that Melissa Hortman, the Minnesota House Speaker, and her husband Mark were shot to death in their home in the middle of the night by a self-identified right-wing extremist and Trump supporter. When that assassination happened, the FBI released a written statement denouncing the killings and pledging to hold the killer accountable.
And I thank the Bureau for that. It was clear, concise, to the point. But when you compare that statement to the over 50 mentions of the Charlie Kirk killing and just four for the Hortmans on accounts affiliated with the FBI and your personal account, it appears to many Americans that you’re valuing some lives more than others.
And that’s painful. And this is what I’m hearing from my constituents. So, I just want to convey that to you. And the Vice President didn’t even call on right-wing organizations to tone down their rhetoric after that horrific killing in Minnesota. And he never once spoke about dismantling conservative institutions.
This week, when the President was asked by a reporter about Speaker Hortman, he claimed he didn’t even know who she was. One of the most high-profile assassinations of an elected official in recent memory, and the President claims to know nothing about it, hasn’t even heard of it.
It was absolutely [snorts] devastating for her colleagues and for her family. And I think we all can agree in this room that we have to stop this political violence. So, my first question to you is Director Patel, what is your plan as Director of the FBI to turn down the temperature, especially in light of the fact that it seems like members of the administration um are reacting to political violence based on party affiliation? What’s your plan? I can only speak for myself and the FBI, and what we are doing is, I think I mentioned it earlier, we’re following the money
because whatever attack you are describing, and they are all despicable, equally so. People need money to operate. People need money to conduct these attacks, to conduct these invest investigations. And so, what we are doing is finding the people that supported this infrastructure system because even when you say there’s a lone, quote unquote, lone wolf actor, he’s not truly a lone wolf actor.
Something happened along the way. I agree. And so, can I just just cuz we have such little time, are you making a commitment right now to follow where the evidence goes in investigating where there’s violence on the left or the right? Because over the last 10 years, when you look at the ideology, I want to follow up on what my colleague from California said, when you look at the data, you look at the Anti-Defamation League data, 96% of ideologically motivated killings were committed by the right wing.
Um when you look at the Institute of Justice report that she cited, it’s five times the number that um five times the number of far-left extremist incidents are perpetrated by far right. And it’s been reported, and she mentioned this, that as of September 12th, 2025, just 2 days after Charlie Kirk’s killing, that the DOJ removed that report from the DOJ website.
That’s why Americans are concerned that there seems to be a separate system of justice that if you are a Republican, that and you are attacked, you will get the full weight and authority of the FBI and this administration.
