you have seen for those one minutes? it wasn't over the stage or hub of the rally, 200 yards away. looks like it would have been looking the length of a football field or so more kind of >> how many separate times was the shooter on the premises? >> so, again with the caveat we continue to work on it. we believe the first time he traveled to the grounds was, i think, a week before. he spent roughly 20 minutes there. and he went to the grounds again on the morning of the event it appears for about 70 minutes, i think. but again, i would have to go back and look to be sure of that point. and then he came back in the

afternoon so that would be, i guess, a third time for good. but that included things like this drone activity that we just talked about. >> the gentleman from california has recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director, thank you for appearing and the extraordinary job you are doing. please convey our thanks to women and men at the bureau for their incredible work. i work with him $0.06 a u.s. attorney more than 30 years ago. let me start and i'm question about when i applied to be an assistant u.s. attorney i had to go through a background check. do candidates for the fbi have to go through background checks? >> yes. >> would somebody with dozens of felony conviction survive a background check from the bureau? >> no. >> so they would never be hired by the bureau? >> no. >> so clearly, the bureau, you don't have to commit on this and i know you won't but they have

hundreds for they were hiring and one of america's great political parties. let me turn to the events of the tragic shooting. have you been able to gain access to the shooters electronic communication, social media and the caveats that you mention, the investigation is still early, have you been able to make any deductions or any other indications of the shooters motivation from those electroni? >> so, in terms of our ability to access it, we have been able to get into and exploit a number of electronic devices, digital devices, but not all of them yet. within the various accounts, we been able to get access to some of them but we are still waiting on some of them. we may never get access because of the encryption issue that presents an increasingly vexing barrier for law enforcement, not

just the fbi, but law enforcement over the country. so we are still drilling into that. we have some information -- some places we've been able to look and simply says we will be able to look in some places we will never be able to see however good our processes. in terms of what we have been able to find so far, a lot of the usual repository of information have not yielded anything notable in terms of motive or like ideology. having said that, it does appear fairly clear that he was interested in public figures kind of more broadly. and, and i think this is important, starting somewhere around july 6th or so, he became very focused on former president trump and this rally. and so one of the things that i can share here today that has

not been shared yet is that we just in the last couple of days found that from our review, to your point about devices, analysis of a laptop that the investigation ties to the shooter reveals that on julh for "how far away was oswald from kennedy? "and so, that is a search, obviously, significant in terms of his state of mind. and that is the same day that it appears that he registered for the butler rally. >> when you say is electronic holdings indicated an interest in different public figures, without revealing anything that you are not comfortable revealing about those public figures, can you tell us anything generally about

them, either the offices they hold, they were political party, or was it simply people of high profile? >> well, couple of things. first, the images that we have recovered so far from -- i can't remember which various devices appeared to be what we call cached images from searches of news articles. so if you do a news article search, of course, image of their photos on it, those photos get stored automatically in your cash as opposed to him searchinn and getting an image of that person. as far as the pictures that are like that, there doesn't seem to be a whole of rhyme or reason to it so far other than these are all prominent public people. but they cover both parties. they cover both u.s. people and

even some foreign public officials. so, that part doesn't appear -- that one repository of information doesn't appear to be overly indicative of motive other than interest in public figures. but that could just be because he was reading news stories. so, we are still trying to drill into that. that is why all these outstanding legal process returns that we are waiting on for various accounts, platforms, et cetera, any one of them could be one that would have very indicative, very important information. >> if i can commit one short additional question. from any other indication of a target, that is someone who is not just sort of generically the subject of the search as you described but for which there was more than interest interest than others? >> information that i just described at the moment does not

appear particularly indicative of targeting in its own right. but again, that dot, once we get other information could connect in a way that might be more meaningful. but i really, i'm sharing that piece of information with this committee and the american public, but i think it is important qualification, this does not appear to be a target list or something like that. this is cached images from running search of news stories, and again, there was nothing at the moment -- there is no pattern from that particular piece of information that is overly remarkable so far. >> thank you, thank you chairman. >> yields back the dental men from california recognized. >> the situation on the southern border, is that still euro assessment. >> i stand by prior testimony and in fact, just in the last month or so, we conducted a

significant series of arrests, i say we come at the joint task force is working with i.c.e. and a number of individuals with suspected international terrorist ties. i've also been very vocal about the fact that since -- and this has really been since the last time i appeared before you, that we are increasingly concerned about the possibility, not just of a foreign terrorist inspired attack, which is very much, very much a concern. but even the potential for a coordinated foreign terrorist attack perhaps like what we have seen against the concert hall in russia, for example, but just here in the united states. >> the night teen suicide bombers for visas were responsible for 3,000 deaths on 9/11. what is your best estimate for foreign terrorist now in our country? >> i don't -- i don't know that i can give you that number. what i can tell you is, we have

