After the Weaponization of the Federal Government Subcommittee hearing held on March 30th, it appears Republicans fear the witnesses they brought to the party. Numerous independent journalists have already reported that Jordan’s weaponization subcommittee lacks credibility and is floundering. The latest set of witnesses have made it clear that the Republican narrative is ready to crumble at the slightest pressure – so they have now taken the steps of shielding their witnesses from any potential scrutiny.
On March 30th, Republicans invited Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry to be a witness to what the Republicans in the committee referred to as weaponization of the federal government. Republicans did so despite Landry’s own record of weaponizing the Louisiana state government. Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry worked to delay approval of flood protection funds to New Orleans after the city pushed back on the state’s new abortion ban. He twice convinced the Louisiana State Bond Commission to temporarily block approval for a line of credit New Orleans’ earmarked for a power plant to support drainage pumps that remove rainwater during storms; a critical aspect for flood protection for the city’s 384,000 residents. The votes happened after New Orleans objected to the state’s new abortion ban and Landry admitted the vote was a response to the city’s “open defiance” of the new state law. Landry’s spokesperson also said the push to delay the funds was about sending a message to New Orleans. The Louisiana State Bond Commission eventually approved the funds with the state’s Republican lieutenant governor criticizing Landry’s tactics and saying the Commission was an inappropriate place to punish New Orleans for its abortion stance. Astonishingly, Republicans dismissed Landry without allowing Democrats to ask a single question of their so-called credible witness.
Another witness, former Missouri Solicitor General, John Saeur was called out by Rep. Wasserman Schultz for his involvement with a dark money group that held “war room” meetings to discuss strategies if Trump lost the 2020 election. The group, Rule of Law Defense Fund, went on to send out a robocall urging “patriots” to support then-President Trump at the January 6th rally. Two St. Louis attorneys found Sauer had coordinated with the group and records show Sauer attended the “war room” meetings. During the hearing, Saeur also admitted to his entanglement with the group during his time as Missouri Solicitor General. Rep. Wasserman Schultz requested the Weaponization subcommittee issue a subpoena to uncover Sauer’s involvement with the group during his time in office – a potential breach of Missouri state law. The motion failed, Rep. Wasserman Schulz called out the committee’s selective evidence gathering methods when investigating instances of officials weaponizing the government.
The events of the hearing on March 30th can be added to the long-running list of Rep. Jim Jordan’s failure to provide credible witnesses to support his claims about the weaponization of the federal government. Jordan touted allegations of dozens of federal government whistleblowers who have come to his office with stories of discrimination and bias. So far, three witnesses have been interviewed by House Judiciary staff and none of them had their claims validated. Democrats on the panel revealed the witnesses were a trio of misinformation traffickers, some of which had been financially supported by a Trump ally, Kash Patel. One witness, Stephen Friend, a former special agent in the FBI’s Daytona office, refused to participate in a SWAT raid of a January 6th suspect because he did not believe him to be guilty – notably the suspect was a member of the Three-Percenter movement, an anti-government organization with a history of violence towards citizens and law enforcement. Friend apparently testified about having to surveil a person who attended a school board meeting. The person in question was a member of the Three-Percenter movement, under counterterrorism investigation and was later arrested.
Numerous Independent Journalists Have Reported That Jordan’s Weaponization Subcommittee Lacks Credibility And Is Floundering
Vox: “The House GOP’s investigations are flopping”
The Hill: “Jordan’s ‘weaponization’ panel is all conclusions, no evidence”
Salon: “Jim Jordan has found no ‘weaponization’ of government — and no actual whistleblowers”
MSNBC: “Rep. Jim Jordan’s committee ‘struck out’ for the second time, says House member”
MSNBC: “Jordan tries and fails to get his ‘weaponization’ panel on track”
Raw Story: “Jim Jordan’s ‘lackluster’ weaponization committee ‘completely ineffective’: Watergate prosecutor”
Raw Story: “Jim Jordan is having a ‘rough time’ as his House committee hearings flop: analyst”
Raw Story: “‘An embarrassment’: Jim Jordan’s hearings slammed by legal experts as ‘far-right snipe hunt’”
Raw Story: “Jim Jordan gets called out at his own hearing for weaponizing the government to protect Trump”
Raw Story: “Watch: Chaos erupts at Jim Jordan’s latest ‘weaponization’ hearing”
Washington Post: “Jordan’s Weaponization-Panel Game Plan Draws Critique From Some On The Right”
The Bulwark: “Jim Jordan’s Weaponization Subcommittee Keeps Firing Blanks”
Politico: “Jim Jordan’s ‘Weaponization Committee’ Is Misfiring”
Washington Post: “The Holes In Jim Jordan’s Convoluted ‘Weaponization’ Theory.”
