All Episodes
Previous Next
July 24, 2024 - MyronGainesX
02:16:11
FBI Testimony on Trump Assassination & Netanyahu Speech Pt. 1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I think we're good on Twitter.
Shout out to X, man.
All right, we're live on X. Let me look here, make sure that we're live on YouTube.
Oh, no, we're not live on YouTube.
I gotta create the YouTube event.
Give me one sec, guys.
Doing this all impromptu, my friends.
We're live on Rumble.
Sweet.
So let me go ahead and get us live on YouTube.
Bear with me, guys.
Literally doing this impromptu.
Very impromptu.
Woke up, saw that they're testifying here.
FBI is testifying in front of Congress.
You can see here, this is Director Ray of the FBI testifying.
So I'm going to go ahead and get this thing going.
Hold on one sec.
We should be live on.
Okay, we are live on YouTube.
Okay, let me just fix this because it's not showing up on anything.
Let me, guys.
And then we're going to get this thing cracking.
And I'm going to tell you guys why it's so important that I went ahead and just did an impromptu stream like this.
So as you guys know.
Give me one sec.
Just switch this over.
Boom, boom, boom.
All right, cool.
We're live on all the platforms.
No thumbnails, no announcements, no nothing.
We're just on here, all right?
And the reason we're on here is because this is very important, what you guys are seeing.
Okay, as you guys know.
Sorry.
As you guys know, I'm literally a little sick recovering.
As you guys know, there's an attempted assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.
There's a criminal investigation being done right now.
The FBI is head of that criminal investigation.
They brought the director in to answer questions.
I think this is probably one of the most important testimony.
So let's just get right into it, and I'll react to it with you guys.
I'm going to unmute this, and let's get into it, guys.
Credit our public institutions, and 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've had some concerns about violence around our elections.
In 2020, the endorsement and promulgation of falsehoods about the election results by the former president and his campaign led to threats and attacks against election officials and poll workers in Pennsylvania.
And those falsehoods also wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on frivolous lawsuits and extraordinary security costs.
So as we're again approaching November, we want to ensure that those who implement and defend our elections, our neighbors and our nonpartisan civil servants, can do that important work free from conspiracy 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're charting for our country's future, not an actual civil war.
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're partnering with state and local law enforcement.
Obviously, the physical security in the first instance, in most of the respects you're talking about, is in the ordinary course, the responsibility of state and local law enforcement.
But we play an important role in a number of ways.
So we share threat bulletins, information like that about things to be on the lookout for, things we're seeing.
If we ever have specific threat information, then we work to get it to the right people.
We have election crime coordinators, which we've had for decades in all 56 field offices who have existing relationship with not just state and local law enforcement, but election officials, especially focused on security and threat-related issues.
And then, of course, we're participating in the election threats task force that DOJ set up, which is focused on threats of violence or actual violence against election workers specifically.
And we've had a number of arrests and even some convictions already on that.
Thank you for your input.
I yield back.
Gentlemen yields back, Director.
It's my intention to go approximately another half an hour.
Then we will break for the Prime Minister of Israel's address to the Congress on the floor, give you a chance for lunch and then resume after that.
But we'll keep pushing through for the next half hour if we can.
The gentlelady from Indiana is recognized.
And then we'll replay the other parts, guys.
Thank you.
I think you have a little bit better tone and conversation, so I appreciate it and answer some questions.
So I appreciate it.
Hopefully, you'll answer also on two letters that I sent you over a year ago: one related to the Durham report and the other one related to Russian-infiltrated SBU that collaborated with the FBI.
So hopefully, we'll get these answers, and hopefully, we'll start doing authorization.
Don't you think doing authorization would help us to get better answers?
Congress should be probably working, authorizing your agency.
Don't you agree with that?
We work very hard to try to get information to this committee and to other committees.
But authorizing spending probably would be a good thing for us to do, don't you agree?
Oh, I'm sorry, authorizing what?
Our spending, not just doing appropriating, but actually doing authorization of spending through this committee.
Yes.
Okay, thank you.
We might start doing that.
But we can talk about, and a lot of my colleagues on the other side, you know, AR-15 gets a lot of bad rap, you know, like to bring it up this issue.
But really, there are a lot of hunting rifles that probably may be even more accurate than a lot of ARs.
And don't you agree?
We have like millions, right?
Don't you agree?
We have millions of rifles owned by law-abiding Americans.
So do you think we should be taking them, millions of rifles from law-abiding Americans?
What do you think about that?
Would that be something feasible, and really, we should be doing that?
Well, again, I'm not going to be addressing anybody's specific legislative proposal.
From our perspective, from the FBI's perspective, the concern is any dangerous weapon in the hands in the wrong hands.
But all weapons in the hands of the wrong person.
But all weapons are dangerous, right?
I'm sorry?
All weapons are dangerous.
Knives are dangerous.
Explosive are dangerous.
There are a lot of people.
Weapons are by their very hands.
Are we going to be confiscating hunting rifles and rifles for millions of Americans?
Do you think it's even feasible to do something like that from law-abiding citizens?
It's not something I'm advocating.
Okay, well, thank you.
I appreciate that.
So we have to go back.
That was a catastrophic failure of security.
That was happened recently with attempted assassination.
Don't you agree with that?
Well, I think former Director Cheadle has already publicly acknowledged that it was, I think her words were a significant operational failure.
Then we had a similar situation, a different, you know, talking about bad optics.
Speaker Pelosi at the time didn't want to have bad optics on January 6th, and we didn't have proper security here in January 6th.
That was a catastrophic failure, too.
Are we looking at that?
Any one conclusion was made from that?
Have we made any adjustments?
Because not a lot of people got hurt now.
Just being here, it was a lot of cases.
Brendan Aubrey, Department of Justice, got hurt.
A lot of them were really just law-abiding Americans that really 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 looking 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 have confidential human sources?
I think you never answered that question on January 6th in the Capitol.
Did you have some?
I'm sorry.
Confidential human sources.
Did you have them on January 6th in the Capitol?
Again, I'm never going to be getting into when and where we have or have not used anyone's going to see sources.
You know, you had no confidential human sources that went into Capitol in January 6th.
As I've said, I'm not going to get into where we have or have not used confidentialities.
I think I'll tell you that if you are asking if the violence at the Capitol on January 6 was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources or agents, the answer is no.
I didn't ask you that.
I asked you.
So did you investigate any confidential human sources?
Did you do any investigation and looking at that?
So you're not answering if you had any or not.
So if you had potentially, did you do anything you needed to make sure to investigate that none of your sources did anything wrong?
If they did wrong, they were prosecuted the same way.
Like you're trying to prosecute a lot of people that really, even the Supreme Court ruled recently that some unconstitutional charges.
Let me just add that there have now been, I think, 180 individuals who've gone to trial, in addition to the 850 who pled guilty.
Right, but I think the problem is with this charges, a lot of people would put guilty.
But let me say, just quickly, because I only have 10 seconds, really.
So I hope you will take seriously what you are doing.
You know, related to the border security is also a crisis.
Your vice president was the lead in on that.
Has she actually initiated meetings with you to lead, like weekly or monthly meetings, where she actually gets briefings from you as a leading border czar that had that function?
Have you had that?
Has she initiated any meetings on a regular basis with you?
Again, his time has expired.
The gentleman can respond.
He's like, on this issue of confidential human sources, number one, I will say there is a DOJ OIG review that is 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 this suggestion, which I have heard all too many times, that somehow January 6th was orchestrated by FBI agents or sources, I will note that, in addition to my prior comments, there have now been 850-ish individuals who have pled guilty, another 180 who have gone to trial.
They've all had access to defense counsel, discovery, all the things the Constitution and the rules provide them.
It's been in front of something like 15 different judges, I think dozens of juries, and not one has given credence to this notion.
And in fact, I don't think any of them have even really seriously tried to raise it.
So it's not just my word for it.
Look what's happening in the cases.
Thank you.
Oh, I didn't know that.
The gentleman from Colorado has nice for five minutes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Because, Discovery, guys, the sources would have to come out during Discovery when they are mounting their defense.
You do each and every day, and that your frontline agents across the country do each and every day to protect Americans, to keep our country safe.
Also grateful for the work that you are doing in investigating the horrific events of July 13th and the attempted assassination of former President Trump, which everyone must and has condemned.
I would first just ask: do you believe that the FBI has the adequate resources to ultimately ensure that your agency gets to the bottom of it and fully investigates this terrible crime?
Well, we are devoting massive amounts of resources to this specific investigation.
We have easily several hundred FBI agents, analysts, and professional staff working on it.
It involves over half of the FBI's 56 field offices, almost every headquarters division.
We even have some of our overseas offices working on it.
You might say, well, why is that?
Well, because some of the companies that involve accounts or purchases or communications or what have you that the shooter used are foreign companies, so we have to get evidence from overseas from those companies.
I've talked about our lab a little bit earlier today.
We've got our Office of Technology Division working on the digital devices.
We have our Behavioral Analysis Unit, our BAU, working on helping us build out a profile of the shooter.
I could go on and on and on.
So it's all hands on deck on this case, as I think is appropriate.
Now, when you ask about our resources, I have been public about the fact that the fiscal year 24 budget put us $500 million below where we needed to be to sustain current operations.
And on FY25, the current House mark would put us significantly further back behind that and would result in significant risks across every program and our support to state and local law enforcement.
We arrested something like 50 violent criminals per day, every day last year.
The current mark would mean more violent criminals on the street, more neighborhoods at risk.
We have about a 1,300 percent increase in our investigations related to China and its targeting of us.
And I can assure you, China is not cutting its budget.
This would mean more threats from China.
We have something like 300 to 400 investigations just into cartel leadership.
And hardly a week goes by when some FBI field office isn't seizing enough fentanyl to wipe out an entire state.
That mark, those cuts means more fentanyl on the street, more people dying.
So the people who suffer the most are state and local law enforcement and the American people we are sworn to protect.
And so they're working with Congress, but we really need to be smart about what we're doing.
And I think that would be a step in the wrong direction given the threat environment that we face.
And I couldn't agree with you more, Director Wray.
And of course, we've talked about this during previous hearings in which you've testified.
And to be clear, I think the budget that House Republicans have proposed, which is about a $325 million cut to the FBI, would do precisely what you've described and have deleterious impacts for public safety across our country.
And House Democrats are certainly working to prevent those cuts from taking place.
You've talked at great length about the events of July 13.
There's justifiably a lot of public interest in the investigation, which we understand is ongoing.
Wonder if you might, if there's anything that you'd like to disclose or provide to the committee or to the public that perhaps has not yet been gleaned during the course of this hearing, it just gives you an opportunity.
And don't worry, Chad, we're going to go to the original.
One thing I can give an update on.
After they take their break, I think Netanyahu is pretty fresh here.
We had some conversations with some of the members about the access to the roof and the ladder and so forth.
And our evidence response teams and their forensic collection, we now believe that the subject climbed onto the roof using some mechanical equipment on the ground and vertical piping on the side of the AGR building.
In other words, we do not believe he used a ladder to get up there.
Oh, shit.
One question, if the chairman might indulge me with just a few extra seconds.
There's an article recently regarding several former Trump administration national security officials who had received a duty to warn briefing from the FBI regarding the potential threat from Iran.
And I think there is this article made clear deep concern these individuals have justifiably so about the threat level, and particularly given the events of the last several months and the need for there to be an increased security posture and security personnel for former officials who may very well still be at risk.
And I don't know if you're familiar with that article.