lots of foreign terrorism related investigations. but that doesn't mean all of them amen, you know come illegally or anything like that. >> it seems the simplest of terrorism looking for dozens of realists to attack, low security, high density menus for example friday night high school football games across the country at the same hour with bombs and automatic weapons that would produce thousands of casualties from coast-to-coast in a matter of minutes. how likely is such a scenario? >> well i'm a white you are describing would require, of course, a lot of coordination but i will tell you and i think you are on a particularly important point which is unlike 9/11 attacks, which again my was an fbi headquarters on the day of 9/11. i remember it vividly, and i spent a period of time after that in my prior positions engaged with the families and victims.

what we are seeing more and more with foreign terrorist threats and frankly, also the domestic terrorist threats is a focus on what you were talking about and what i call soft targets. which is really the american people's benefits, just the intelligence community speak where everyday people live their everyday lives. >> what terrorist groups have infiltrated our country? >> i don't know that i would say infiltrated. we have investigations as we speak that relate to isis and its affiliates. we have investigations as we speak that relate to al qaeda. we have investigations as we speak that relate to al-shabaab. we have investigations as we speak that relate to the iranian proxies, hezbollah, and frankly, even the irg seat itself. >> what foreign criminal things are now in our country? that you are most concerned

with? >> welcome a foreign criminal gangs, i mean, obviously we have investigations and a lot of investigation into gangs like ms-13, for example, and some of its counterparts. although, i think if you were to talk to most chiefs and sheriffs like i'm doing every week, you shouldn't underestimate how prevalent how prevalent gangs are appear at a lot of the gang violence -- >> i'm concerned about those we have allowed him through the southern border and what they are now posing. do you believe the bedding performed at the southern border to ensure aliens or terrorist or criminal gang ties are not being released in the united states? >> well, it is not for me to speak to the bedding. what i will tell you -- >> once they are released in the united states. >> one of the concerns that i have, which i touched on briefly in my opening is, there's been a lot of focus on the number of

terrorist encountered at the border. that number has increased over the last five or six years, and that should be of concern. but frankly, to me, the bigger concern is individuals who weren't either weren't on the watch list taught at the time they came in because there wasn't information known yet the ties to terrorism and only after they get and that some new piece of information developed somewhere overseas and now we know. that is a bigger concern. >> we been warned that fed it against a blank sheet of paper m in this country, but doesn't have any record released in the country but you find out later the dangers. >> were fake documents to connect them. sometimes, i think there are people who come in who because of the nature of the threat information to put somebody on the watch list, there wasn't

fingerprints from the person at the time because not every piece of intelligence comes with fingerprints. so the guy comes and using a fake idea and there is no reason to connect him. >> and of course, 2 million cutaways, you know nothing about them. >> welcome i don't know absolutely nothing but one of the key parts of our collective defense here is that we work with 800,000 sworn law enforcement across the country and we trained them on the right questions to ask things like that so we can build additional eyes and ears to do a traffic stop or whatever it happens to be. we run a greater chance of leveraging all of that to pick up people who may slip through the cracks. speak with the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california has recognized. >> director, we are 100 days and russia has attacked their democracy in past elections. are they seeking to do with that in one? >> we assess that the russian

government continues to want to influence and embarrass ways interfere with our democracy, with our electoral process. in fact, in just the last few weeks, we announced significant disruption of a generative ai enhanced social media bop form of the russians with influence of operation and some of the fake petitioner's profiles of those bots purported to be u.s. persons. they were still at it. we have seen that an election cycle after election cycle. >> do the russians have a preferred candidate? >> i'm not sure i can speak to that year, but certainly what i would tell you, it is not just the russians. i think that is important for people to know too appear there was a lot of tension with the russians, as it should be but

we also know you may recall in 2020, director ratcliff and i announced an effort by the iranians to interfere and more recently, we have had indictments related to china. 34 chinese mps officer is creating fictitious personas, posting full's information online full of narratives designed to so device and discourse and i'm talking narratives they were pushing, purporting to be americans but chinese officers and suggestion that covid came from a lab leak or trashing u.s. law enforcement on the occasion of the anniversary of george floyd's death. >> and shifting to the attempted assassination of the former president, i want to make it clear in america, violence has

never been the answer. not on a certain day in january or recent day in july. and i want to go through the shooting just briefly with you. how many armed officers are within the perimeter, just a ballpark figure? >> you know, that really goes to the security posture, which is the subject to the dhs inspector general review an outside panel might end up in a panel. >> you say probably more than a hundred though? >> i have to believe that number, but again i don't have that numbers at our fingertips. our focus is on the should ramp at tech. speak with the shooter was able to get eight shots off before he was killed questioning >> that is what it appears, yes. >> the type of weapon was in a soul rifle? ar style. >> so one round? >> essentially. >> do you like to shoot? >> do i question my guest. >> do you know the difference between ar and flexion rifle?