Esquire: “House “Weaponization” Subcommittee Shows What Happens When One Bad-Faith Exercise Pokes Another”
Axios: “Jim Jordan scrambles amid claims “weaponization” probe is a dud”
MSNBC: “The House GOP’s ‘weaponization’ subcommittee is already imploding”
MaddowBlog: “Jim Jordan pretends his ‘weaponization’ committee still has merit”
Raw Story: “Jim Jordan facing heat from conservatives over handling of ‘weaponization’ hearings”
Raw Story: “Jim Jordan shredded as his ‘weaponization’ probe chases a ‘mirage’”
Fox News: “Jim Jordan ‘weaponization’ probe draws early flak after disputed testimony”
3/30/23: Republicans Protected A Witness With A History Of Weaponizing The Government From Being Cross Examined
Republican Members Of The Weaponization Of The Federal Government Subcommittee Invited Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry To Be A Witness For A Hearing On Alleged Suppression Of American Liberties.
[U.S. House Committee on Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, Hearing to Examine Missouri v. Biden, 3/29/23]
- On March 30th, 2023, The Select Subcommittee On The Weaponization Of The Federal Government Held A Hearing To Examine Missouri v. Biden. “The Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government will hold a hearing on Thursday, March 30, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. ET. The hearing will examine the Missouri v. Biden case challenging the administration’s violation of the First Amendment by directing social media companies to censor and suppress Americans’ free speech.” [U.S. House Committee on Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, Hearing to Examine Missouri v. Biden, 3/29/23]
JEFF LANDRY WORKED WITH THE STATE BOND COMMISSION TO WITHHOLD VITAL FLOOD PROTECTION FUNDS FROM NEW ORLEANS FOR REFUSING TO FULLY ENFORCE LOUISIANA’S ABORTION BAN
July 2022: Jeff Landry Called On The State Bond Commission To Deny State Tax Dollars For Projects In New Orleans In Response To City Officials Saying The Wouldn’t Enforce The State’s Abortion Ban. According to WWNO, “Attorney General Jeff Landry issued a threat to New Orleans officials Tuesday: enforce the state’s near-absolute ban on abortion or risk losing state funding for projects in the city. In a letter to state Treasurer John Schroder, Landry called on his fellow members of the State Bond Commission to deny any state tax dollars for projects in New Orleans in response to city officials saying they won’t enforce the state’s abortion ban, which would prohibit nearly all abortions except for medically futile or life-threatening pregnancies.” [WWNO, 7/19/22]
LANDRY SUCCESSFULLY CONVINCED THE STATE BOND COMMISSION TWICE TO DELAY APPROVAL FOR FUNDS FOR DRAINAGE PUMPS MEANT TO PROTECT OF 300,000 NEW ORLEANS RESIDENTS DURING HURRICANE SEASON
August 2022: In The Middle Of Hurricane Season, Louisiana’s State Bond Commission, At The Urging Of AG Landry, Voted To Delay Approval For Funding For Drainage Pumps That Removed Rainwater During Storms. According to The Independent, “In the middle of hurricane season, officials in Louisiana have voted to temporarily block the city of New Orleans from a $39m line of credit intended for critical flood protection after the city’s Democratic leadership announced its objections to newly enacted state laws criminalising abortion care. The Louisiana State Bond Commission, at the urging of Republican Attorney General Jeff Landry, voted 7-6 on 18 August to delay approval for funding that New Orleans officials earmarked for a power plant to support drainage pumps that remove rainwater during storms.” [Independent, 8/22/22]
- The Louisiana State Bond Commission Vote Happened After New Orleans’ City Leadership Objected To A New State Abortion Ban. According to The Independent, “In the middle of hurricane season, officials in Louisiana have voted to temporarily block the city of New Orleans from a $39m line of credit intended for critical flood protection after the city’s Democratic leadership announced its objections to newly enacted state laws criminalising abortion care. The Louisiana State Bond Commission, at the urging of Republican Attorney General Jeff Landry, voted 7-6 on 18 August to delay approval for funding that New Orleans officials earmarked for a power plant to support drainage pumps that remove rainwater during storms.” [Independent, 8/22/22]
AG Jeff Landry Acknowledged On Facebook That The Vote Was A Response To New Orleans City Officials’ “Open Defiance.” “Mr Landry said in a statement on Facebook that ‘the officials in New Orleans took an oath of office to support and enforce the laws of our State, yet they have decided that some laws are not worthy of enforcement.’ He condemned what he called the city’s ‘open defiance of the will of the people of Louisiana’ and said the commission’s vote is ‘another step toward ensuring the parishes and municipalities of our State comply with the laws of our State.’” [Independent, 8/22/22]