I'm trying not to use names here, but I think would perhaps follow up with your agency and with the Department of Justice more broadly to ensure that any individuals who are potentially facing a threat from Iran or another hostile actor and foreign nation have the resources they need to have the security available to them.
So again, without reference to any specific individual, I want to be very clear about this because I've tried to be vocal on this, but it sometimes doesn't get noticed as much, which is that in my view, the Iranian government has been extremely aggressive and brazen.
We have seen in the last few years an attempt, I'm speaking just from public information now, an attempt to assassinate a former U.S. National Security Advisor on U.S. soil.
We have seen an attempt first to kidnap and then to try to murder an American dissident/slash journalist who's a critic of the Iranian regime right smack in the middle in New York City.
We have seen a cyber attack against a children's hospital in New England that ties back to Iran.
We have seen, as I've testified before, as Director Ratcliffe and I announced, an effort by the Iranians to target the 2020 presidential election.
And that's all before you even get to the fact that the Iranian government is the leading state sponsor of terrorism.
So if that's not enough to convince people that Iran is a threat, I don't know what is.
But Director, was there a distinction between what the gentleman from Colorado raised and what you just said, this general concern in these specific incidents you talk about, and a direct specific threat on President Trump that's distinct from what you've been describing as this general concern with Iran?
Well, again, I can't get into specific pieces of clients.
And if so, when, if it was a threat on President Trump, when did that happen?
Yeah, all I can tell you, certainly in this kind of setting, is targeting of U.S. officials for the Soleimani strike is something that is a reality that the Iranian government has at times called for very publicly.
And whenever there is reporting, let me try to answer your question this way.
Whenever there is reporting about any of those protectees, we share the information in a variety of ways, working with the intelligence community, working with whoever is the protective service with responsibility for that individual.
And we do it in a timely way using the duty to warn process that was just referred to.
And to my knowledge, everything along those lines that's relevant was shared in a timely way with the relevant people.
Thank you.
The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
Director Ray, thanks for being here.
Where were you when you heard that President Trump was shot and then what were like your immediate actions, response to that as director?
I was about to have dinner with family and I was horrified and angry.
I'm just thinking the reason I asked the question is because I'm thinking I'm still trying to figure out kind of the lanes between what the FBI would respond to and what the Secret Service has the responsibility to respond to.
Can you just kind of cover that again?
So the FBI is not responsible for, it's never really been part of our mandate or mission for the physical security of venues of specific protectees or anything like that.
If it's somebody within Secret Service's scope, that's their mandate and mission.
We are a law enforcement and intelligence agency.
And so if you think about it this way, we're the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
We're not the Federal Bureau of Security.
You might say, well, what's the difference?
Well, there is a difference.
We investigate crimes.
We investigate threats to national security, but we don't.
Questions about security posture, the adequacy of resources and assets that were deployed to protect a specific individual, whether there's enough security, and certainly the staffing of that security is not something the FBI, again, we're 116 years old, has historically done.
So at this point, have you been able to go through the shooter's home and kind of document kind of what we found as far as it goes?
So we have been able to search the shooter's home.
So again, just sort of tying your first question to your second question now.
You know, our role is to conduct an investigation of the shooter and the attack.
And so we're going to conduct a painstaking, intense investigation of that.
We have, among other scenes that we've processed using evidence response teams, in addition to the rally scene itself, of course, we have been through the individuals, the shooter's home, his bedroom, other parts of the house, etc.
Have you been able to establish that he did go to a range and either zero that weapon in or at least target shoot that weapon prior to the assassination attempt?
So we do assess that he went to a shooting range the day before, not the only time he went to a shooting range.
He was a fairly, avid might be a little strong, but a fairly avid shooting hobbyist.
And so he went to, you know, belonged to different sort of clubs and went to certain ranges and that kind of thing.
We do believe based on what we've seen so far that he went to a shooting range the day before and that he shot an AR style rifle at that range the day before.
I'm not sure we know for sure that it's the weapon that he used, but I think we assess that it probably is.
Have you been able to interview his parents?
Yes, we have.
And was there anything that was gained from that interview that would lead you to believe that they certainly were aware?
See, he's asking the real question.
I guess I want to be careful about talking about specific people's interviews, but I would say that his parents were cooperative with us.
And as I've said before, and hopefully this gets at your question, we have not identified any accomplices, co-conspirators, or anything along those lines.
So it's the FBI's position right now that he acted independently.
Again, we're still, I know it seems like a lifetime since July 13th, but we're still early stages.
But we have not seen anything so far that would suggest to us that he acted with others.
How does the FBI view not just a Trump rally, but political rallies versus other types of events from a security perspective compared to a college football game or any mass large crowd type gathering?
Because I can't, I think one of the things that's most difficult to really swallow at this point is that the idea that these Trump rallies have been happening for years and that there could be such a lax approach to the physical security of those fairgrounds that day.
And I'm wondering, you know, where does this fall?
And then on top of that, that there were other presidential candidates out there that didn't have full Secret Service protection.
RFK Jr. has been the most vocal about it.
I was wondering if you can comment on the facilities as well as providing security for presidential candidates.
I'm not going to have that answer.
Well, again, I want to be a little bit careful to stay in my lane because, again, security posture and the adequacy of the security posture is really the core expertise and responsibility of agencies like the Secret Service.
But certainly it is outdoor events, whether they're political rallies or, as you say, a college football.
Put me on Congress.
I'll ask the questions that the American people need to know.
These are places that are not available.
Often, you know, particularly the people who are going to be able to get you to fucking answer adequately because the range of threats that can face them are higher.
You need to be nice.
They don't give a fuck about security.
Already in today's hearing, just threats to public officials, including politicians, is an increasingly pervasive part of today's landscape, and so that adds to the challenge.
So you're talking about the combination of individuals who are increasingly targeted for violence combined with venues that are softer and harder to secure targets.
I guess is the way I would answer it.
But again, those kinds of questions, the adequacy of the security posture, all the resources that were or were not devoted, all that stuff, is my understanding, would be very much in scope for the DHS Inspector General investigation and this outside independent panel that's been.
I yield back.
The gentleman yields back.
Director, I think we're going to be able to get two more members' times of question, then we have to get to the floor for the Prime Minister.
Gentlelady from Georgia is recognized.
Thank you, Chair Johnson, and thank you so much, Director Wray, for your transparency and your testimony today.
First, I want to say my friend, my mentor, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, was known by many as the voice of reason here in Congress.
And she was my friend before I even came to Congress.
And in my freshman year, she kind of took me under her wing and she kind of showed me the ropes.
And she was a force to be reckoned with.
And I can say that she will never ever be replaced.
And she was a trailblazer, and I know that she will sorely be missed here in Congress.
Director Wray, I only have one question for you today, but before we get to that point, I'd just like to reiterate today that political violence is never acceptable.
Regardless of how different our political values and views are, attempted assassinations are a stain to the very democratic ideals of this nation.
We have endured riots on Capitol Hill on January 6th, where a literal noose was erected on Capitol grounds, intended for then Vice President Pence and Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi.
Political violence against election workers, that has been expressed today.
An attack on Paul Pelosi, Nancy Pelosi's husband, threats against the FBI agents, as you have expressed, and prosecutors, and threats to the staff who serve the public every single day.
Congressman Connolly's staff was targeted and attacked last year.
And now we have the attempted assassination of a former President of the United States.
All of this within just the last three years.
This violence simply needs to end.
The assassination attempt on Donald Trump was, by the grace of God, a failure.
The weapon the 20-year-old man was able to obtain in AR-15 generally has a shooting range up to 600 yards and shot Mr. Trump from almost 150 yards away.
This weapon has the ability to kill multiple people in seconds.
And sadly, Corey Compatour lost his life because of this man and because of this gun.
Mr. Compatour's family will never be the same.
Trust me, I understand that more than anyone else in this room.
Is the near loss of a former president enough for this Congress to finally take action?
Because there are 206 of us that are already standing in the wings ready to take immediate action to ban assault weapons today.
We need only 12 more of our colleagues to join us in courage and move the legislation to save lives of so many Of the people that we are elected to serve by removing assault weapons from the hands of people who simply should not have them in their possession.
We are crippling our democracy and we are ripping.
Bro, shut the fuck up, man.
Like, you're never going to get rid of AR-15s, bro.
Sorry.
Like, it's not happening.
I made a whole tweet about this, actually.
I'll pull it up for y'all.
When the lethality of salt weapons like, you're sitting here trying to, like, you got the director of the FBI in front of you.
Ask questions on the investigation.
Don't sit there and use this as an opportunity to give your political ideals out there.
Shut up.
These congresspeople are so dumb.
19 more children and two more teachers in 2022.
Oh, my God.
Well, is it enough now?
Now that a former president, the very president that many of you in this room are hoping will be reelected, almost lost his life because this Congress has failed to reinstate an assault weapons ban.
A ban that, by the way, Republicans joined with Democrats the past 30 years ago.
Bro.
Well, fine.
Y'all don't like assault weapons ban.
We can bring another bill that I have introduced to a vote, the GoSafe Act.
So focus on the business.
Let's use this as an opportunity to lobby.
This again is not the time for thoughts and prayers.
This is a time for action.
Director Ray, just one question I have for you.
Bruh.
Would you rather have your officers protected or protect someone against an assault weapon being shot from 147 yards away or a standard pistol with no accessories attached?
Bruh.
Well, again, I'm going to refrain from appearing to comment on specific legislative proposals, but I can tell you that we have certainly concerned about the danger to law enforcement from any kind of high-powered weapon in the wrong hands.
And it hits close to home for us because just not that long ago, two great agents, Laura Schwarzenberger and Dan Alphen, down in Miami, executing a search in a crimes against children case were shot and killed by a subject with an automatic weapon.
So again, dangerous weapons in the wrong hands is something that, of course, from a law enforcement perspective.
Yeah, two FBI agents died into the legislative couple years back.
Well, thank you for that answer.
I'd rather give our agents a fighting chance.
And I yield back.
FBI agents have ARs as well.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I had an AR when I was in jail.
Most federal agencies give you an AR-15 if you ask for it.
$3 billion.
And it would seem that we could and should have had a better job done a few weeks ago on the 13th than what we saw.
Will you have anything to say about correcting what are the obvious deficiencies in what the Secret Service did?
Well, for the most part, the deficiencies or adequacy or inadequacy of Secret Service's performance, decision-making, resources, all that stuff is in the purview of those two other investigations, that is the DHS Inspector General and the outside independent panel that's been announced.
Having said that, our investigation, which as I've testified now several hundred and every asset we can bring to bear of the shooter.
Yep.
Again, our investigations of the shooter, of course, involves interviewing law enforcement, including lots and lots and lots of Secret Service.
So we'll share all that with those reviews so that they can answer those.
The reason I'm asking this is because this isn't the first time the Secret Service has been before Congress.
There was a 435-page report issued in 2015 by Congress saying fix yourself.
They didn't.
In fact, there was a follow-up in 2019 where they had only done a few of the, I think it was 18 or 19 different specific things they were supposed to do.
They'd done some, but certainly.
These congresspeople are so stupid, bro.
Like, ah, give me five minutes and let me get on there and ask the director these questions.
I will get the answers the American people need.
He doesn't know or give a shit about Secret Service's pitfalls, bro.
Like, why are you wasting time asking him questions about the fucking Secret Service?
Can you help, Director Ray?
Because this ampute performance is not acceptable.
Well, I think even former Director Cheadle has acknowledged that this was a significant operation.
It's not his agency.