>> i'm not going to try to engage on firearms expertise, but i have hired a variety of weapons. >> had the shooter used bullet rifle come up with that be one trigger pull around? >> that is my understanding. >> would there have been more -- an assault rifle trigger pull round, trigger pull round, trigger pull round come up election the soul rifle, what is the difference? faster, slower? >> it was able to get more rounds off more quickly than he would have with other kinds of weapons. >> that is my point is that, we can add additional resources to protect political candidates, and we should. people who went to that really deserved to be protected from gun violence just like the students at parkland deserved to be protected from gun violence pure just like the baby sandy hook deserved to be protected from gun violence. so we will devote more

resources. we've added a presidential candidate who is also now protected. but if we are being honest with ourselves, we have armed this country to the t. and we have allowed the most dangerous people to have access to the most dangerous weapons. and i say that as a parent of a 7-year-old and a 5-year-old and a 2-year-old and the two oldest have done as shooter drills in their classrooms. i say that as a brother to two police officers who walk a very violent beat. and i say that as an elected official who believes that my colleagues deserved to be as safe as i deserved to be when we are at political rallies. so we really need to step back and think of him if we allow these weapons to be in our country, can we truly protect our elected officials and can we truly are protect, most importantly, our children in the next election. i yelled back. >> the gentleman yields back. it is good to have mr. massey back with us, and at some of us had a chance to go to kentucky

at the last few weeks and visit with thomas and his family and hear wonderful stories about rondo. an amazing, an amazing lady, gentle spirit, and we are glad to have esther massey back with us. the next 5 minutes belong to you, congressman. >> director ray, how many counter snipers were present at the rally that day and which of the counter snipers took the shop that took out the would-be assassin? >> i don't have the number of counter snipers. i know it was secret service counter that took the shot that eliminated the shooter. we have conducted a number of interviews, including of him. >> wasn't one of the two we see in the videos on top of the roof, or was it a different location? >> i'm afraid i don't have the at my fingertips here. >> you mentioned the would-be assassin bought a 5-foot ladder and you have credit card evidence of that. but it looks like on the scene, there was a larger letter he

might abuse. do you know which ladder he used to get to the roof and do you have possession of that 5-foot ladder in the other ladder and that taller ladder got to the scene? >> so this whole bit about the latter is something we are drilling into more. we do have possession of the 5-foot ladder that he purchased close in time to his attempt to the assassination that we traced the purchase of that ladder from a receipt, a bloodied receipt that he had on him at the time his body was recovered on the roof. we do not yet know for sure how exactly he got up on the roof. we are looking at various forensic pieces to kind of peace that together so more to come on that. >> do you know where the 5-foot ladder was found or retrieved? was it near the report still in his vehicle? >> neither.

we don't have it in front of me, but i know that it was not on the scene and i know it was not in his vehicle but we can circle back to it. >> is there any evidence that he may have been in contact with somebody else before this occurred that may have had any prior knowledge or may have helped him plant this event? >> needless to say, that is a question we are intensely focused on because, obviously, that would be incredibly meaningful. so far, underline so far, we have not found any evidence of any accomplices or coconspirators, foreign or domestic. >> and you are using geo location data to see if his cell phone was near another cell phone, i presume? right, we are doing lots of different cellular analysis, geolocation stuff, looking at his accounts. from everything we have seen,,

which is consistent with what we have learned in interviews and a lot of people describe him as a loner, that those kind of fit with what we are seeing in his devices. his list of contacts, for example, is very short, you know, compared to what you would normally see for most people. it doesn't appear to be a lot of interaction between him face-to-face or digital with a lot of people. >> okay, thank you. >> i mean, there's not any and we are trying to talk to anybody that had any engagement whatsoever, digital, classmates, coworkers, et cetera. >> rights come i appreciate that. now i want to talk about another possible assassination attempt and i will start with a video of president biden. this was from recently, this last month if you can play that. >> gallo is directed to hank the president, mike pence. and i think it is fair to say one of the darkest days in the history of america.