AG Jeff Landry Justified His Actions And The Bond Commission’s Vote By Claiming It Was Another “Step Forward” To Ensuring Municipalities Complied With The Laws Of The State. “Mr Landry said in a statement on Facebook that ‘the officials in New Orleans took an oath of office to support and enforce the laws of our State, yet they have decided that some laws are not worthy of enforcement.’ He condemned what he called the city’s ‘open defiance of the will of the people of Louisiana’ and said the commission’s vote is ‘another step toward ensuring the parishes and municipalities of our State comply with the laws of our State.’” [Independent, 8/22/22]
AG Jeff Landry Twice Successfully Convinced The Louisiana State Bond Commission To Delay The Approval Of A $39 Million Line Of Credit For A Power Station To Run Draining Pumps Meant To Protect New Orleans’ 384,000 Residents From Flooding. According to E&E News, “A Louisiana commission today approved New Orleans flood control funding it had been refusing to support over city officials’ opposition to the state’s strict abortion ban. Citing the abortion issue, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry (R) had twice successfully convinced the State Bond Commission to delay approval of a future $39 million line of credit for a power station to run New Orleans drainage pumps that would protect the city’s 384,000 residents from flooding. [E&E News, 9/15/22]
AG JEFF LANDRY’S TEAM JUSTIFIED DELAYING APPROVAL OF FUNDS BY SAYING IT WAS ALL ABOUT SENDING A MESSAGE TO NEW ORLEANS
A Spokesperson For AG Jeff Landry Justified Withholding The Funds Because It Would Not Cause More Flooding Only Send A Strong Message To The City, “This Is Not Going To Harm Hurricane Protection, But What It Is Going To Do Is It Is Going To Send A Message.” “Landry himself did not attend today’s hearing, sending Civil Director of the Louisiana Department of Justice Angelique Freel to represent him. She argued that withholding the funding would not actually cause more flooding in New Orleans because approval of the future line of credit would not immediately release funds for the project, which is needed to provide reliable electricity to pumps to keep city streets dry during rainstorms. Rather, approving the line of credit puts the project forward for the Legislature to actually fund in its next appropriations bill. ‘This is not going to harm hurricane protection, but what it is going to do is it is going to send a message that we expect all municipalities to abide by the laws that are passed by this body, the Legislature,’ she said.” [E&E News, 9/15/22]
Louisiana State Bond Commission Members Eventually Voted To Approve The Funds. According to E&E News, “But on Thursday, commission members had clearly run out of patience with Landry, voting 11-1 to approve the future line of credit for the project. ‘Any flood protection anywhere in this state should not be held up for any reason,’ Lt. Gov. Billy Nungesser (R) said.” [E&E News, 9/15/22]
Louisiana Lieutenant Governor Criticized AG Jeff Landry And Said The Commission Was An Inappropriate Venue To Punish New Orleans For Its Abortion Stance
Louisiana Lieutenant Governor Billy Nungesser: “Any Flood Protection Anywhere In This State Should Not Be Held Up For Any Reason.” According to E&E News, “But on Thursday, commission members had clearly run out of patience with Landry, voting 11-1 to approve the future line of credit for the project. ‘Any flood protection anywhere in this state should not be held up for any reason,’ Lt. Gov. Billy Nungesser (R) said. […] Nungesser said that his representative had voted to withhold the funding at the previous two meetings without his knowledge or approval and that he was intending the commission meeting in-person ‘to change the previous two votes.’ Noting that he disagreed with the New Orleans mayor and City Council, Nungesser argued that the State Bond Commission was not an appropriate venue to punish the city for its abortion stance. Landry, Nungesser said, ‘is really good at suing.’ ‘Take it up in the courts and not here interrupting flood protection at a time when our insurance rates are through the roof,’ he said. ‘File a suit if he thinks the laws are broken, but that’s not for this commission.’” [E&E News, 9/15/22]
DURING THE WEAPONIZATION HEARING, REPUBLICANS DISMISSED AG JEFF LANDRY BEFORE HE COULD ANSWER QUESTIONS
Republicans Excused Two Witnesses Who Were Invited To Testify To The Weaponization Subcommittee After Their Opening Testimony. “.@HouseJudiciary Democrats ask why two witnesses were excused after their opening testimony. @RepStephenLynch to Chair @Jim_Jordan: ‘They have scurried away with your complicity…that’s pretty disgraceful.’” [CSPAN, Twitter, 3/30/23]