If there are ways for the FBI to be helpful beyond what we're already doing in terms of our investigation, we stand ready to try to be helpful.
I do want to say, as somebody who has been in law enforcement for most of my career, I've worked with some just phenomenal Secret Service agencies.
Yeah, going all the way back to my time as a line prosecutor, and they have an incredibly hard job, and I have a lot of evidence.
Yeah, bro, he's not going to give you the answers that you want, buddy.
You've got to bring in DHS OIG if you want to ask these questions, you've got to bring in Secret Service Management.
This is another agency.
Something needs to change.
Now, the director has resigned, but you're going to be in a position, because your agency is doing such a careful review, to say a lot about what should have been done.
I guess the real issue is much more of what the higher-ups in that agency are or are not doing.
Perhaps that's on us.
No, it's OIG.
We will share with those reviews anything that we come across that could be helpful or relevant to them for those questions.
Let me quickly go to some details about the actual.
At the end of the day, they are focused on the shooter.
They are not focused on Secret Service, man.
These congressmen are stupid, former President Trump from the state that he was clearly still in view of everybody.
Had there been another shooter, I didn't see him being protected.
Stupid questions.
I think that's really more in scope of these two other reviews.
Let me go to both of them.
Okay, that's fine.
Let me go to the shooter.
Guys, I'm still sick.
That's what I'm talking about.
I still got a cough, but I'm out here from another police division saw him and quickly ducked down because the shooter aimed a gun at him.
And then the shooter, apparently, was he prone at the time he took the shot toward the president?
So my understanding is that the local officer that we're talking about, with the assistance of another local officer, was able to kind of get up and see onto the roof where he observed the shooter, I believe, in a prone shooting position.
The shooter then turned and faced him, the local officer, with the weapon.
From the prone position.
That's my understanding.
Then he went back to the prone position.
And this is all seconds before the shooter took his shot.
But that entire time the shooter was in the scope sight of the counter sniper, correct?
That one I'd have to double check on.
I know we've interviewed the countersniper, but I'm not sure I know that.
But the countersniper didn't take a shot until after the assassin attempted to shoot the former president and others.
He got off eight shots before the counter sniper shot the shooter.
What's with that protocol?
Can you get that fixed?
Well, again, I really want to be careful not to be given the scope of our investigation, somehow second-guessing the very difficult act and decision it takes for a countersniper to kill another human being in that situation.
It's all happening in seconds.
Eight shots.
And that was after he'd been seen for 20 minutes.
I yield back.
Thank you.
That's an important question, though, because you've talked to the countersniper.
And that, I mentioned this in our opening statement, that critical five minutes from 609 to 614 and what takes place there is critical.
And I think that's what the gentleman was getting at.
And we were hopeful that you could tell us something about your interview with the countersniper.
Yeah, I guess I want to distinguish a couple things.
There is some individual, not law enforcement, I believe, who spotted the shooter on the roof a few minutes before.
But I think law enforcement spotting him with the weapon on the roof is seconds before the shooter.
So that's important.
So there's two different things.
I think what you're saying is it wasn't maybe that if the bad guy shoots at 6-11, then you're saying this encounter with local law enforcement that Mr. Bence was just getting into happened just seconds before that and maybe not two minutes before that?
That's my understanding.
In other words, there's different things here.
There's an individual, at least one individual, I guess, a member of the public, who observed him on the roof, not clear whether or not the individual saw a weapon or not, but saw him in a way that was concerning.
That is some number of, not many, but like just a handful of minutes.
I think separate from that, as far as law enforcement goes in terms of a weapon, this local officer that we just talked about observed the individual, again, literally just seconds before the individual, the shooter took his shots.
Separate and apart from all of that, you know, roughly, I think maybe a little less than or around an hour before the shooting, there were local law enforcement officers who observed the shooter, not up on the roof, not with a weapon, but with a, I believe, a range finder, kind of like you would use if you were playing golf or something, in a way that was odd and suspicious.
So that started happening with local law enforcement beforehand.
But in terms of shooter, meaning with the weapon, law enforcement, my understanding is that the first time that happened was this local officer climbing up on the roof seconds before.
Again, we want that timeline.
I think the committee wants that timeline and communications that were taking place in that short period of time.
Again, as I've said with everything else, I really want to be careful.
I'm leaning in, trying to share as much as I can here.
Facts are evolving.
Things may change, but we are working on a timeline, among other things.
Committee will stand in recess until after the Prime Minister's remarks conclude.
All right.
So Netanyahu's going to talk with them.
Let's go ahead and go to the beginning of this thing.
My feedback on this, guys.
So this is the problem, bro, right?
A lot of these congresspeople, I'm just going to be honest with y'all, are stupid.
All right.
A lot of them are dumb as hell.
And they're asking stupid questions that they shouldn't be asking the director of the FBI.
You got a guy here, right, that is running the top law enforcement agency in the country, right?
He's privy to a lot of the things going on.
Obviously, like I told you guys before, the director is a political position.
However, I guarantee you the three guys that were behind them are probably from the Pittsburgh office, right?
And they're going to know what's going on because I think they're the lead office in this investigation, right?
And they had to subpoena to bring him in, right, and get these questions answered.
But instead of them going ahead and lobbying their stupid gun laws that they want to push in or trying to be politically correct and say, well, assault rifles are and all of their dumb shit, you have a real opportunity to ask real questions on the actual investigation that the American people want to fucking know, right?
And then you're also asking stupid questions that he's not going to know the answer to.
He doesn't know about Secret Service policy or protection or how to run security at a venue for a rally.
None of that shit is his concern or nor does he care.
It's not his duty.
All right.
So these congresspeople, a lot of them are dumb.
Just being honest with y'all.
Fucking dumb.
And they're not asking the right fucking questions.
Give me five minutes with this fuck guy and I'll tell y'all, I will literally have you guys knowing what the fuck is going on in this investigation.
You want to know how I know?
Because he'd probably tell me that's under investigation, that's classified, et cetera.
But that's when you know that you're asking the right fucking questions when they start saying shit like that.
So these congresspeople are stupid.
Holy shit, man.
All right, let's go to the beginning here.
They can't tell us who planted the pipe bombs on January 6th.
They can't tell us who leaked the business.
Why are you asking about January 6th?
The animals who put cocaine at the White House.
Biden-Harris Justice Department who raided President Trump's home.
Biden-Harris Justice Department who worked with social media companies to censor America.
Look, if you want to go ahead and ask about January 6th, which is totally viable, understandable, that's cool.
Have a separate hearing for that.
All right?
Like, don't waste time on January 6th shit when you got this fucking dude in here and you want to ask questions about the assassination.
Perkins, Biden-Harris.
All right, so I'm speeding this up.
We're going to go from the beginning and play this thing through.
Justice Department let the country believe that the Hunter-Biden laptop was misinformation when they knew at the time it was authentic.
And maybe most importantly, a Biden-Harris Justice Department, who were in nearly three decades included jeoparding through countless pieces of legislation.
I said yesterday at subcommittee hearing that I don't know that there was any member of Congress who got more out of five minutes than Jayley Jackson.
Lee did.
And she was just a pleasant spirit who we all enjoyed.
The Violence Against Women Act and to protect victims of trafficking, among many other successes.
She was also leading in such issues as you're talking about the congresswoman that passed away.
What happened in Butler, Pennsylvania was a tragedy.
Okay.
Took the life of a man somewhere.
What exactly happened between 609 and 614, those critical five minutes?
Okay, so now we're getting into what's going on here.
Let's go look.
We know from briefings from the director and the deputy director of the FBI and other information we've gathered that at 6.09, the shooter was identified on the roof.
At 6.10, the counter sniper was notified.
Counter sniper teams were notified about the shooter.
6.11, the shooter fired several shots, injuring and killing one person, injuring others.
At 6.12, the countersniper took down the shooter, and at 6.14, President Trump was escorted off the stage by Secret Service agents.
We need to know what happened play by play, moment by moment, second by second, the communication that took place again during that critical five minutes.
And then finally, after the rally, why did both the Secret Service and Secretary of Homeland Security, my Orcus, lie to the American people?
July 14th, the day after the attack, Secret Service spokesman Anthony Gugliami said this, quote, the assertion that a member of the former president's security team requested additional security resources that the U.S. Secret Service or the Department of Homeland Security rebuffed is absolutely false.
The next day, Secretary Marcus said, that is an unequivocally false assertion.
We had not received any requests for additional security measures that were rebuffed.
But five days later, top officials repeatedly rejected requests from Donald Trump's security detail for more personnel.
And on the 21st of July, the New York Times confirming what the Washington Post reported said, quote, Mr. Gugliami acknowledged that the Secret Service had turned down requests for additional federal security assets for Mr. Trump's detail.
180-degree change.
Why did they initially lie to us in the days after the attack in Pennsylvania?
Finally, we hope to learn more today from Director Ray about the shooter, his use of the drone, the explosive that rings.
And that's what he's going to know about is the shooter.
All this other shit is like lip service, man.
Like, the thing with these Congress people that pisses me off is that they don't understand that every agency has different missions and different agencies have different information.
And asking them questions about other agencies a lot of the times is just a waste of time because the government, the U.S. government, the way the U.S. government works, guys, right?
And you're not going to know this unless you work in the U.S. government, especially in the law enforcement world, everything is compartmentalized, right?
Every agency has different missions, different purviews, different authorities, et cetera.
And they're only going to care about and know about what they're specifically designated and have the authority to investigate or do, okay?
Asking this guy questions about Homeland Security or Secret Service or protection details is a waste of fucking time.
You went through the trouble of subpoenaing him and getting here, getting him here under oath to talk to you.
Ask him the right questions, okay?
These Congress people are idiots.
Just from some of the questions that I've seen here.
Absolute idiots.
Carr, how he got on the roof, and a host of other questions.
It is our hope that Director Ray's testimony can begin to give answers to the American people about all of these questions and concerns.
So, Director, we appreciate you being here, and we trust that you're going to be as transparent with the committee and the country as you possibly can.
And I'm sure you understand that a significant portion of the country has a healthy skepticism regarding the FBI's ability to conduct a fair, honest, open, and transparent investigation.
And that skepticism is based on what they've witnessed over the past several years.
The American people have seen a Biden-Harris Justice Department.
They can't tell us who planted the pipe bombs on January 6th.
They can't tell us who leaked the Dobbs opinion, and they can't tell us who put Cocaine at the White House.
Okay, now you're making more sense, right?
You got the FBI director in there.
You're telling him, look, the American people are skeptical about XYZ.
Cool.
All right.
Biden-Harris Justice Department, who raided President Trump's home, Biden-Harris Justice Department, who worked with social media companies to censor Americans.
Biden-Harris Justice Department who let the country believe that the Hunter Biden laptop was misinformation when they knew at the time it was authentic.
And maybe most importantly, a Biden-Harris Justice Department, who retaliated against whistleblowers, who came to this committee and spoke to us about these issues.
Yes, a couple of FBI agents did come and testify in front of Congress a few months back.
I remember that.
Last week, we sent you 12 questions about what occurred on 2015.
We expect you to answer those questions and the others that I've just outlined.
And again, we thank you for being here today and appreciate your willingness to answer the questions that the committee is going to have.
And with that, I would yield to the ranking member for an opening statement.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, two weeks ago, our country witnessed a shocking assassination attempt on a presidential candidate.
Now, I disagree with Donald Trump in almost every policy area imaginable.
I'm frequently shocked and outraged at the plans he has for our country and the words that come out of his mouth.