>> okay, and he is referring to january sixth. werther gallows erected to hang mike pence as the president says here? >> i'm not aware of any physical gallows. i can't remember whether demonstration perspective. there may have been replica or symbol of something like that. >> that is my impression. can we show -- can we ray set up so you can see it? it looks like there was some kind of prop that was built. the construction doesn't look it lends itself to actually hanging somebody but more of a prop, i think, as you suggested, that was erected january 6th. but if the president were correct that these gallows were erected to hang mike pence, that would be a very serious allegation, wouldn't it? >> i would take it very seriously, yes. >> has anybody been arrested, or do you have any leads in

conjunction with election of this gallows? we have a picture here on the screen if you can show it again. it was just up there. there is an individual here who is seen near these gallows. has he been arrested? have you identified this person? >> you know, i don't know i can speak to the specific person or the gallows that are pictured on the image. we have had my thing, 850 people that pled guilty to federal crimes related to january 6th. and another 180 convicted at trial's. so, i can be sure. >> and some of them merely for going into the capital, but here, the president suggests that individual intended to hank vice president pence, which seems like kind of a wild claim myself, given the construction. but if we are to take him

serious and even if we aren't, let me just finish by saying this. if you have no leads or not sure anybody who erected those gallows was arrested were being investigated, you know, were there any confidential human sources involved from the fbi or any other agency in the election of that prop, those gallows? >> i'm not aware of anything like that. >> thank you my yield back. the lady from washington is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman and welcome director wray. dangerous, unlawful and totally unacceptable and just as we all watched and unequivocally condemned the attempted assassination attempt on our former president of my wish we could all come together to unequivocally condemn the act of political violence on january 6 instead of depending props that were used that were harmful, dangerous products of gallows,

attempting to show what people wanted to do to vice president pence. extreattempted to subvert the democracy on the worst assault on the capital since 1812. many were trapped in the gallery that day and we feared we would not make it out. insurrectionist's were chasing down former speaker nancy pelosi anthem vice president mike mike pence. i, myself a direct target of political violence when unarmed man with a gun showed up at my door and threatened me and my family and we actually ended up having to move our home. so, i understand the increased tenor of political violence that is wrecking our country. it has been on the rise fomented by violent and dehumanizing rhetoric from top public officials, including the former president and members of congress, sadly and bolstered by the proliferation of easily accessible cons, including

assault style weapons. all of this violence is unacceptable, and i wholeheartedly condemn it. i just hope we condemn all of the violence, not just one or two incidents. mr. ray, today i want to focus on the role of the fbi and the need for the bureau to remain neutral and independent, the fbi cannot and should not be subject to the whims of any president. the majority, apparently, doesn't think the fbi needs to be politically neutral and a dependent. they want an fbi subordinate to the president and not accountable to the american people. that is one part of a larger plan to undermine our democracy, to remove the checks and balances that have protected us, and ultimately to subvert our freedoms. that agenda promulgated by the former president, his loyalist, and his maga allies is called project 2025. it is publicly available online. i encourage everyone who is

watching this to google it. it includes plans to undermine every part of our government including the fbi. trump's 2025 agenda says, "the director of the fbi must not be independent of politics, but instead, must do whatever the president orders. under trump's project 2025, trump willis would undermine the independent structure of the fb. openly calls on the next conservative administration to support "a vast expansion of the number of political appointees in every office across the doj, especially the fbi." so mr. wray, given your extensive experience as a law enforcement special at doj and across multiple republican and democratic demonstrations, why do you think it is important that the fbi maintain political independence from the president? >> i think the fbi is needs to

stay independent and that means protecting american people without fear or favor upholding the constitution and rule of law and it means following the facts wherever they lead no matter who likes it. and at that last part because the essence of independence and objectivity is not an investigation is always going to yield the result you want. our independence and objectivity can't only be respected when you like the outcome. that is the very essence of objectivity. sometimes you will like the results, sometimes you won't like the result. that applies to everybody, including a spirit every member of time we are frustrated and disappointed by the outcome of r investigation but the alternative is erosion of rule of law where the only thing that distinguishes one investigation for another is power. that is what you see in some authoritarian countries around the world. so, i'm not familiar with this particular... >> no, i didn't ask you to comment on that. >> i don't know anything about

it, but what i can tell you from my perspective, the fbi needs to be functioning as independents. it is not part of the executive branch. it doesn't mean they'll be i doesn't serve at the pleasure of the president. but it does mean the way we do our work has to be. >> i have another question about the role of attorneys that the fbi office of general counsel, how do we protect that work? >> sorry, could you repeat the question? what role do the attorneys at the fbi office of general counsel insured that respects the rights of american citizens and how do we protect that work? >> so, in my experience, the lawyers and the officer of general counsel play an incredibly important role in ensuring that our agents have their questions about how to comply with the law and conducting their work answered. and ensuring that we conduct our work in the right way, which means scrupulously adhering to the laws and the rules that