Jordan Excused Attorney General Landry After His Opening Testimony To The Weaponization Subcommittee. During the weaponization of the federal government subcommittee hearing on March 30th, JORDAN: “Thank you Attorney General Landry we appreciate you coming here and testifying today […] We’ll let you move on to your other responsibilities.” [CSPAN, Twitter, 3/30/23] (VIDEO) [0:00 – 0:09]
3/30/23: Republicans Shielded Their Witness From A Subpoena After He Was Accused Of Potentially Weaponizing The Missouri Government
TWO ST. LOUIS ATTORNEYS DISCOVERED THE RULE OF LAW DEFENSE FUND, A DARK MONEY GROUP FOR REPUBLICAN ATTORNEYS GENERAL, WAS IN CONTACT WITH MISSOURI SOLICITOR GENERAL, JOHN SAUER
St. Louis Attorneys, Elad Gross, And Mark Pedroli, Uncovered Proof That Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt’s Office Exchanged Emails With The Rule Of Law Defense Fund – The Fundraising Arm Of The Republican Attorneys General Association. “St. Louis attorneys Elad Gross and Mark Pedroli got a surprise in a set of documents they recently unearthed via Sunshine requests: proof that Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt’s office exchanged emails with the Rule of Law Defense Fund leading up to the November 2020 election — and continued to receive numerous communications from staffers at the fund afterward. The defense fund is a fundraising arm of the Republican Attorneys General Association. For months following the election, the organizations amplified former President Trump’s false claims about a stolen election. The defense fund even sent a robocall urging “patriots” to march on the Capitol on Jan. 6.” [KBIA, 3/4/21]
Missouri Solicitor General John Sauer Corresponded With The Rule Of Law Defense Fund, Attorney Gross Claimed Sauer “Confirmed[ed] His Attendance At The ‘War Games’ Meeting In September.” “And staffers there corresponded in recent months with at least one member of Schmitt’s top staff: Missouri Solicitor General John Sauer. “He replied [to Rule of Law Defense Fund] to confirm his attendance at the ‘War Games’ meeting in September,” Gross told St. Louis on the Air. The itinerary for that meeting involved political strategizing in case of Trump’s defeat at the ballot box. Sauer subsequently became the counsel of record on the amicus brief filed by some Republican attorneys general challenging election results in Pennsylvania and other states.” [KBIA, 3/4/21]
Attorney Gross Claimed The Correspondence Between Sauer And The Rule Of Law Defense Fund Were Surprising, “Having Worked There Before, I Didn’t Think There’d Be Any Emails From These Political Groups Within The Attorney General’s Office At All — Was Very Surprised To Find Out I Was Very Wrong About That” “Most of what Gross and Pedroli have sorted through are blind-copy emails from the defense fund to the attorney general’s office. In at least one case, though, Sauer responded. To Gross, a former assistant attorney general under Schmitt’s predecessor, it all suggests a surprising mix of political action and state business. “Having worked there before, I didn’t think there’d be any emails from these political groups within the attorney general’s office at all — was very surprised to find out I was very wrong about that,” Gross said.” [KBIA, 3/4/21]
THE RULE OF LAW DEFENSE FUND HELD A “WAR GAMES” MEETING TO DISCUSS STRATEGIES IF TRUMP LOST THE 2020 ELECTION – THE GROUP URGED “PATRIOTS” TO SUPPORT TRUMP ON JANUARY 6TH
The Rule Of Law Defense Fund Held A Special “War Games” Meeting Weeks Before The Election To Discuss Strategies If Trump Lost – The Group Sent A Robocall Urging “Patriots” To Support Then-President Donald Trump At The Jan. 6 Rally. “An offshoot of the Republican Attorneys General Association that sent a robocall urging ‘patriots’ to support then-President Donald Trump at the Jan. 6 rally that preceded the storming of the U.S. Capitol held a special ‘war games’ meeting weeks before the election to discuss its strategies if Trump lost. [Associated Press, 9/10/21]
RECORDS SHOW SAUER CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE TO THE “WAR GAMES” MEETINGS IN SEPTEMBER – HE ALSO ADMITTED TO ATTENDING A MEETING DURING THE WEAPONIZATION HEARING
During The Weaponization Hearing, Sauer Admitted To Attending Rule Of Law Defense Fund Meetings, But Denied Attending Political Meetings. A transcript of John Sauer’s response to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz regarding his communications with the Rule of Law defense fund, SAUER: “None of the meetings I attended were political. I attended one meeting by zoom that discussed legal issues only.” [Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, 3/30/23] (VIDEO)
