Republicans are pushing forward with their effort to get to the bottom of politicization at the FBI. But it was never expected that Democrats would simply sit back with arms crossed and passively allow evidence of corruption to come to light.
Accordingly, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are speaking out against Republicans’ whistleblowers, attacking the individuals who have testified.
House Democrats claim the three persons who have thus far spoken to the Republicans as part of the probe have not given any real evidence of wrongdoing. The Democrats made their claims in a 300-page report released on Friday.
“The three individuals we have met are not, in fact, ‘whistleblowers.’ These individuals, who put forward a wide range of conspiracy theories, did not present actual evidence of any wrongdoing at the Department of Justice or the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” the judiciary Democrats wrote.
This provoked backlash from Republicans, as it is not customary for members of the committee to reveal the substance of private and transcribed interviews. Democrats themselves acknowledged the audacity of their action, asserting it is not something they would do “in the ordinary course of business.”
“It is beyond disappointing, but sadly not surprising, that Democrats would leak cherry-picked excerpts of testimony to attack the brave whistleblowers who risked their careers to speak out on abuses at the Justice Department and FBI. These same Democrats vowed to fight our oversight ‘tooth and nail,’ and they are willing to undermine the work of the Congress to achieve their partisan goals,” said a spokesman for Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), per The Hill.
Another critic of Democrats’ decision to publicize the contents of the interviews was Representative Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who argued at CPAC that “If the Democrats are going to obstruct our investigation, then I am calling to remove the Democrats from our investigation.”
“They shouldn’t be allowed to sit in the depositions and hear the evidence if they are going to use that to try to get in the way of thorough, rigorous oversight,” Gaetz added.
The three men who have sat down for interviews with the panel are George Hill, Garret O’Boyle, and Stephen Friend.
Hill is a now-retired FBI intelligence analyst who worked at the bureau’s Boston field office. O’Boyle is a special agent from the Wichita Resident Agency who was suspended. Friend is a former special agent who served at the FBI’s Daytona Beach Resident Agency.
Democrats argue that not only are these witnesses not really whistleblowers (because they allegedly didn’t actually witness any malfeasance), they also contend that the witnesses are compromised.
“A network of organizations, led by former Trump administration officials like Kash Patel and Russell Vought, appears to have identified these witnesses, provided them with financial compensation, and found them employment after they left the FBI,” the Democrats allege in their report.
Patel is a Trump loyalist who now works as a surrogate for the 45th president’s reelection campaign. During Trump’s time in the White House, Patel was a top State Department official. As The New American reported, in November of 2020, Trump initiated a clearing out of establishment types at the Pentagon and replaced them with loyalists.
Patel, a protege of House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) who, as a Hill staffer, played a major role in fighting the Russia probe, was among them — being named chief of staff to acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller.
Vought, meanwhile, served in the Trump administration as director of the Office of Management and Budget. In the time that Trump has been out of the White House, Vought created a pro-Trump think tank known as the Center for Renewing America — where Patel is a senior fellow.
Democrats raised an alarm at the fact that Friend acknowledged in a transcribed interview that he received a $5,000 gift in November 2022 from an organization affiliated with Patel, which then put him in touch with the Center for Renewing America — where Friend is now employed as a fellow.
While Democrats call this a “monetary incentive to continue pursuing his claims,” the Center for Renewing America pushed back at that characterization.
Rachel Semmel, the think tank’s communications director, said in a statement: “The media is coordinating with the Left on the next phase of protecting weaponized government: discredit the brave ones who have come forward to blow the whistle on a security state that is weaponized against the American people, instead of protecting them.”
Democrats’ issue with O’Boyle is that he allegedly refused to provide them with documents related to the suspension of his security clearance, and that he never took his employee claims to the relevant offices at the FBI and DOJ, The Hill reports.
And the Democrats took aim at Hill due to his promotion of January 6 “conspiracy theories,” even though he did not work on cases related to the riot at the Capitol.
Do Democrats have valid concerns in this back-and-forth? Or are they merely trying to hinder the investigation into the weaponization of the FBI?