apply to us. >> i want to say before i yield, mr. chairman, of the project 2025 eliminates the general counsel and house lawyers who were responsible for that role. i appreciate your indulgence and i yield back. speak with the lady yields back here at the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i think in december of last year, mr. wray, that you said blinking lights were going off in regards to the southern border and what is happening down there but as the border situation improved in terms of your assessment with security of americans since you were last year in december? >> well, i guess a couple of things and i appreciate the question. so first, the blinking lights comment that i made refers more broadly to the threat environment that i'm seeing as fbi director across a wide range of threats. contributing to that in a variety of ways are the threats that emanate from the border. so it's not just a comment on

the border issues but the threat environment we place more broadly. my experience in law enforcement. i am increasingly concerned that foreign terrorists would seek to exploit vulnerabilities at our southwest border or at other ports of entry or other aspects of our immigration system to facilitate an attack here in the united states. i think that is something we have to be concerned about. there's been a lot of focus on numbers, numbers of this number so that. i understand that. but as we have referenced in an earlier question, it doesn't take very many foreign terrorists to be a real problem. we had 19 hijackers responsible for the 9/11 attacks. and we just knocked out long ago, we had a case some of the members of the committee will remember where we charged an individual for trying to smuggle individuals and to assassinate former president bush.

>> are you concerned the border patrol chief, rodney scott said he was very concerned about very, very minuscule data that they are receiving. so, there is all of this -- we are told that illegal aliens are vetted against databases, but often times they are doing biometrics when they come into this country but not looking behind it in their own countries. does that concern you when there is not a review done in the home country? >> well, we certainly need as much help as we can get from the countries of origin. these people and when i say war to not where they come from originally but the countries they have come through. the biometric enrollment pieces, of course, an important one. we have situations where if we -- >> are we doing a thorough enough job to review their actions and their lives and their home countries before they came here? >> well, i know we need more help from our foreign partners. there was no question about

that. and i think that is an important part. >> how about the domestic partners, cia and others who are supposed to protect us? so, there's been a lot of discussion, of course, the last several years about the pit of it to what is called the hard targets, right, the understandable focus, which i support of focusing on the threat posed by china, russia, iran. but with that comes, if you look at, for example, or withdraw from afghanistan, we start to lose sources of information about foreign terrorist threats from overseas. that is a concern to me. >> my time is running out. has vice president harris met with you in terms of the border? >> well, i've been in meetings that have included the vice president that in different ways touched on the border specifically. >> as she specifically asked for a meeting in regards to the threat that is at the border? >> i'm not going to get into

specific meetings, but i can tell you i've been in meetings that included among other people the vice president that touched on border security issues. >> did she ask you questions that you thought needed to be done in regards to reducing the threat to the american people? >> i really can't get into specific conversations. >> is support for president trump a sig security concern and the fbi? i'm sorry, i couldn't year. is support for president trump a security concern amongst the employees? >> no. is the covid-19 vaccine and objection to that a security threat? not from my perspective. >> who approve the trump questionnaire at the fbi done by jeffrey behind it, who is responsible for that, and did you know there was a trump questionnaire out there? >> so, the document you are asking about is an interview

outline that we only recently learned about and in my view, completely inappropriate. i asked my team to get to the bottom of what happened to ensure it doesn't happen again. and i've learned it is not an fbi form. its use was isolated, and it was created not by an fbi employee but by an outside contractor. that individual is no longer affiliated with the fbi. we are sending what we have found to the office of inspector general and will cooperate with anything. >> mr. chairman, i will close with the spirit we keep hearing isolated examples, this instanc. is it a pattern? i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. >> thank you, mr. chairman and director ray, welcome to this committee. i want to thank you and your agents for a good job you are doing to protect americans. earlier this week, i was part of

the group that went out to visit butler, pennsylvania, homeland security. me and my colleague said violence has no part in our democracy. and i trust you will investigate the events surrounding july 13th early. i'm going to ask you a question and i hope you will keep in mind as y your investigation proceeds which is, who is in charge? who is in charge at a campaign rally and setting it up? who will service the campaign? and i asked this question because when i was there, had a couple of law enforcement individuals alluding to that question as well. they gave me an example, they said, if the secret service says you need to set up a line of dump trucks behind the stage to serve, to protect the candidate

in the campaign says, "that is bad optics," who wind winni the debate? so my question is who is in charge and as you investigate this crime scene, i hope u.s. the local elected officials -- i spoke to a county supervisor, local police, and sheriff. they had information they wanted us to know to relay but we just didn't have the opportunity to sit down and talk to them. there was a lot of concern that they weren't given enough time to prepare for this rally. they thought there were things that could have been done better. and ultimately what i keep thinking and what i keep coming back to is, who is in charge of these rallies? i think it is an important one because we have an election right around the corner. pennsylvania, butler, these