Missouri Solicitor General John Sauer Corresponded With The Rule Of Defense Fund, Attorney Gross Claimed Sauer “Confirmed[ed] His Attendance At The ‘War Games’ Meeting In September.” “And staffers there corresponded in recent months with at least one member of Schmitt’s top staff: Missouri Solicitor General John Sauer. “He replied [to Rule of Law Defense Fund] to confirm his attendance at the ‘War Games’ meeting in September,” Gross told St. Louis on the Air. The itinerary for that meeting involved political strategizing in case of Trump’s defeat at the ballot box. Sauer subsequently became the counsel of record on the amicus brief filed by some Republican attorneys general challenging election results in Pennsylvania and other states.” [KBIA, 3/4/21]
- Records Show Sauer Was Registered For The Rule Of Law Defense Fund “Senior Staff Summit” Held On September 23 And 24th. “The records show John Sauer, the state solicitor general, was registered for a ‘Senior Staff Summit’ on Sept. 23 and 24. He received Zoom log-in info from a Rule of Law Defense Fund official.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 2/24/21]
REP. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ REQUESTED THE WEAPONIZATION COMMITTEE ISSUE A SUBPOENA TO UNCOVER SAUER’S INVOLVEMENT WITH THE GROUP
Rep. Wasserman Schultz Moved To Subpoena Mr. Sauer And Request Correspondence Relating To The Use Of State Resources In Coordination With Dark Money Groups Involved In The January 6th Insurrection. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “So I move that the chair issue subpoenas to Mr. Sauer, requesting any and all correspondence relating to their political involvement in the January 6 insurrection and dark money groups while using state resources.” [Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, 3/30/23] (VIDEO)
- Missouri State Law Prohibits The Use Of State Resources For Political Purposes And The Law Has Been Enforced In The Past. “As Gross explained on Thursday’s St. Louis on the Air, Missouri law prohibits the use of state resources for political ends, and there’s some history of enforcing that law in the Show-Me State. Former Attorney General William Webster went to prison for it. ‘He was sentenced to a two-year term of imprisonment in the early ’90s,’ Gross said. ‘I mean, he did a whole lot of stuff, but the stuff that he pled guilty on was using a copy machine for some campaign materials. … Our law is very clear, and the law of many states is very clear, that you cannot use public resources for political purposes. ‘And that’s what these emails are showing. Not only was the email account used for that purpose, but taxpayer-paid staff were doing this on work time. It boggles my mind to even think about it.’” [St. Louis Public Radio, 3/4/21]
Rep. Wasserman Schulz Asked Republican Witness Sauer, If He Violated Missouri Law By Using State Resources On Official Time To Colluded With A Political Group To Prevent America’s Peaceful Transfer Of Power – Sauer Claimed He Did Not. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “Did you violate Missouri statute section 36.157 By using state resources on official time to collude with political groups to prevent America’s peaceful transfer of power?” SAUER: “Absolutely not.” [Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, 3/30/23] (VIDEO)
THE MOTION FOR A SUBPOENA FAILED – WASSERMAN SCHULTZ CRITICIZED THE SUBCOMMITTEE FOR ITS SELECTIVE EVIDENCE GATHERING
The Committee Denied The Subpoena On A 10 – 7 Vote. Clerk: “Mr. Chair there are 10 ayes and seven no’s. [Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, 3/30/23] (VIDEO)
- Wasserman Schultz Criticized The Weaponization Subcommittee For Only Being “Selectively” Interested In Evidence Gathering Regarding The Weaponization Of Governments. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “But this committee is only interested in selectively doing that as evidenced by the fact that the Republican majority on this committee squashed getting us more evidence than what I have behind me that I’ve entered into the record to prove that proves that this witness Mr. Sauer weaponize weaponized government and participated violating Missouri State law” [Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, 3/30/23] (VIDEO)
Add Today’s Hearings To Jordan’s Failure To Provide Credible Witnesses To Support His Claims About Weaponization Of The Federal Government
JORDAN HAS REPEATEDLY TOUTED ALLEGATIONS OF DOZENS OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHISTLEBLOWERS
HEADLINE: “Jim Jordan’s Credibility Questioned Over Whistleblowers’ Testimony” [Newsweek, 3/3/23]
Jordan Previously Touted Allegations Of Dozens Of Federal Government Whistleblowers With Stories Of Discrimination And Bias – But Has Yet To Answer Questions Raised By Democrats Regarding Their Legitimacy. “As CNN has previously reported, Jordan has touted the allegations of what he asserts are ‘dozens’ of federal government whistleblowers who he says have come to his office with stories of discrimination and bias. But Democrats have raised questions about their legitimacy as whistleblowers and the relevance of their testimony.” [CNN 3/4/23]