And I've dedicated much of the last eight years to fighting his agenda.
All right, Democrat, shut up.
We don't care if my strong feelings about Donald Trump's behavior.
I unequivocally and unabashedly condemn with every fiber of my being the attempt against his life.
This was not just an attack on a man, but an attack on our democracy.
Political violence erodes the very foundations of our nation.
The concepts of freedom of speech, of peaceful transitions of power, of a Democratic government at its core, these cannot exist.
Keep in mind, just so you guys know, I pulled up Christopher Wray's stuff here.
Here he is, right?
He was appointed by Donald Trump.
All right.
So he's a director of the FBI.
He came in, he was born in 1966, born in New York City, graduated from Yale University in 1989, attended Yale Law School, joined government in 1997, assisted United States Attorney.
So this guy was an AUSA back in the day for the North District of Georgia.
From 2003, 2005, he served as assistant attorney general in charge of the criminal division George W. Bush's administration.
So this guy's a lawyer.
And then in June 7th, 2017, President Trump nominated Ray to replace James Comey as the director of the FBI.
He was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on July 30th and took office on August 2nd.
He is a registered Republican.
All right?
So, so yeah.
So this guy was an AUSA, and then he became director in 2017, which, I mean, I'd prefer a former FBI agent to be director, but whatever.
You know, AUSA, close enough.
If political violence is allowed to fester and to go unchecked.
And if you think that this one assassin's bullet was a volt out of the blue and not part of a wave of violence that has threatened this nation for years, then you have missed the point of what my Democratic colleagues and I have been imploring you to hear for some time.
Election workers, many of them working for free, face near constant threats of violence.
In one recent instance, an Indiana man pleaded guilty to threatening to kill an election worker who said that there were no irregularities in a recent election.
That man said, quote, 10 million plus patriots will surround you when you least expect it and will exploit, kill you, close quote.
That is political violence.
In another instance, Speaker Mary Nancy Pelosi's husband was bludgeoned over the head with a hammer by an intruder in his home who had been there to capture Ms. Pelosi, interrogate her, and possibly, quote, break her kneecaps because of her liberal views.
That is political violence.
The death threats surging against Vice President Harris, former President Obama, his wife Michelle, and Governor Desent.
All right, ask your question, bro.
Holy!
As well as many others, including videos online of individuals holding guns and making assassination threats.
That is political violence.
The plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitman and overseer parts of the state government.
That is political violence.
The brutal deadly attack three years ago against this very building.
We get it.
You condemn political violence, as we all do.
Again, I've said this a million times.
I don't agree with Joe Biden's policies, but I'll be fucking damned if a hair on his head is ever harmed by some fucking whack job because that insults and attacks our democracy.
Cool.
Now get to your question.
You got the director of the FBI in front of you, okay?
Ask the questions.
With rioters breaking through police barriers to run through these halls chanting, kill Nancy and hang Mike Pence and even hanging a nose outside the building.
These rioters battering capital police officers and forcing members of the United States.
Guys, they got to sped up.
That's why he's talking so fast.
Members of Congress and their staffs to go into hiding, squatted in spaces under desks or in closets.
That is political violence.
This assassination attempt, as horrific as it is, should surprise no one.
And you would think a political party that almost lost their presidential candidate through an act of political violence would have something to say about the way their leaders keep talking about the next election.
Donald Trump has warned there will be a quote bloodbath if he loses.
Republican Ohio State Senator George Lang said just last week at a rally for J.D. Vance that he is, quote, afraid that civil war might be necessary if Republicans lose the November election.
Bro.
President of the right-wing think tank and Project.
Well, even the director is like, bro, ask your question.
Like, the director is even like, bruh, you guys brought me over here so you could go ahead and lecture me on your political views.
like bro five leader the heritage foundation kevin roberts said on stephen bannon's podcast quote we're in the process of the second american revolution which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be close quote Republican former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin said in August of last year, if somebody's Adler guy.
Do you want us to be in civil war?
Because that's what's going to happen.
We're not going to keep putting up with this.
We do need to rise up and take our country back, close quote.
I could go on, but it's more and more the same.
And I hear nothing from the other side of the island in this room about these statements.
Do you support a bloodbath if you don't get the election outcome you want?
Do you justify violence if the left does not agree with you?
And what exactly has preoccupied this Republican majority while their allies threaten violence to their political enemies, real and imagine?
We have chased down baseless conspiracy theories designed solely to influence the 2024 election in favor of Donald Trump.
We have spent millions of dollars and thousands of hours of staff time in more than 100 transcribed interviews chasing false accusations against President Biden, supporting an impeachment effort that seemed designed to fail, and hunting for a smoking gun that simply does not exist.
In 70 years, these investigations found no corruption, coercion, no unethical behavior by the Biden administration.
Republicans chose to just dig deeper and spend more money.
Imagine what could have happened if we had spent these thousands of hours of staff time, those millions of taxpayers, addressing even surprise to the political violence that now threatens our country.
Perhaps you guys already know to help a nation that is watching guns.
The assassin of Butler would not have had such easy access to the weapon he used to fire on that crowd.
Director Ray, your agency is responsible for addressing some of the most serious of our time.
The Bureau of Fights Gun Violence, which claims the lives of 40,000 Americans every year.
It protects election security from growing threats through malign foreign actors who are working tirelessly to influence our elections.
It protects against domestic terrorists and violent extremists who have been a growing threat in recent years and have carried out horrific mass shootings and deadly events around the country.
And so, so much more.
I apologize to you, Director, that instead of supporting you in these missions in the 118th Congress, some of my colleagues have instead hindered your work, maligned your agents, and called to abolish and to defund your agency, all for political gain.
It is despicable, especially from the party that claims to, quote, back the blue.
And I know that you and your many agents and employees have paid the price for these baseless attacks.
I know you have faced a barrage of threats, distrust, and vitriol from the public as a result of these wild, politically driven conspiracies.
I know it has become even more dangerous and difficult for you to come to work each day.
I may not agree with you on everything, but I sincerely thank you and every employee in your agency who continues to protect our country.
The FBI is vital to keeping America safe, and I pray that today we can focus on the real, substantive work of the agency.
It is the least we owe our country in these times.
I yield back.
The gentleman yields back with the pleasure of the public will be included in the record.
We will now introduce you to the past.
Bro, he just used that opportunity to yap for five minutes.
He gave no questions.
Bro, this is what I'm trying to say.
Guys, these Congresspeople, again, I've said it a million times, but I'm going to say it again.
A lot of them are idiots.
Absolute idiots.
It was today's witness.
The Honorable Christopher Ray, has been the director of the FBI since 2017.
He previously served as the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.
We know this already.
We did the research.
Yes, he was an AUSA Associate Deputy Attorney General, an Associate Deputy Attorney General, and as representing the 38,000 special agents, intelligence analysts, and professional staff who make up the FBI.
Men and women who every day work relentlessly to counter the most complex threat environment of my tenure as FBI director, maybe in my entire career in law enforcement.
Before I go any further, I also want to acknowledge and offer my deepest condolences to the victims.
We are bringing all the resources of the FBI to bear, both criminal and national security.
Now, there's a whole lot of work underway and still a lot of work.
So, just so you guys know, FBI has two sides, okay?
They have an intelligence side and they have a criminal investigation side, okay?
The FBI is a dual mission agency, all right?
They are think of them as the domestic CIA, all right?
So, a bunch of their agents are in what I call national security groups that don't necessarily arrest people that much.
They're more involved in gathering intelligence, thwarting attacks to America, et cetera.
Then you got the criminal side, okay?
So, for example, if you're in the JTTF, you're in counter-espionage, counterintelligence, et cetera, you're going to be more in groups that are based on Intel, okay?
You're stopping things from happening.
Then, if you're in the criminal side, Safe Streets Task Force, organized crime groups, you know, the they used to have mafia groups back in the day.
I doubt they have those anymore.
You're in a white-collar crime group, you're in a public corruption group, like, you know, these are guys that are more involved in bank robbery groups.
They have, you're in more violent crime, you're in a group that's like going to be out there on the streets more, et cetera.
So, the FBI has like two different types.
So, they have a criminal side and then a national security side.
That's what he means when he says that.
To do in our understanding of what happened and why will continue to.
He's just talking about the FBI's efforts now.
So, we're going to fast forward.
See you guys how great this is when you're watching this with someone who knows what the fuck the lip service that these government officials are going to give y'all.
So, let's keep going.
And the importance of this investigation to the American people that foreign terrorists may seek to exploit to identify those who slip through the cracks.
Blah, blah, blah.
Five minutes rule.
The gentleman from North Carolina's recognition is fine in the middle of the second.
Let's get into some questions.
Director Ray, I'm way down here.
I appreciate the chairman giving me the.
See, we skipped all bullshit.
Let's get into it, man.
God damn it.
That's because I've got to leave.
But let me ask this question.
Why doesn't the FBI disclose to the American people all of the investigative detail and evidence that you are gathering as it is gathered?
Okay.
I already know what he's going to say.
It's an active investigation.
We've got to protect the integrity of the evidence.
Some of it is classified.
Let's see what else here.
We don't want to compromise the investigation.
What else?
Do you say investigations are sensitive in nature?
Let's see what he says.
Let's see if your boy Myron Gaines is on point.
Well, we have tried to be transparent with both Congress and the American people as we're going along in the investigation, frankly, unusually so for an ongoing investigation given the sheer nature of it.
We have provided a lot of information.
I expect to continue to provide information.
I expect to be able to provide some additional information here today in response to your questions and your colleagues.
But part of the issue is that, like in any investigation, as we proceed, facts evolve.
Our understanding of what somebody said turns out to have more context than we didn't have before.
We have additional leads out there.
So part of our goal is not just to respect the ongoing investigation process, but also to make sure that we don't prematurely provide information that then two days later turns out to be different than what we told people.
Because that's very much kind of a natural part of any investigation.
Yep.
So did Crooks fire eight shots?
We have recovered eight cartridges on the roof.
Why was Crooks allowed to get off eight shots?
Well, that, I think, is something we're still digging into.
Again, maybe this is a good place for me to make clear the different investigations that are going on.
Okay.
And I've told you guys this as well.
So, because certainly I understand.
Well, and I, given that I've only got three minutes left, I know the members, I'm really going to let him answer the question.
What the fuck, man?
Because I appreciate your invitation.
You said you're prepared to disclose things as questions are asked.
So I don't want to waste time.
I just want to get to the questions that might and as many members as can ask questions that you'll answer.
I actually think you, I'd be glad for you to go on solo quickly frankly and tell us what you know.
I think the American people.
Stop Yappin.
People want to know.
Why was President Trump not kept off the stage?
We don't know the answer to that, but I want to be clear.
It's a Secret Service decision, my friend.
And this is important because I think it goes to questions that I can and cannot answer.
Our investigation, the FBI's mandate, is focused on the shooter.
Yes, which I told you guys before here in the chat.
Let's go.
All right.
Told y'all they don't give a shit about why Trump wasn't on stage and all this other crap.
That's not their mission.
And all things related to his attack.
Now, obviously, I understand very much the intense interest and focus on the once the shooter shot those shots.
That's all FBI cares about.
They don't care about how, you know, Secret Service didn't move Trump before, all this other crap.
Oh, who was it supposed to be where?
They're not looking into that right now, unless it's directly tied to the shooter.
The Secret Service's performance, actions, decision-making, et cetera.
There are two separate after-action reviews, the DHS Inspector General and the Outside Independent Panel.
What did I tell y'all?