areas, battleground states around the country will continue to be areas where candidates both sides will show up. and the threats will continue to be there. so i hope, director ray, you will keep that statement in mind as you continue to investigate the crime scene. >> i appreciate the question. but i will tell you we conducted well over 400 interviews, but we have many more still to conduct. as is not unusual in an investigation, i am sure there are situations we have to go back to people we already and reviewed with follow-up questions. and her interviews cover a wide range of people. i do think it is important to make sure the committee and the american people understand the scope of our investigation versus the scope of others. our investigation is focused on the shooter and his attack. there is, of course, and i understand completely why, two

separate -- there are two separate reviews, one by dhs inspector general and the other by this outside independent panel that has been announced that are focused on the security posture, the adequacy of the security posture at the rally, secret service decision-making, and actions and things like that. so, i certainly understand why there are all of those questions. but those aren't scope of those two weather reviews and, of course, whatever congress chooses to do. our investigation though because of our interviews of people who were on the scene will relate to that in some ways. we will share whatever we learned that is relevant to those other reviews. >> during my last minute, i will flip quickly to your good job resources. earlier this year, and appropriations committee, we testified that you were 2024, your budget was $500 million below what you needed to sustain your 2023 efforts.

a few minutes ago, you talked about foreign terrorists here are the last few weeks, no information has emerged. that information came from pfizer information that was able to be collected overseas on these possible terrorist threats. but what we have here today is a domestic terrorists and what looks to be a lone wolf. your statements, there is nothing really there that would have tipped anybody off to this individual. is that when i'm hearing from you? >> welcome i don't know i would quite go that far because we are still investigating a lot related to the shooter. it does appear so far, we are seeing less -- >> in six seconds, i would just say -- i would ask that you let us know what resources you need to protect the american public and our candidates and our democratic system. >> i appreciate the question but i will just say this.

we are consistent to date in quite some time now, we are an elevated threat environment covering a wide range of threats. the fbi is central to protecting the american people from those threats. state and local law enforcement who depend on us every day rely on us for all sorts of services, databases, forensic support, training, and i could go on and on and on. a lot of those departments unlike the fbi have had a hard time recruiting. so this is not a time to pull back on their funding because we believe our brothers and sisters and state and local law enforcement twisted in the wind. then by extension, the american people who are all collectively sworn to protect. >> thank you, mr. chair, yield. the gentleman from texas. >> thank you for being here. went to gillespie to president biden? >> -- went to gillespie to

president biden? >> i don't have the last date but certainly since the shooting. >> so you have open to president biden since the assassination attempt on president trump's life? >> yes, sir. >> we had a perfectly professional conversation. >> and do you have any schedule briefings for the president upcoming? >> not at the moment specifically scheduled, no? >> 2016, top fbi officials about their insurance policy to make sure trump was not elected or inaugurated as president. many have an email or expressed disappointment that trump survived the assassination attempt otherwise editorialized about the assassination attempts? >> i don't know about any agents. there have been at least two incidences or one instance of an individual who posted somethingr outrageous, totally inappropriate.

and unacceptable. and that individual has been referred to our inspection division, which is the rnr sort of internal affairs and investor quarry process. >> will you report back to this committee any other incidences? i will do my best to share with the committee. >> you testified the fbi remains high standards and efforts. is it true 2016 former director, he lowered the standards for phase 1 allowing influx of previously unqualified applicants to continue the hiring process and normally would have been stopped? back in december 2016? >> i can't speak to director comey's -- but i can tell you at least since i have been director, changes we have made -- >> we are on a phase one transpacific part of the process where they changed in 2016? >> i don't recall if changed in 2016. i started as your question disposes after that but what i can tell you since that time, we

maintain changes to paris phases of the process but not them, this is important, none lowered the standards and if anything, they actually increased -- >> are you familiar with the reporting we have and we have asked questions to you about this. i'm not sure the results of the questions, "easily accommodated applicants and fbi hiring standards relaxed requirements measurably lowered." this to an agent who testified about this and read the report and submitted to congress. in addition to specifically minority people, twenty-year careers and one particular served more than 20 years wrote in this report and submitted to congress saying, the standards were in fact lowered and in fact, if you were hiring, you were moved off of hiring if you put quality above these kind of dei requirements. do you reject this report? do you have comments on this report? >> i'm aware of the report and i know i've read every detail of it, but i can tell you the claim