Several Of Jordan’s Supposed Whistleblowers Were Suspended From The FBI Because They Were At The U.S. Capitol On January 6th
Several Supposed Whistleblowers Who Have Not Come In For Interviews Were Suspended From The FBI For Being At The US Capitol On January 6th. “Separately, several other supposed whistleblowers who have not come in for interviews were suspended from the FBI for being at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, according to multiple sources familiar with the committee’s work.” [CNN 3/4/23]
THREE OF JORDAN’S WHISTLEBLOWERS HAVE COME IN FOR INTERVIEWS WITH HOUSE JUDICIARY STAFF – NONE OF THEM HAVE HAD THEIR CLAIMS VALIDATED NOR WERE THEY GRANTED WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION
Three Of Jordan’s Witnesses Came In For Interviews With House Judiciary Committee Staff – None Of Them Had Their Claims Validated By Government Entities That Grant Federal Whistleblower Protection. “As of Thursday, three of Jordan’s witnesses had come in for private interviews with House Judiciary Committee staff. None of them appear to have had their claims validated by government entities that grant federal whistleblower protection, sources familiar with their testimony said. [CNN 3/4/23]
One Claimed There Was FBI Wrongdoing But Had Their Claims Rejected, Another Is Retired And Their Testimony May Not Be Based On First-Hand Knowledge Of The Violations. “Three of Jordan’s witnesses have come in for private interviews with committee staff so far. None of them appear to have had their claims validated by government entities that grant federal whistleblower protection, sources familiar with their testimony said. One who alleged there was FBI wrongdoing had their claims rejected. Another is retired and it’s unclear whether he has first-hand knowledge of the violations he alleges. The third has not revealed his direct disclosures or FBI suspension notice to House Democrats, according to transcripts reviewed by CNN.” [CNN, 3/2/22]
DEMOCRATS REVEALED THAT JORDAN’S ALLEGED WHISTLEBLOWERS WERE A TRIO OF MISINFORMATION PEDDLERS SOME OF WHOM WERE FUNDED BY A TRUMP ALLY
Democrats On The Panel Revealed The Alleged Whistleblowers Were A Trio Of Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory Traffickers And Some Received Financial Support From An Ally Of Donald Trump. “But the first three witnesses to testify privately before the new Republican-led House committee investigating the ‘weaponization’ of the federal government have offered little firsthand knowledge of any wrongdoing or violation of the law, according to Democrats on the panel who have listened to their accounts. Instead, the trio appears to be a group of aggrieved former F.B.I. officials who have trafficked in right-wing conspiracy theories, including about the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the Capitol, and received financial support from a top ally of former President Donald J. Trump.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
Democrats’ Report Said Jordan’s Three Whistleblowers Were Not Actually Whistleblowers Because They “Did Not Present Actual Evidence Of Wrongdoing.” “A lengthy report released by ranking Democratic Judiciary Committee member Jerrold Nadler of New York and U.S. Virgin Islands House Delegate Stacey Plaskett earlier on Friday argued that ‘House Republicans have found very few facts to fit their favorite talking points.’ ‘The three individuals we have met are not, in fact, ‘whistleblowers,’ Nadler and Plaskett wrote in a foreword to the report. ‘These individuals, who put forward a wide range of conspiracy theories, did not present actual evidence of any wrongdoing.’ The foreword goes on to say that the ‘transcribed interviews we have held thus far refute House Republican narrative about bias,’ while urging Jordan to open up the hearings and ‘schedule the public testimony of these individuals without delay.’ The report’s executive summary says that ‘there is reason to doubt the credibility of these witnesses,’ arguing that every witness ‘endorses an alarming series of conspiracy theories related to the January 6 Capitol attack, the COVID vaccine, and the validity of the 2020 election.’” Newsweek, 3/3/23]
The Men Interviewed By The House Judiciary Panel’s Investigators Were George Hill, Stephen Friend, And Garret O’Boyle. “The document centers on three men who have been interviewed by the panel’s investigators: George Hill, a retired F.B.I. supervisory intelligence analyst from the bureau’s Boston field office; Stephen Friend, a former special agent who worked in the Daytona Beach office; and Garret O’Boyle, a special agent from the field office in Wichita, Kan., who has been suspended.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
