Wray lied to Congress': Kash Patel clarifies role of FBI agents on Jan 6; Trump calls out cover-up

FBI Director Kash Patel fires back, clarifying the role of hundreds of agents at the January 6th U.S. Capitol riot and accusing former Director Christopher Wray of lying to Congress. Patel says that while 274 plainclothes FBI agents were present, they were deployed after the riot had already been declared, tasked with crowd control, a mission he claims violated standard FBI policy. He alleges that Wray misled Congress by denying that agents or sources were embedded in the crowd during questioning. In past hearings, Wray repeatedly denied that any FBI sources or agents were operating in the January 6th crowd. Patel insists those denials were D.C. answers that masked the truth. Patel says that agents were only sent after the riot was underway, contradicting the notion of prior infiltration and that the FBI leadership failed to provide transparency. He claims whistleblowers and internal disclosures are now bringing clarity to what really happened. In a series of truth social posts, President Trump blasted Wray as a disgrace to the FBI and one of the biggest liars to ever step into Congress. He said Wray should be prosecuted for perjury and claimed the former FBI director was part of a wider cover-up. It seems arbitrary and there's reports that it's kind of a quasi quota system that he's put together for January 6th prosecutions. Do you approve of targets, goals, quotas in prosecuting alleged criminal conduct? Certainly not quotas. That doesn't make any sense. I mean goals is a bit more of an ambiguous term. Certainly not quotas. Certainly not quotas. Do you know if any of your personnel at the FBI is involved in the investigations promised that will lead to indictments by the January 6th quota established by U.S. Attorney Graves? That doesn't sound familiar to me. In June 2021st you told this committee that a small group of people at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th had quote all sorts of weapons. Do you remember being here for that committee hearing and testifying that way? In general, yes. It has been reported that more than 40 FBI personnel agents or contractors were in the crowd on January 6th. Is that number accurate? I don't know if that number is accurate. Former Capitol Police Chief Stephen Son reportedly has asserted that the protest crowd was filled with federal agents. Are you aware of his assertion? I am not. Would you agree with him that it was filled with federal agents on January 6th? I would really have to see more closely exactly what he said and get the full context to be able to evaluate it. How many agents or human resources were present at the Capitol Complex and vicinity on January 6th? Well, again, it's going to get confusing because it depends on when we deployed and responded to the breach that occurred. How many were federal agents? Sure, you're talking and you and I both know what we're talking different things here. And please don't distract here because we're focusing on those who were there in an undercover capacity on January 6th. How many were there? Again, I'm not sure that I can give you that number as I sit here. I'm not sure there were undercover agents on scene. I find that kind of a remarkable statement, Director. At this point, you don't know whether there were undercover federal agents, FBI agents in the crowd or in the Capitol on January 6th. I say that because I want to be very careful. There have been a number of court filings related to some of these topics, and I want to make sure that I stick with him. I understand that, but I thought I heard you say you didn't know whether there were FBI agents or informants or human sources in the Capitol or in the vicinity on January 6th. Did I misunderstand you? I thought that's what you said. Well, I referred very specifically to undercover agents. Yeah. And so are you acknowledging then there were undercover agents? As I sit here right now, I do not believe there were undercover agents on scene, FBI agents. Did you have any assets present that day in the crowd? When it comes to what you're calling assets or what we would call confidential human sources, that's a place where, again, I want to be careful, as much as I said in response to an earlier question. There are court filings that I think speak to this that I'm happy to make sure we get to you, assuming they're not under seal. And that can better answer the question than I can, as I sit here right now. In the same January, excuse me, June 2021 committee hearing, you told us that the FISA court, quote, approved FBI procedures, minimization procedures, collection and procedures, querying procedures, did not find misconduct. Close quote. That's what you said. Specifically, you said the FISC found no misconduct. Yet three months later, the inspector general found widespread problems in FBI's FISA applications, raising serious questions about the FBI review process of applications, including hundreds of examples of noncompliance with Woods procedures, for example. And we know that from December 2020 to November 2021, the FBI conducted 3.4 million warrantless searches of U.S. data under FISA, 3.4 million, up nearly triple the amount of the previous year. And it got worse. As you were telling us, there was nothing to worry about. But now your reforms have reduced it down to 119,000, over 200,000 total, but 119,000 discreet Americans. That just doesn't seem like you've accomplished much there if you have 119,000 illegal searches and queries under FISA. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for five minutes. I thank the chairman. Director Wray, in light of information provided to us about the FBI's investigation of the January 6th pipe bombs, in an interview with Assistant Director Steven D'Antuono, Chairman Jordan and I sent you a letter a month ago. Some of the information that we found in that interview was that phone data that could have helped to identify the pipe bomber was corrupted, was unusable. He also wasn't sure who found or how the second bomb was found at the DNC. Do you know how the second bomb was found at the DNC? And when do you plan on answering our letter? Well, as to the letter, I will work with the department to make sure we can figure out what information we can provide. As you know, this is a very active, ongoing investigation, and there are some restrictions on that. Yes, we can handle classified information, and we fund your department, and so you need to provide that. It's not, respectfully, it's not an issue of classification. It's an issue of commenting on ongoing criminal investigations, which is something that by longstanding department policy we are restricted in doing, and in fact, the last administration actually strengthened those policies partly because— That's not our policy, though, and we fund you, so let's move on. Do you know how the second pipe bomb—can you tell us how the second pipe bomb was found at the DNC? Again, I'm not going to get into that here. Nine hundred days ago is when this happened, and you said you had total confidence we'd apprehend the subject. We've found video that looks like somebody, a passerby, miraculously found this pipe bomb at the DNC and then notified the police. Miraculously, I say, because it was specifically the precise time to cause the maximum distraction from the events going on at the Capitol. Can you show this video that we have, please? I'd like to know if the director has seen this. This is somebody with a mask on, wearing a hat. They're walking in front of the DNC, which is out of the view on the right-hand side. You'll see him come into view. He goes to one police car. He goes to another police car. He's holding a backpack. He's got a mask on. He's talking to the police, and within a minute, they start scrambling. You'll see the camera turn to the pipe bomb, the location of the pipe bomb. By the way, I believe the Metro police are now getting out of their car, and that's vice president-elect Detail in the black SUV, I believe, parked about 30 feet from the pipe bomb, eating lunch. Okay, now we go over to the location of the pipe bomb. The cameras are scrambling. It appears to me that that's not a coincidence, that the person with the backpack who walked by that bench and then went up to the police and the Detail didn't do that accidentally. They had a purpose in mind, and then what transpired after that was the result of information that person gave to them. If that person found the pipe bomb, would they be a suspect? Well, again, I don't want to speculate about specific individuals. I will tell you that we have done thousands of interviews, reviewed something like 40,000 video files, of which this is one, assessed 500-something tips. Have you interviewed that person? We have conducted all logical investigative steps and interviewed all logical individuals at this point. It's 900 days. You need to tell us what you found, because we're finding stuff you haven't released into the public.