OIG opened an investigation on the Secret Service fuck-ups.
Office of Inspector General OIG.
They're doing an internal investigation.
Okay.
And I told you guys this in my tweet.
They need to bring those guys in if they want to know about the lapses in security.
FBI doesn't know or give a shit about any of that.
So I can't even focus on that.
Now, our investigation will happen.
Here's the problem.
We're out 13 days, and you say we've been disclosing.
You know, we had the director of the colonel from the Pennsylvania State Police in front of Homeland yesterday.
He was quite candid.
He disclosed to us that Butler, emergency services unit personnel were posted into the windows on the second floor of the AGR building, that they left there to go pursue the person that they spotted, Crooks, that they texted a photo of Crooks to the PSP representative in the command center.
That information was related to the United States Secret Service.
They asked that it be texted to someone else.
That was many minutes before President Trump took the stand.
What we don't know is why did he not, why did he, why were they not keeping him off the stand?
And to the extent, you know, I know we all hear.
He's not going to know that, bro.
That's a Secret Service decision that was made in-house that he is not going to be privy to.
There's a criminal investigation.
You've got to wait for that to develop.
But do you have any reason to, are you, do you have any other target of your criminal investigation other than Crooks, who's dead?
We are investigating the shooter both to determine his motive and his preparations and activities before the shooting, but also to make sure whether or not there are any co-conspirators, accomplices at this point.
Have you developed any evidence to so suggest that there are any accomplices or cooperators or assistants?
Okay, now you're asking the real questions.
Thank God it took you fucking minutes and you only have five minutes, you dummy.
Not at this time, but again, the investigation is ongoing.
Okay, so right now, as of this hearing, guys, they don't have any co-conspirators identified or no reason to believe that there are co-conspirators as of now.
So here's the thing.
While we wait.
That can obviously change.
Maybe for months.
And I hate to say this, just I'm not trying to take a pop shot, but the country went for years with the understanding that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation.
It's offered by respected former Intel officials.
And the whole time the FBI had the laptop and let that happen in public until finally offering testimony in the case.
To the degree we wait to hear as a country and as a Congress what has happened in this event, because the FBI is conducting an investigation, it provides quarter for the U.S. Secret Service not perhaps to reckon with the problems that are obvious to everyone.
So let's get a couple in while I've got 13 more seconds.
One more question, perhaps.
Senator Grassley says that the records of the day show that there was a counter unmanned aerial surveillance operator on site.
Was there?
And why did that person not prevent Crooks from being able to use a drone?
So again, questions about the Secret Service's performance are better.
Again, yeah, you got to bring them better directed to those other reviews.
What I can tell you when it comes to drones is that Crooks himself had a drone, and I'm prepared to answer questions here today about the shooter and his use of the drone, for example.
There you go.
Ask the right questions, Congresspeople.
Come on, man.
My time's expired.
You guys are government employees.
You guys should fucking know better.
This is ridiculous that they ask questions to this guy about Secret Service.
He's not going to know, nor is he going to care.
He's being nice about it.
But if I was directed, I'd be like, guys, I'm being very candid with y'all.
I don't give a shit about Secret Service.
I don't know anything about their security protocols.
I'm here to answer questions about the shooter, specifically the events that led to him getting on top of that goddamn roof and what transpired after the fact and how he got there.
I can answer your questions about the shooter only.
That is what I am here for.
Don't ask me questions about Secret Service.
He's being nice about it, right?
Because he's a fucking politician.
I told you guys all the time, directors are politicians first.
But that's what I'll be telling these idiots.
So they stop asking redundant, dumb questions, wasting my fucking time while in the middle of one of the most important investigations in American history to ask me questions about Secret Service lapses in security that aren't my fucking business.
John Yield's back to making members recognize for five minutes.
Idiots.
These guys.
Oh, here this nigga comes back.
You already know it.
I don't like that, but hey.
As I said in my opening statement, political violence is a scourge and entirely unacceptable no matter the source or the target.
Last October, far-right conspiracy theorists broke into Nancy Pelosi's home and bludgeoned her husband.
Prominent Republicans mocked the attack and promoted conspiracy theories about it.
You mentioned that an armed Utah man who threatened to kill President Biden was killed as FBI agents attempted to serve a warrant on him hours before President Biden landed in his state.
Some on the right claimed that the man was simply a, quote, Second Amendment enthusiast.
In recent weeks and months, those on the right have repeatedly called for, quote, civil war, with an Ohio State Senator saying that if Republicans lose the election, quote, it's going to take a civil war to save the country, and it will be saved.
The president of the Heritage Foundation likewise said that, quote, we are in the process of the Second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be, close quote.
Director Ray, it's obviously important that we respect First Amendment protections, but there is clearly a point at which some violent radar crosses over into threats of violence or leads to actual violence.
Could you describe how the FBI looks at this relationship between rhetoric and action and what you are seeing around the country?
So I appreciate the question, and this is an issue that I've been talking about for some time.
You know, in our view, there is a right way and a wrong way under the First Amendment to express your views, no matter how passionate or even angry you are.
And violence and threats of violence is not the right way.
And we don't care what you're upset about or who you're upset with, from the FBI's perspective, when it turns to violence and threats of violence, that's when we have to draw the line.
That's when we get engaged.
And there is an alarming phenomenon that we've seen over the last several years of that kind of passion and heated rhetoric turning into actual violence and threats of violence.
We've seen it against public officials of all sorts.
We've seen it against law enforcement.
The number of officers shot and killed in the line of duty in this country is, frankly, outrageous and alarming.
And I know that because every time an officer is shot and killed anywhere in this country, since the day I started as FBI director, I personally call the chief or the sheriff to express my condolences and to talk to them about the victim's family.
And the number of Of those shootings that are ambush-related, meaning somebody is targeting law enforcement because they're law enforcement, is particularly alarming.
I have made around 400 of those phone calls.
It's almost every five days that a law enforcement officer is killed in the line of duty.
And that is an example of the kind of ways in which passions and heated rhetoric can bubble over into violence.
Thank you.
Members of Congress, their families, and their staffs have witnessed an alarming rising threats against them.
I appreciate the work your agency has done to investigate and address these threats, but I'm concerned that we do not seem to be stemming the time.
What is the FBI doing to ensure that members of Congress, their families, and their staffs are safe?
Okay, that's cool and all.
I get it.
But, bro, this is a question on the assassination.
This isn't an inquiry to ask about Congress members being safe.
Okay?
The FBI prosecuted the guy, by the way.
Just so you guys know, the guy that attacked Nancy Pelosi's husband, FBI prosecuted that motherfucker.
So we have a very close relationship with the Capitol Police, and we have members of the Capitol Police, for example, who are on some of our task forces.
We share intelligence information about things that we're seeing, trends that we're seeing with Capitol Police and others in law enforcement.
Obviously, if we have specific information about an effort to target a member of Congress, then we're getting with Capitol Police in a much more specific way.
But those are some of the things that we're doing.
Thank you.
Now, Director, your office is leading the investigation to the attempted assassination.
This is cool and all, but this has nothing to do with the assassination, bro.
Come on, man.
Here you guys go.
I got y'all right here, man.
My cat is on.
Don't demonstrate.
As you guys know, here's a criminal complaint right here.
Boom.
October 20th, 2022, assault and an immediate family member of a federal official attempted kidnapping a federal official.
This is October 28th, 2022, right?
And this was from FBI Special Agent Stephanie Minor, okay?
And this is a criminal complaint, right?
So this was go this is for the guy, David Wayne DePape, who went ahead and attacked Nancy Pelosi's husband, right?
Speaker, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives.
Just so you guys know, by the way, FYI, the Speaker of the House is like the third most powerful person in the United States.
You got the president, the vice president, and then if something were to happen, the Speaker of the House is third in line, guys, to become the leader of this nation, FYI.
If you guys didn't know that, that's the leader of secession, right?
That's the secession hierarchy, okay?
So yeah, so this is a criminal complaint right here.
Boom.
This is what happened, the facts, everything else like that.
So if you go back, let's see here.
How much time did this guy get?
Attempted kidnapping.
How much time did he get here?
His name is Nancy Pelosi husband, criminal complaint.
Man indicted.
He got indicted.
What's his name here?
It was something DePape, he probably got convicted by now.
This was a while ago.
This is almost two years ago going on.
Okay, he got sentenced.
Okay, he got sentenced to let's see here.
360 months.
He got 10 years.
No, yeah, 360.
Hold on.
My math sucks, guys.
Hold on.
360 divided by 12.
He got, oh, shit, 30 years.
Holly.
Wow.
Okay, he got quite a bit of time.
So, yeah, they don't fuck around with that.
Don't attack a member of Congress, his family, guys.
Hi.
What impact would defunding or even just limiting your funding have on the FBI's ability to conduct this and other investigations?
So I understand that there are heated views, opinions about us, just like there are about every institution in today's America, but cutting our funding is incredibly short-sighted.
And the people, it really hurts, are state and local law enforcement and the American people were also warned to protect.
Thank you.
During my remaining time, I want to turn through a different matter.
In recent days, Republican members of Congress have attacked resumptive Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris as a quote DEI candidate, which presumably is code for women and person of color.
It's not a new theme for them.
In May, Chairman Jordan wrote to you claiming that because of DEI initiatives, the FBI is no longer hiring, quote, the best and brightest candidates to fill the position of special agent.
With remaining time, with my remaining time, Directorate, can you please answer the following questions?
Is it true that hiring women and people of color means that FBI is no longer hiring the best and the brightest to serve as law enforcement officers?
Is there any evidence that women and people of color are less effective in law enforcement roles?
And what messages are sent to prospective applicants when the leaders demean them and make judgments about them based solely on their race or gender?
Let's make response.
So any notion that we have lowered our standards or hiring standards is just not accurate.
In fact, our standards are as competitive and selective as ever.
We have tens of thousands of people applying, and our selection rate is about 3.1%, which is more selective than just about any university in the country.
And most of our applicants, I think something like 50% of them are coming from military or law enforcement backgrounds.
About 50% of them also have advanced degrees.
The average age is around 31, which means they're bringing a wealth of personal and professional experience when they arrive.
Yep, FBI definitely has DEI, guys.
Look, boom, here we are.
We're on their website.
Okay.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion, culture, and commitment.
Boom, right?
So they got DEI hires as well.
You can see here.
So, yep.
And then what's the new ones that they got here?
Yeah, here's the ones that are coming up.
Beacon Project.
10th anniversary FBI in office.
Office of Diversity and Inclusion.
Our culture.
So they definitely do have this DEI crap as well.
Look, boom.
Employer resource groups, ERGs are formerly employee-led groups that connect employees with shared interests to network and support one another, right?
Blacks of government, FBI African-American millennials, FBI family, FBI Jewish Americans, Latinos, Pride.
Boom.
Yep.
Here we go.
Woke.
Agendas.
This is like a frat or some shit?
What is this?
Gang sign?
I don't know what the hell's going on here.
She's especially, this is a supervisor right here.
Our demographics.
Because FBI, guys, historically, has been a white agency.
You know, it's been, you know, a lot of Mormons, actually, because they're pretty clean.
They don't do drugs.
They don't do anything.
Fantastic candidates, right?
They'll do no bullshit.
Very clean cut.
Nobody drink caffeine.
So yeah.
45% feet.
Holy!
almost 50% female.
So yeah, they definitely are involved in DEI.
We've got a whole page dedicated to it.
And to suggest that those people, because of efforts related to diversity or anything like that, are less qualified, frankly, is not at all consistent with what I see.