O’Boyle And Friend Testified They Received Financial Support From Trump Loyalist, And Former High Ranking Official In The Trump Administration, Kash Patel – Patel Sent One Republican Witness $5,000 Immediately After Connecting. “Mr. O’Boyle and Mr. Friend both testified that they had received financial support from Kash Patel, a Trump loyalist and former high-ranking official in the former president’s administration. Mr. Friend said Mr. Patel sent him $5,000 almost immediately after they connected in November 2022 and that Mr. Patel has helped to promote Mr. Friend’s forthcoming book on social media.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
Stephen Friend And Garret O’Boyle Received Financial Support From Trump Ally Kash Patel, Who Also Helped Friend Find A New Job With A Group Affiliated With Former Trump Chief Of Staff Mark Meadows
O’Boyle And Friend Testified They Received Financial Support From Trump Loyalist, And Former High Ranking Official In The Trump Administration, Kash Patel – Patel Sent One Republican Witness $5,000 Immediately After Connecting. “Mr. O’Boyle and Mr. Friend both testified that they had received financial support from Kash Patel, a Trump loyalist and former high-ranking official in the former president’s administration. Mr. Friend said Mr. Patel sent him $5,000 almost immediately after they connected in November 2022 and that Mr. Patel has helped to promote Mr. Friend’s forthcoming book on social media.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
Kash Patel Reportedly Helped Stephen Friend Find A Job At The Center For Renewing America, Which Is Affiliated With The Conservative Partnership Institute, A Group Run By Former Trump Chief Of Staff Mark Meadows. “It also details the ties between Mr. Trump’s inner circle and the witnesses. For instance, Mr. Patel found Mr. Friend his next job, working as a fellow on domestic intelligence and security services with the Center for Renewing America, which is run by Russ Vought. The center is affiliated with the Conservative Partnership Institute, which is run by Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff, and former Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
STEPHEN FRIEND WAS SUSPENDED FROM THE FBI BECAUSE HE REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE IN CASES CONNECTED TO JANUARY 6TH BECAUSE HE DID NOT THINK THE SUSPECTS WERE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRIMES
HEADLINE: “Republicans Hail ‘Patriotic’ FBI Agent Who Refused To Work On Jan. 6 Cases” [Huffington Post, 9/29/22]
One Of The FBI Whistleblowers Rep. Jim Jordan Relies On Was Suspended From The FBI Because He Refused To Participate In Cases Connected To January 6th Because He Did Not Think The Suspects Were Guilty. “A key part of the political nature of the Justice Department, as Republicans see it, is reflected by the supposed mistreatment of Jan. 6 rioters. One of Jordan’s FBI whistleblowers is a special agent in Florida who was suspended after he refused to participate in any cases connected with the attack on the Capitol partly because he doesn’t think the rioters are guilty. Jordan said the agent disclosed ‘that the Washington field office is deliberately manipulating Jan. 6 case files to make it appear that domestic violence extremism is on the rise,’ and that the agent had been suspended. But according to the FBI whistleblower’s statement to Congress — which Johnson published on his Senate website last year — the suspension occurred after he repeatedly refused to participate in arrests connected to Jan. 6 because he didn’t think the suspects were guilty.” [Huffington Post, 2/9/23]
Stephen Friend Refused To Participate In Operations Targeting Members Of The Three-Percenter Movement, A Known Extremist Group That Conducts Paramilitary Training
Stephen Friend Refused To Participate In A SWAT Raid Of A January 6th Suspect – Notably The Suspect Was A Member Of The Three-Percenter Movement. “Mr. Friend has said he refused to take part in a S.W.A.T. raid of a Jan. 6 suspect facing misdemeanor charges, which at the time he called an ‘excessive use of force,’ to which he was a ‘conscientious objector.’ The suspect, Tyler Bensch, was accused of being a member of a right-wing militia group connected to the Three Percenter movement. Documents in Mr. Bensch’s case indicate that on Jan. 6, 2021, he posted a video of himself outside the Capitol wearing body armor and a gas mask and carrying an AR-15-style rifle.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
Stephen Friend Testified About Being Asked To Surveil A Person Who Attended A School Board Meeting – The Person In Question Was A Member Of The Three Percenter Movement And Under Counterterrorism Investigation And Was Later Arrested. “Mr. Friend also testified about being asked to surveil a person attending a school board meeting, touching on a claim promoted by Republicans that the government mistreated conservative parents. But according to the report, Mr. Friend conceded during his interview that the man being tracked was a Three Percenter who was under counterterrorism investigation. He was later arrested with Mr. Bensch and three other individuals.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