that we have lowered our standards to be less selective and less competitive is not accurate. >> so do you believe these former agents are lying to congress when they submit a report to congress adjusting otherwise? are you saying they are lying? >> i'm saying they were mistaken. >> affirmative like they were on the record and cementing a report to congress saying those facts are contradicting what you are testifying today. so i want to be clear so we know we are saying they are submitting evidence to our record to the contrary that you say is untruthful. >> i encounter all the times when i travel around the country and have conversations with our agents and one of the things i try to do was have meetings with some of the longer, observing agents without executive -- >> so it's untruthful. i don't know but one minute left. are you familiar with the case is 75-year-old from massachusetts with a medical condition. she was prosecuted for violating the phase act and since two

years in prison. just go to texas in two weeks. she was praying at an abortion clinic in d.c. the fbi interrogated and investigated her. do you think it is important for a 75-year-old praying in a clinic in d.c. to be put in prison for two years for that activity? just a simple question, do you think that is appropriate? i'm not familiar with the specific case. >> you're not familiar but specifically and the headlines but you don't know how to comment. appropriate for 75-year-old to be put in prison for praying at a clinic. >> i don't want to start weighing in because i don't know the facts, but what i can tell you is when it comes to face act enforcement and abortion violent extremism, one of the thing that gets lost and i appreciate the opportunity to clarify is since the dobbs decision filled portion extremism investigatione facilities as opposed to the otr way around. we've had a number of

investigation with face act resources and f tf spirit >> we are waiting on response letters on the day of the contract but significant amount of efforts targeting people who are going o clinics and prosecuted like this case, 75-year-old woman whg to jail in texas for two years because she was parading in a clinic in washington, d.c. be some meta-questions on that, and i would appreciate a response on that. i yelled back. >> the gentleman yields back. >> thank you so much. thank you director wray, for being here in the work that your team does as well as for sharing the information that you have been able to provide today. you have a couple of questions about it seem to imply that there was some problem with the fbi diversity efforts and certainly the 1950s version of the fbi was singularly cauc caucasian, male agents, et cetera. is the fbi better for us for

having a diverse range of employees and agents? >> i think diversity makes us better, but like everything else, it has to be done the right way. you can have a more divorce workforce into it without lowering our standards and that is, in my view what we have done. >> you haven't lowered standards at the fbi? >> we have not and i repeatedly come across people who are confused about different parts of that, and i appreciate the opportunity to set that straight. >> i think we are all concerned as we see the rollout of this project 2025 that purports to try to eliminate any reference to diversity efforts across the entire federal government. so it is sort of a top of mind concern as it is threatening to become reality. so what i did want to talk about today is something some of my colleagues have mentioned, which is the normalization of threats and violence against public servants at all levels, whether election workers were school

officials, elected officials and their families, judges, federal law enforcement agents and others. to be clear, i think it is very clear that the majority of americans wholeheartedly condemn any sort of political violence and understand it is not legitimate discourse and that it has no place in our civic life. but words do matter. they have consequences, particularly when uttered by people in positions of leadership. that is why i remain concerned about the willingness of some members of congress to repeat this information and conspiracy theories that undermine trust in our public institutions, which serve all americans. went on the elected officials embrace over heated rhetoric dangerous. i have been heartened as many national leaders have equivocal he condemn coals of violence and i urge all members of this bodyo do so and continue to do so regardless of the party affiliation of the perpetrators are the targets of such threats.

you and our other national security officials have repeatedly warned us that foreign actors are actively working to spread disinformation to influence our elections and discredit our public institutions. we shouldn't be aiding and abetting them. so, to live in a country that we aspire to where our most valued democratic processes like free and fair elections can be carried out unimpeded and people can run for office, serve their communities, and exercise their right to vote without fear of violence, we have had some concerns about violence around our elections. in 2020, the endorsement and promulgation of endorsements about the election results by the former president and his campaign led to threats and attacks against election officials and all networkers in pennsylvania. those falsehoods also wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on frivolous lawsuits and extraordinary security costs.

as we are again approaching november, we want to ensure those implement and defend our elections, our neighbors, and our nonartist and civil servants can do that important work awayy theories and threats. so we know our local law enforcement across pennsylvania are preparing for some disruption and threats because while pennsylvania may be a battleground state in the upcoming election, that battle should obviously be a war of words over policy and the vision we are charting for our country's future, not an actual civil war. so, how is the fbi working with state and local law enforcement to prevent and respond to election-related violence, particularly against election workers? >> so, in a variety of ways, we are partnering with say local law enforcement. obviously, the physical security in the first instance and most of the you were talking about is