Having visited all of our field offices and seen these young people in action, I think, is an insult to those hardworking men and women who have signed up to dedicate their lives for this country.
Thank you, Director.
I yield back.
John Mills back to Director.
Let me go back to where Mr. Bishop was.
Tell me about the drone.
You act like you wanted to fill us in on that, fill us in.
So we have recovered a drone that the shooter appears to have used.
It's being exploited.
All right, real questions.
There we go.
Now let's talk about this drone.
Analyzed by the FBI lab.
The drone was recovered in his vehicle.
So at the time of the shooting, the drone was in his vehicle with the controller.
In addition, our investigation has uncovered...
Do you know what time of day he flew it and if he flew it on the day of the shot?
Go on.
Go ahead.
So in addition, it appears that around 3.50 p.m., 4 o'clock in that window on the day of the shooting, that the shooter was flying the drone around the area 11 minutes.
I'll be clear, but I say the area, not over the stage and that part of the area itself.
I would say about 200 yards, give or take away from that.
We think, but we do not know.
Again, this is one of these things that's qualified because of our ongoing review, that he was live streaming, viewing the footage from that game, about 11 minutes in around the 3.50, 4 o'clock p.m. range.
Two hours before he's flying a drone in the vicinity of the drone.
About 200 yards away.
Okay, that's important information.
What about the bombs that we put about in the shooter's car?
So again, the FBI lab is exploiting those explosive devices.
We've recovered three devices, two in his vehicle and one back in his residence.
Are these what you would call, in your expression, call sophisticated operations?
That's what I've been told by people who have some understanding of this area.
Yeah, I think it's we've seen more sophisticated and less.
I would say these are relatively, again, keyword relatively crude devices themselves, but they did have the ability to be detonated remotely.
And so to that point, in addition to the two devices that we recovered out of his vehicle, there were receivers for those two explosive devices with the devices.
And then on the shooter himself, when he was killed by law enforcement, he had a transmitter with him.
Now, I do want to add one important point here is at the moment, it looks to us, again, ongoing review, and I can't say that too many times, at a moment, it looks like, because of the on-off position on the receivers, that if he had tried to detonate those devices from the roof, it would not have worked.
But that doesn't mean the explosives weren't dangerous.
I'm sure we're going to get all these subjects a little bit later as well.
Tell me, tell us what you can about the encrypted platforms we've heard about.
All right.
Now they're asking real questions.
Thank you.
One of the things that we're drilling into hard with the shooter in an effort to try to learn more about his state of mind, his mode of his ideology, his contact, everything else, is to look at all of his devices, any social media accounts he had, et cetera.
And one of the things we've learned in finally getting into his phone, which was also a significant technical challenge from anybody.
Because they didn't have the code, and I described this before as well.
And I'm going to do an episode on this, by the way, for you guys on how to exploit telephones, how the feds do this.
I'm going to do a separate episode for that.
But, yeah, when you don't have the code for the phone, guys, it's very difficult to get in there.
Encryption perspective.
But in addition, once we got on the phone, it turned out he was using some encrypted messaging application.
And again, the same question relative to the bombs.
Was this pretty sophisticated?
Or is this kind of the norm you see with folks like, you know, similar situation?
How much do you think about it?
On this subject, I would say this has unfortunately now become very commonplace, and it's a real challenge for not just the FBI, but state and local law enforcement all over the world.
Exactly, the scope of does the scope of your investigation include what I call that critical five minutes from when the 609, when this is based, I think, on information you've given the Congress, 609 when the shooters identified on the roof in 614 when President Trump is ultimately escorted off, and all that happens, the shots that take place in between there.
Do you have access to the communications that were going on at the time in that critical five minutes?
So, our investigation, when you say scope, our investigation includes that time frame, although focused again on the shooter himself and his technology.
He's obviously involved in that time frame.
Correct.
And as part of that, as part of our focus, our investigation of the shooter and the attack, of course, we are interviewing law enforcement from the scene because those are some of the most significant witnesses, and we're obviously getting access to their materials and that kind of thing.
And the Secretary of the United States is a very important cooperative.
You have access to the communications that exist there.
That exact question, I don't, as I sit here at the moment, I don't know the exact answer to that question, but I know the Secret Service.
That is a question for the case agent, my friends.
He's going to know that stuff.
The guy that's running the investigation out of FBI Pittsburgh has been cooperative with us.
The Congress would like access to those communications as well.
I mean, not just that five minutes, although I think that's the critical timeframe.
There's lots of communication.
Well, get in line, buddy.
You guys probably won't get that until later on.
Just being very honest with y'all.
And if I was a case agent, I would tell you guys to go pound sand because it's an active investigation.
A lot of you guys don't have a fucking clearance.
A lot of you guys are idiots.
And quite frankly, it's my case.
I dictate who gets to see what.
And yeah, pound sand.
You and everybody else and their fucking mom wants to look at that.
We'd love to have access as well.
I see my time is off.
That's me, just being honest with y'all.
If I was the case agent because I've actually done these types of investigations, I would not open that out to all you guys where people can go ahead and interpret shit.
And they have called votes on my case, which I'm responsible for.
The floor, I think there are about six minutes left in votes.
So we will committee will stand in recess until approximately 10 minutes after votes conclude on the House floor.
Okay, so they go on a little recess.
Let's fast forward.
And just so you guys know, I'm also, let's see here.
It looks like Netanyahu is about to step in through their clock for him.
Hold on, let's see here.
This is live, gentlemen.
Let's see.
Was he walking down the hall or some shit?
Hold on.
Yeah, they must be walking in.
Oh, yeah, here he is.
Okay.
Jay O'Brien, are you noticing who's shaking?
Because he walks in, he's shaking hands.
Okay, now they're showing what the fuck is going on.
Okay.
Oh, my gosh.
What the fuck?
All right, here he is.
just walked in.
Alright, he's taking the podium.
You shake the hand of the Speaker of the House, Johnson, if I'm not mistaken, right?
All right, Speaker of the House.
This Johnson.
Yeah, Mike Johnson.
Which, like I told you guys before, third most powerful person in the United States.
A lot of people don't know that.
If the president and the vice president, something happened to them, that guy's your fucking president, FYI.
So you got the third most confident person in the United States hanging out with this guy.
There's a bunch of protesters outside, Palestinian protesters, by the way, going crazy.
Shout out to Thomas Massey.
He goes today, Congress will undertake political theater on behalf of the State Department.
The purpose of having Netanyahu address Congress is to bolster his political standing in Israel and to quell international opposition to his work.
I don't feel like being a prop, so I won't be attending.
Let's go, baby.
And I go, let's go.
End off 4-8, Israel.
All right.
He's about to start yapping.
Members of Congress, I now have the high privilege and distinct honor of presenting to you His Excellency Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel.
Here we go.
We'll get back to the FBI thing here, guys, in a bit.
Let's hear a little bit of this speech.
We all know what he's here for.
He's here to ask for more aid, how Iran is enemies, how Lebanon are enemies, and how we need to unite with them and fight their wars.
We already know what's about to happen here.
let's go ahead.
Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, Senator Ben Cardin, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Senators, members of Congress, distinguished guests.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank you for giving me the profound honor of addressing this great citadel of democracy for the fourth time.
We meet today at a crossroads of history.
Our world is in upheaval.
In the Middle East, Iran's axis of terror confronts America, Israel, and our Arab friends.
Called it Iran.
Here we go.
This is not a clash of civilizations.
It's a clash between barbarism and civilization.
Let's count how many times they clapped for him.
What are we at?
Are we at?
Chat, help me out here.
I think last time he addressed Congress, there was 36 between those who are at two glorified deaths and those who sanctify life.
Three.
Oh, somebody said four?
All right, somebody count it.
Let's count it up in the chat.
Let's go.
Count up in the chat, guys.
America and Israel must stand together.
Here we go.
Come on, guys.
Chat, get on it.
And we have four or five.
Four or five.
Let's count this up.
Let's get this shit accurate.
I see mostly saying five.
Okay, five.
Because when we stand together, something very simple happens.
We win, they lose.
All right, it's six.
We're going to go with six.
We're going to go with six.
All right.
And my friends, I came to assure you today of one thing: we will win.
now we're at seven ladies and gentlemen like december 7 1941 and september 11 2001 october 7th is a day that will forever live in infamy
It was the Jewish holiday of Simchatoa.
It began as a perfect day, not a cloud in the sky.
Thousands of young Israelis were celebrating at an outdoor music festival.
And suddenly, at 6:29 a.m., as children were still sleeping soundly in their beds in the towns in Kibutzi next to Gaza, suddenly heaven turned into hell.
3,000 Hamas terrorists stormed into Israel.
They butchered 1,200 people from 41 countries, including 39 Americans.
Proportionately, compared to our population size, that's like 2911s in one day.
And these monsters, they raped women, they beheaded men, they burnt babies alive.
That's not true.
They killed parents in front of their children and children in front of their parents.
Wow.
They dragged 255 people, both living and dead, into the dark dungeons of Gaza.
Notice he didn't say beheaded babies this time.
The Trump has already brought home 135 of these hostages, including seven who were freed and during rescue operations.
That's seven or eight claps now, guys.
Chat.
Seven or eight.
You didn't say beheaded babies this time.
Remember, 40 beheaded babies, guys?
Only one baby died on October 7th.
We have it from Israeli media, by the way.
I did a whole podcast on this, guys.
One of those freed hostages, Noah Ghomani is here in the gallery, sitting near my wife, Sarah.
On the morning, here's a link where we talk about that.
What really happened October 7th.
Don't watch it now, guys, but I did a whole podcast with Silly Man on this.
On the morning of October 7th, the entire world saw Noah's look of desperation as she was violently abducted to Gaza on the back of a motorcycle.
I met Noah's mother, Leora, a few months ago.
She was dying of cancer.
She said to me, Prime Minister, I have one final wish.
I wish to hug my daughter Noah one last time before I die.
Two months ago, I authorized a breathtaking command or rescue operation.
Our special forces, including a heroic officer named Arnonz Mora, who fell in this battle, rescued Noah and three other hostages.
Noah, I think it's one of the most moving things, when Noah was reunited with her mother Leora, and her mother's last wish came true.
Noah, we're so thrilled to have you with us today.
Thank you.
There she is right there.
Many hostage families are also here with us today, including Eliel Bibas.
Eliyu Bibas is the grandfather of those two beautiful red-headed boys, the Bibas boys, toddlers.
And they were taken hostage with their mother and Noah sorry, and Eliyahu's son.
The entire family was taken hostage.
Two beautiful red-haired children taken hostage.
What monsters.
And with us also is Il-Israim, whose son, Yotam, bravely escaped Hamas captivity with two other Israelis.
And tragically, they were killed, making their way back to our lines.
We have with us also the families of American hostages.
They're here.
Yo, chat, do you guys want the chat on the side, or do you guys want me to just enlarge this like this?
Tell me what you guys want.
You guys want to see the chat on Fox or do you guys want it enlarged?
Let me know.
Enlarge, y'all don't care about the chat.
Okay, no chat.
All right.
Is beyond words.
I met with them again yesterday, and I promised them to be able to do this.
I will not rest until all their loved ones are home.
As we speak, we're actively engaged in intensive efforts to secure their release, and I'm confident that these efforts can succeed.
Some of them are taking place right now.
I want to thank President Biden for his tireless efforts on behalf of the hostages and for his efforts to the hostage families as well.
We had 16 chat.