- Southern Poverty Law Center Said Three Percenters Engage In Paramilitary Training And Organizing Under The Belief That A Small Force Can Overthrow A Tyrannical Government – Their Actions Have Repeatedly Led To Violence Against Citizens, Law Enforcement, And Residents. “Three Percenters often draw parallels between the U.S. government today and the British government in the 1700s, arguing that the current U.S. government is tyrannical and actively working to infringe on Americans’ Constitutional rights and liberties. They believe a small force of armed individuals can overthrow a tyrannical government, and many Three Percenters engage in paramilitary training and organizing to do so. Three Percenterism is at its core a vanguard extremist movement that claims to be ready to carry out armed resistance to perceived tyranny. Their perceptions of tyranny emanate from the radical conspiracy theories and paranoia rooted in the decades-old antigovernment extremist movement, and have repeatedly led to violence against America’s law enforcement, citizens and residents.” [Three Percenters, Southern Poverty Law Center, accessed 3/11/23; Anti-Defamation League, accessed 3/11/23]
GEORGE HILL EMBRACED CONSPIRACY THEORIES THAT FEDERAL INFORMANTS INSTIGATED TRUMP SUPPORTERS TO ATTACK THE CAPITOL ON JANUARY 6TH
George Hill Embraced A Conspiracy Theory That An Arizona Man Was A Federal Informant Who Helped Instigate The Attack On The Capitol On January 6th. “The report also said that Mr. Hill had embraced a conspiracy theory that an Arizona man named Ray Epps was a federal informant who helped to instigate the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Prominent Republicans — including Mr. Trump — have widely promoted the claim, which Mr. Epps denies and the House Jan. 6 committee determined to be unfounded.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
George Hill Claimed January 6th Was A “Set Up,” That There Was A “Larger Democrat Plan Using Their Enforcement Arm, The FBI” And He Described The FBI As “The Brown Shirt Enforcers Of The DNC.” “Mr. Hill has claimed on Twitter that the Jan. 6 attack was a ‘set up,’ and that there was ‘a larger #Democrat plan using their enforcement arm, the #FBI.’ He also described the F.B.I. as ‘the Brown Shirt enforcers of the @DNC,’ making an apparent reference to Nazi storm troopers to describe the federal law enforcement agency and its relationship to the Democratic National Committee.” [New York Times, 3/2/23]
AFTER JORDAN’S THREE WHISTLEBLOWERS WERE DISCREDITED HE DEMANDED THAT THE FBI ALLOW 16 EMPLOYEES TO TESTIFY TO THE WEAPONIZATION SUBCOMMITTEE
HEADLINE: “Jim Jordan Presses For More Witnesses After Report Nixes ‘Whistleblowers'” [Newsweek, 3/3/23]
3/3/23: Rep. Jim Jordan Requested That 16 FBI Employees Testify Before His Weaponization Subcommittee. “Republican Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio is calling for a host of new witnesses to testify on ‘weaponization’ of the government after a report from Democrats dismissed his previous ‘whistleblowers’ as conspiracy theorists. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jordan, in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray on Friday, requested that 16 of the bureau’s employees testify before the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Three supposed FBI whistleblowers have testified so far. ‘Our need to obtain testimony from FBI employees is vital for carrying out our oversight and for informing potential legislative reforms to the operations and activities of the FBI,’ Jordan wrote to in the letter to Wray. ‘From the documentary and testimonial information that we have obtained to date, we have identified several FBI employees who we believe possess information that is necessary for our oversight,’ he added, before listing 16 name-redacted employees for Wray to make ‘available’ for interviews.” [Newsweek, 3/3/23]
After Jordan’s Three Whistleblowers Were Discredited Rep. Matt Gaetz Said Democrats Should Be Excluded From Weaponization Subcommittee Depositions
3/3/23: Rep. Matt Gaetz Called For Democrats To Be Excluded From Weaponization Subcommittee Depositions. “Republican Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida, a committee member, called for Democrats to be excluded from future ‘weaponization’ depositions while speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland on Friday. ‘These are the Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene [and] Matt Gaetz days,’ said Gaetz. ‘And if the Democrats are going to obstruct our investigation, then I am calling to remove the Democrats from our investigation.’” [Newsweek, 3/3/23]