in the ordinary course of responsibility of law enforcement. but we play an important role in a number of ways. so we share brett information at things to be on the lookout for and things we are seeing. if we ever have specific threat information and work to get to the right people, we have election crime coordinators, which we have had for decades in all 56 field offices with existing relationships with not just state and local law enforcement but elected officials, especially to focus on security and threat related issues. and then, of course, we are participating in the threat force that the doj set up which is focused on threats of violence or actual violence against election workers pacifically. we've had a number of arrest and even convictions already on that. >> thank you for your input. i yield back. >> it is my intention to go another half an hour, and then

we will break for prime minister of israel's address to the congress on the floor. and a chance for lunch and we will resume after that but we will keep pushing through the next half-hour. the gentle lady from -- is recognized. >> thank you, director wray. i think you have a little bit conversation so i appreciate it and answering questions. i appreciate it. hopefully, those two letters i sent a year ago with the durham report and the other one related to russian infiltrated sbu that collaborated with the fbi. so hopefully, we will get some answers, and hopefully authorization. the authorization, don't you think would help to get better answers with congress working to authorize new agents? do you agree with that? >> we work very hard to get information to this committee and other committees. >> but authorizing would be a good thing for us, do you agree? i'm sorry, authorizing?

>> authorizing and expanding, authorization of expanded ends for this committee? >> yes. >> okay thank you. we can talk about a lot of my colleagues on the other side, he or 15 gets a lot of bad rap, you know, like to bring up this issue but really there are a lot of hunting rifles that may be even more accurate than a lot of arn millions, don't you agree we have millions of rifles on b. do you think we should be taking them, millions of rifles from law-abiding americans? what do you think about that? would that be feasible and that really we should be doing that? >> again, i will not address anybody's specific legislative proposal. from the fbi perspective, the concern is in a dangerous weapon in the wrong hands. >> all weapons are dangerous. a knife is dangerous, expl

explosives. but are we going to be compensating hunting rifles and weapons for millions of americans? do you think it is feasible to do something like that for law-abiding citizens? that is not something i'm advocating. >> thank you, i appreciate that. there was a catastrophic failure in security that has happened recently within the attempted assassination. don't you agree with that? >> i think former director cheatle has already publicly acknowledged that it was her might think her words were significant operational failure. >> in a similar situation talking about bad objects and be careful because bad objects on january 6th. we didn't have proper security january 6th and that was a catastrophic failure, too. are we looking at that and the conclusion that was made from that? have we made any adjustments? because i know a lot of people, you know, got hurt now.

just being here, there was a lot of cases bringing up the department of justice, and a lot of them were law abiding americans that relate just upset with the government. and they have a reason to do it. so i think we need to think about it before we prosecute instead of actually look at how we can deal with real criminals and how we can have a proper security when we have events with so many people there. so, did you -- did you have confidential human sources? i think you never answer the question on january 6 and the p or did you have some? >> i'm sorry, what is the question? >> confidential human sources, did you have that january 6th and the capital? >> again, i will never be getting when and wear or have not or have not used confidential human sources. >> are you on the record, you had no confidential human sources on the capital on

january 6th? >> as i have said consistently, i'm not going to get into where we have or have not used confidential human sources. i can tell you if you are asking the violence at the capitol january 6 was part of an operation or us orchestrated by fbi sources or agency, the answer is no. >> i didn't ask you that. did you investigate any confidential human service sources? you have not answered whether you had were not so if you had potential, did you do everything you needed to open potentially investigate that they did wrong and prosecute at the same way? like trying to prosecute a lot of people? really, because the supreme court ruled recently some unconstitutional charges. >> let me just add that there have now been 180 individuals who have gone to trial in addition to 850 who pled guilty. >> but i think the problem is the charges come a lot of people

would plead guilty. let me just say quickly because i only have ten seconds, i hope you will take seriously what you're doing related to the border security which is also a crisis. vice president was a lead in on that. and actually had meetings and months where actually briefs from you as a lead-in border czar. have you had that -- has she initiated on a regular basis any meetings with you? speak with the gentle lady is time has expired but he can respond. >> on this issue have confidential human sources, number one, there is a doj ig review underway that i think addresses some of these kinds of topics. i believe but i won't speak for the inspector general. second, as to the suggestion, which i've heard all too many times that somehow january 6th was orchestrated by fbi agents or human sources.

i will know in addition to my prior comments, there have been 850ish who have pled guilty and went to trial and had access to defense counsel and discovered all the things the constitutional rules provide them for something 15 different judges. dozens of juries i'm not one has given credence to this notion. and i don't think any have seriously tried to raise it. it is not just my word for it. look what is happening in the cases. >> thank you. >> the gentleman from colorado is recognized for 5 minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, duct director ralph, for your testimony and the work that you do each and every day and frontline agents across the country do each and everyday too keep our country safe and also for the grateful work you are doing in investigating the horrific events of july ha