I want to thank President Biden for his heartfelt support for Israel after the savage attack on October 7th.
He rightly called Hamas sheer evil.
He dispatched two aircraft carriers to the Middle East to deter a wider war.
And he came to Israel to stand with us during our darkest hour, a visit that will never be forgotten.
President Biden and I have known each other for over 40 years.
I want to thank him for half a century of friendship to Israel and for being, as he says, a proud Zionist.
Actually, he says, a proud Irish American Zionist.
Hey, yo.
My friends, for more than nine months, Israel's soldiers have shown boundless courage.
With us today, with us today is Lieutenant Abikhail Rouven.
Avichael is an officer in the Israeli paratroopers.
His family immigrated to Israel from Ethiopia.
In the early hours of October 7th, most of anyone heard the news of Hamas's bloody rampage.
He put on his uniform, grabbed his rifle, but he didn't have a car.
So he ran eight miles to the front lines of Gaza to defend his people.
Let's see if we can break 36.
I think last time he addressed Congress, he had 36 claps.
You heard that right.
He ran eight miles, came to the front lines, killed many terrorists, and saved many, many lives.
Abhikhal.
Oh, this dude.
He looks like a Somali.
I want to honor your remarkable hero.
Another Israeli is with us here today, and he's standing, stand up, right next to, right next to Abhikhail.
This is Master Sergeant Ashraf al-Bakhiri.
Ashraf is a Bedouin soldier.
These guys got to cover the Baltimore community of robs.
On October 7th, Ashraf II killed many terrorists.
First, he defended his comrades in the military base, and he then rushed to defend the neighboring communities, including the devastated community of Kibbutzbury.
Like Ashraf.
Again, we cover this all on October 7th, guys.
October 7th podcast for Suleiman.
Like Ashraf, the Muslim soldiers of the IDF fought alongside their Jewish, Druze, Christian, and other comrades in arms with tremendous bravery.
A third hero, Lieutenant Asa Sofer, is also here with us.
Asa fought as an officer in the Tank Corps, and he was wounded in battle.
He was wounded in battle while protecting his fellow soldiers from a grenade.
He lost his right arm and the vision in his left eye.
He's recovering and incredibly, within a short time, Asa will soon return to active duty as a commander of a tank company.
The same tanks that fired on innocent civilians that killed fellow Israelis, FYI.
A lot of those tanks killed Israelis, guys.
I just learned there is a fourth hero here, Lieutenant Jonathan Benchamo, who lost a leg in Gaza and continued to fight.
How many claps are we at?
We got to be at almost 30.
Bro, we're going to break the record.
My friends, these are the soldiers of Israel, unbound, undaunted, unafraid.
As the Bible says, Am Kilavi Yakum, they shall rise like lions.
They have risen like lions.
The Lions of Judah, the Lions of Israel.
30 claps.
Right, 30?
Here we go.
Ladies and gentlemen, the men and women of the IDF come from every corner of Israeli society.
Every ethnicity, every color, every creed, left and right, religious and secular.
Mostly secular, though.
With the indomitable spirit of the Maccabees, the legendary Jewish warriors of antiquity.
With us today is Yechiel Leiter, the father of one of those Maccabees.
Yechiel's father escaped the Holocaust and found refuge in America.
As a young man, Yechiel moved to Israel and raised a family of eight children.
He named his eldest son, Moshe, after his late father.
Moshe became an exemplary officer in one of our elite commando units.
He served with distinction for two decades while raising six beautiful children of his own.
On October 7th, Moshe volunteered to return to combat.
Four weeks later, he was killed when a booby trap mine exploded in a tunnel shaft right next to a mosque.
At his son's funeral, Yechiel said this.
If the state of Israel had not been established after the Holocaust, the image engraved in our collective would have been the photograph of that helpless Jewish boy in the Warsaw ghetto holding his hands up in the air with Nazi rifles pointed at him.
But because of the birth of Israel, Yechiel continued, because of the courage of soldiers like my son Moshe, the Jewish people are no longer helpless in the face of our enemies.
Standing ovation.
Yechiel, Yechiel, please rise so we can honor your son's sacrifice.
And I pledge to you and to all the bereaved families of Israel, some of whom are in this hall today, the sacrifice of your loved ones will not be in vain.
It will not be vain, because for Israel, never again must never be an empty promise.
It must always remain a sacred vow.
And after October 7th, never again is now.
What do we have, Chat?
33 or 34?
What are we at, chat?
33.
Okay.
Let's see, chat saying 33.
All right.
My friends, defeating our brutal enemies requires both courage and clarity.
Clarity begins by knowing the difference between good and evil.
Yet incredibly, many anti-Israel protesters, many choose to stand with evil.
They stand with Hamas.
They stand with rapists and murderers.
They stand with people who came to the kibbutzim, into a home.
The parents hid the children, the two babies, in the attic, in a secret attic.
They murder the families, the parents.
They found the secret latch to the hidden attic, and then they murder the babies.
These protesters stand with them.
They should be ashamed of themselves.
Standing ovation, what are we at?
Guys, we have the lists of the people that were murdered on that day.
Obviously, that's terrible.
But it was only one infant that was killed.
So this story that he's talking about, I don't know where he's getting this from.
34.
No, we're at 35.
I mean, sorry, 34, chat.
Chat's saying 34.
They refuse to make the simple distinction between those who target terrorists and those who are taking the same thing.
I think 36 is the record.
Between the Democrats, the state of Israel and the terrorist thugs of Hamas.
We recently learned from the National Security Director, U.S. Director of National Intelligence, that Iran is funding and promoting anti-Israel protests in America.
They want to disrupt America.
So these protesters burn American flags even on the 4th of July.
And I wish to salute the fraternity brothers at the University of North Carolina who protected the American flag, protected the American flag against these anti-Israel protesters.
If I'm not mistaken, those frat guys were all Israelis.
If I'm not mistaken, I'm going to double check.
Are they there?
For all we know, Iran is funding the anti-Israel protests that are going on right now outside this building.
Not that many, but they're there and throughout the city.
Well, I have a message for these protesters.
When the tyrants of Tehran, who hang gays from cranes and murder women for not covering their hair, are praising, promoting, and funding you, you have officially become Iran's useful idiots.
Some of these protesters, and it's amazing, absolutely amazing.
Some of these protesters hold up signs proclaiming gays for Gaza.
They might as well hold up signs saying chickens for KFC.
How many class do we have, chat?
These protesters chant from the river to the city.
This is crazy.
37?
But many don't have a clue what rivers are.
I think we set them a record, guys.
They not only get an F in geography, they get an F in history.
They call Israel, they call Israel a colonialist state.
Don't they know that the land of Israel is where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob prayed, where Isaiah and Jeremiah preached, and where David and Solomon ruled?
For nearly 4,000 years, the land of Israel has been the homeland of the Jewish people.
It's always been our home.
It will always be our home.
We've got still a lot to go over, guys.
We're already at 38 or 39.
No, we're at 40?
Come on, chat.
Get it together.
Where are we at?
It's not only the campus protesters who get it wrong.
It's also the people who run those campuses.
80 years after the Holocaust, 80 years after the Holocaust, the presidents of Harvard, Penn, and I'm ashamed to say my alma mater, MIT, couldn't bring themselves to condemn the calls for the genocide of Jews.
You remember what they said?
They said, it depends on the context.
Well, let me give these befuddled academics a little context.
Anti-Semitism is the world's oldest hatred.
For centuries, the massacre of Jews was always preceded by wild accusations.
We were accused of everything from poisoning wells to spreading plagues to using the blood of slaughtered children to bake Passover matzahs.
These preposterous anti-Semitic lies led to persecution, mass murder.
He didn't mention Ussery, though.
Ussery's worst genocide, the Holocaust.
Now, just as malicious lies were leveled for centuries at the Jewish people, malicious lies are now being leveled at the Jewish state.
No, no, don't applaud.
Listen, the outrageous slanders that paint Israel as racist and genocidal to legitimize Israel to demonize the Jewish state and to demonize Jews everywhere.
And no wonder.
No wonder we've witnessed an appalling rise of anti-Semitism in America and around the world.
My friends, whenever and wherever we see the scourge of anti-Semitism, we must unequivocally condemn it and resolutely fight it, without exception.
And don't be fooled when the blood libels against the Jewish state come from people who wear fancy silk robes and speak in lofty tones about law and justice.
Here's a case in point.
The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has shamefully accused Israel of deliberately starving the people of Gaza.
This is utter, complete nonsense.
It's a complete fabrication.
Israel has enabled more than 40,000 aid trucks to enter Gaza.
That's half a million tons of food.
And that's more than 3,000 calories for every man, women, and child in Gaza.
If there are Palestinians in Gaza who aren't getting enough food, it's not because Israel is blocking it.
It's because Hamas is stealing it.
That's cat.
They are stopping it.
They're absolutely stopping it.
So much for that lie, but here's another.
The ICC prosecutor accuses Israel of deliberately targeting civilians.
What in God's green earth is he talking about?
The IDF has dropped millions of flyers, sent millions of text messages, made hundreds of thousands of phone calls to get Palestinian civilians out of harm's way.
But at the same time, Hamas, Hamas does everything in its power to put Palestinian civilians in harm's way.
They fire rockets from schools, from hospitals, from mosques.
They even shoot their own people when they try to leave the war zone.
A senior Hamas official, Fatri Hamad, boasted, listen to this, he boasted that Palestinian women and children excel at being human shields.
His words excel at being human shields.
What monstrous evil.
For Israel, every civilian death is a tragedy.
For Hamas, it's a strategy.
They actually want Palestinian civilians to die so that Israel will be smeared in the international media and be pressured to end the war before it's won.
This would enable Hamas to survive another day and as they vowed to carry out October 7th again and again and again.
Well, I want to assure you, no matter what pressure is brought to bear, I will never allow that to happen.
46?
The vast majority of Americans have not fallen for this Hamas propaganda.
They continue to support Israel.
And I want to say thank you, America, and thank you, senators and House members, who continue to support us, continue to support Israel, continue to support the truth, and see through the lies.
But as for the minority that may have fallen for Hamas's Khan's job, I suggest you listen to Colonel John Spencer.
John Spencer is head of urban warfare studies at West Point.
He studied every major urban conflict.
I was going to say in modern history.
He corrected me, no, in history.
Israel, he said, has implemented more precautions to prevent civilian harm than any military in history and beyond what international law requires.
We've also killed the most people too.
They dropped the most amount of bombs.
But, hey, it is what it is, right?
That's why, despite all the lies you've heard, the war in Gaza has one of the lowest ratios of combatants to noncombatants casualties in the history of urban warfare.
And you want to know where it's lowest in Gaza?
It's lowest in Rafah.
In Rafah.
Remember what so many people said?
If Israel goes into Rafah, there'll be thousands, maybe even tens of thousands of civilians killed?
Well, last week, I went into Rafah.
I visited our troops as they finished fighting Hamas's remaining terrorist battalions.
I asked the commander there, how many terrorists did you take out in Rafah?
He gave me an exact number, 1,203.
I asked him, how many civilians were killed?
He said, Prime Minister, practically none.
With the exception of a single incident where shrapnel from a bomb hit a Hamas weapons depot and unintentionally killed two dozen people, the answer is practically none.
You want to know why?
Because Israel got the civilians out of harm's way, something people said we could never do, but we did it.
All cat, Dan.
He killed a bunch of people in Rafah that are innocent.
A bunch.
This is cat, bro.
Practically none.
These heroes here today, the heroic soldiers of Israel, should not be condemned for how they're conducting the war in Gaza.
They should be commended for it.
I want to thank all of you here today who forcefully opposed the false accusations of the ICC and stood up for the truth.
These lies are not only libelous, they're downright dangerous.
The ICC is trying to shackle Israel's hands and prevent us from defending ourselves.
And if Israel's hands are tied, America is next.
I'll tell you what else is next.
The ability of all democracies to fight terrorism will be imperiled.
That's what's on the line.
So let me assure you, the hands of the Jewish state will never be shackled.
Israel will always defend itself.
We have 50, chat?
We have 50?
How many ovations we have, chat?
Wow.
Yeah, I'm going to give him a Don DeMar.
Calm down go the whole time, but he got 50 ovations.
That's crazy.
Behind all the terrorism, all the turmoil, all the chaos, all the killing.
And that should come as no surprise.
When he founded the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini pledged, we will export our revolution to the entire world.
We will export the Islamic revolution to the entire world.
Now ask yourself, which country ultimately stands in the way of Iran's maniacal plans to impose radical Islam on the world?
And the answer is clear.
It's America, the guardian of Western civilization and the world's greatest power.
See how he leaves it together?
They're our enemy too.
They're your enemy as well.
51.
Let's go.
He got over 50 applauses.
That's why Iran sees America as its greatest enemy.
Last month, we heard a revealing comment, ostensibly about the war in Gaza, but about something else.
It came from the foreign minister of Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, and he said this.
This is not a war with Israel.
Israel, he said, is merely a tool.
The main war, the real war, is with America.
Iran's regime has been fighting America from the moment it came to power.
In 1979, it stormed the American embassy.
It held scores of Americans hostage for 444 days.
But ask yourself why Iran doesn't like America.
It's because of Israel.
In the Middle East and beyond.
In Beirut, they killed 241 U.S. servicemen.
In Africa, they bombed American embassies.
In Iraq, they supplied explosives to maim and kill thousands of American soldiers.
In America, in America, they actually sent death quads.
They sent death squads here to murder a former Secretary of State and a former National Security Advisor.
And as we recently learned, they even brazenly threatened to assassinate President Trump.
But Iran understands that to truly challenge America, it must first conquer the Middle East.
And for this, it uses its many proxies, including the Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas.
Yet in the heart of the Middle East, standing in Iran's way, is one proud pro-American democracy, my country, the state of Israel.
That's why the mobs in Tehran chant death to Israel before they chant death to America.
For Iran, Israel is first, America is next.
So when Israel fights Hamas, we're fighting Iran.
When we fight Hezbollah, we're fighting Iran.
When we fight the Houthis, we're fighting Iran.
And when we fight Iran, we're fighting the most radical and murderous enemy of the United States of America.
And one more thing.
When Israel acts to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons that could destroy Israel and threaten every American city, every city that you come from, we're not only protecting ourselves, we're protecting you.
My friends, if you remember one thing, one thing from the speech, remember this.
Our enemies are your enemies.
Our fight is your fight.
And our victory will be your victory.
Of course.
surprise.
Ladies and gentlemen, that victory is in sight.
Israel's defeat of Hamas, ladies and gentlemen, will be a powerful blow to Iran's axis of terror.
Another part of that axis, Hezbollah, attacked Israel on October 8th, a day after the Hamas attack.
It has launched thousands of missiles and drones against us.
80,000 of our citizens in northern Israel evacuated their homes, becoming effectively refugees in their own land.
We are committed to returning them home.
We prefer to achieve this diplomatically.
But let me be clear.
Israel will do whatever it must do to restore security to our northern border and return our people safely to their homes.
Last Friday, a third Iranian proxy, the Khutis, attacked Tel Aviv with a deadly drone.
It exploded a few hundred feet from the American consulate, killing one person and injuring nine.
On Saturday, I authorized a swift response to that attack.
All our enemies should know this.
Those who attack Israel will pay a very heavy price.
And as we defend ourselves, and as we defend ourselves on all fronts, I know that America has our back.
Here we go.
And I thank you for it.
All sides of the aisle.
Thank you, my friends, for decades, America has provided Israel with generous military assistance.
And a grateful Israel has provided with critical intelligence that saved many lives.
We've jointly developed some of the most sophisticated weapons on earth.
I choose my words carefully.
We've jointly developed some of the most sophisticated weapons on earth that help protect both our countries.
And we also help keep American boots.
We help keep Americans'boots off the ground while protecting our shared interests in the Middle East.
I deeply appreciate America's support, including in this current war.
But this is an exceptional moment.
Fast-tracking U.S. military aid can dramatically expedite an end to the war in Gaza and help prevent a broader war in the Middle East.
In World War II, as Britain fought on the front lines of civilization, Winston Churchill appealed to Americans with these famous words.
Give us the tools and we'll finish the job.
Today, we're back up on locals, guys.
Sorry about that.
Give us the tools faster and we'll finish the job faster.
Here's the sales pitch.
We need your money and weapons.
We need to keep killing innocent people to defend ourselves.
Here we go.
Here's the cell pitch now, guys.
How many class do we have?
59?
The fucking record.
My dear friends, the war in Gaza could end tomorrow if Hamas surrenders, disarms, and returns all the hostages.
That's not true.
They could have ended it on the 10th.
They wanted to give the soldier the hostages back three days before.
Sorry, three days after or so.
That's not true.
We talked about this, guys.
I pinned the video.
Go watch it after this.
But here I go to my stream.
Israel will fight until we destroy Hamas'military capabilities, end its rule in Gaza, and bring all our hostages home.
That's what total victory means, and we will settle for nothing less.
The day, the day after we defeat Hamas, a new Gaza can emerge.
My vision for that day is of a demilitarized and de-radicalized Gaza.
Demilitarized.
We must not seek to resettle Gaza.
But for the foreseeable future, we must retain overriding security control there to prevent the resurgence of terror, to ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel.
so that we can attack them whenever we want and cut the grass.
Gaza should have a civilian administration run by Palestinians who do not seek to destroy Israel.
That's not too much to ask.
It's a fundamental thing that we have a right to demand and to receive.
A new generation of Palestinians must no longer be taught to hate Jews, but rather to live in peace with us.
Also, a two-state solution, but you sabotage that.
Those twin words, demilitarization and de-radicalization, those two concepts were applied to Germany and Japan after World War II, and that led to decades of peace, prosperity, and security.
Following our victory, following our victory, with the help of regional partners, the demilitarization and de-radicalization of Gaza can also lead to a future of security, prosperity, and peace.
That's my vision for Gaza.
Now here's my vision for the broader Middle East.
It's also shaped in part by what we saw in the aftermath of World War II.
After that war, America forged a security alliance in Europe to counter the growing Soviet threat.
Likewise, America and Israel today can forge a security alliance in the Middle East to counter the growing Iranian threat.
All countries that are at peace with Israel and all those countries who will make peace with Israel should be invited to join this alliance.
We saw a glimpse of that potential alliance on April 14th.
Led by the United States, more than half a dozen nations worked alongside Israel to help neutralize hundreds of missiles and droned by Iran against us.
Thank you, President Biden, for bringing that coalition together.
Talking about the Tuesday solution, LOL, which I'm going to get some for you guys here in a second on that.
Would be a natural extension of the groundbreaking Abraham Accords.
Those accords saw peace forged between Israel and four Arab countries, and they were supported by Republicans and Democrats alike.
We could call, I have a name for this new alliance.
I think we should call it the Abraham Alliance.
I want to thank President Trump for his leadership in brokering the Stark Abraham Accords.
Like Americans, Israelis were relieved that President Trump emerged safe and sound from that dastardly attack on him, dastardly attack on American democracy.
There is no room for political violence in democracies.
I also want to thank President Trump for all the things he did for Israel, from recognizing Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, to confronting Iran's aggression, to recognizing Jerusalem as our capital and moving the American embassy there.
That's Jerusalem, our eternal capital, never to be divided again.
My dear friends, Democrats and Republicans, despite these times of upheaval, I'm hopeful about the future.
I'm hopeful about Israel because my people, the Jewish people, emerged from the depths of hell from dispossession and genocide.
And against all odds, we restored our sovereignty in our ancient homeland.
We built a powerful and vibrant democracy, a democracy that pushes the boundaries of innovation for the betterment of all humanity.
I'm hopeful about America because I'm hopeful about Americans.
I know how much the people of this country have sacrificed to defend freedom.
America will continue to be a force for light and good in a dark and dangerous world.
For free peoples everywhere, America remains the beacon of liberty its extraordinary founders envisioned back in 1776.
Fight our wars, America!
Working together, I'm confident that our two nations will vanquish the tyrants and terrorists who threaten us both.
As Israel's Prime Minister, I promise you this.
No matter how long it takes, no matter how difficult the road ahead, Israel will not relent.
Israel will not bend.
We will defend our land.
We will defend our people.
We will fight until we achieve victory, victory over liberty, rather, victory of liberty over tyranny, victory of life over death, victory of good over evil.
That's our solemn commitment, and we will continue to work with the United States and our Arab partners to transform our troubled region from a backwater of repression, poverty and war into a thriving oasis of dignity, prosperity and peace.
In this noble mission, as in many others, Israel will always remain America's indispensable ally.
Through thick and thin, that's the protein chips, guys.
Through thick and thin, in good times and in bad, Israel will always be your loyal friend and your steadfast partner.
On behalf of the people of Israel, I came here today to say thank you, America.
Thank you for your support and solidarity.
Thank you for standing in Israel with Israel in our hour of need.
Together, together we shall defend our common civilization.
Together we shall secure a brilliant future for both our nations.
May God bless Israel.
May God bless America.
And may God bless the great alliance between Israel and America forever.
82?
We got what?
What are the clouds, guys?
81 claps total?
81.
Wild.
And there you have it.
An almost hour-long speech by Benjamin Netanyahu as he did address Congress.
This, as you see on the left side of your screen, is his fourth address to Congress during his career, the most of any world leader.
We know that Winston Churchill actually did address Congress a total of three times.
So now Netanyahu does have the record, so to speak.
His last speech there in 2015 during Obama's presidency.
Now, he is expected to meet with President Biden tomorrow and then head over to Florida to Mar-a-Lago to meet with Trump on Friday.
We will have coverage of all of those things.
But again, that is Netanyahu speaking right there with lawmakers after delivering that almost hour-long speech.
A lot of different topics that were covered during that.
Again, this is the first time that he has addressed Congress since back in 2015.
Do you want to talk a little bit more about this five minutes for you to guest?
We have Jonathan Ruhi, the Director of Foreign Policy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America.
Thank you so much for taking the time to be here with us today.
Thank you for having me.
It's great to be back.
Of course.
Well, first off, I want to ask you the big question because there were a lot of topics that were discussed.
And just so you guys know, this was to interrupt the FBI testimony that was going on, right, from Director Ray on the Trump assassination.
They got interrupted for this shit.
Again, an almost hour-long speech.
So what stood out to you directly about what Netanyahu did have to say?
So So I thought the most important thing is a very big picture observation, which is the atmosphere in which he's coming to the United States.
There's a lot of uncertainty and division here in our country, including over the health of the bilateral partnership.
Into an assessment are very core to his worldview and core to his belief in the support of our mutual interests.
So I thought he did an excellent job of striking the tone, which is to say there is no daylight between our two countries, as we like to say at my organization, which while it sounds sort of simple and straightforward, is actually profoundly Important because the more daylight there is in the bilateral partnership,
▲
Export Selection