Transcripts For CSPAN Hearing On Origins Of FBIs Russia Inquiry Part 1 20240713

Thank you all very much. Mr. Horowitz thank you very much. Mr. Horowitz, thank you. I appreciate what you have done. Do you have your team with you . Would it be ok if they raised their hands . If they are ok with it, im ok with it. Thank you all. You have labored hard and your work product is impressive. I just want to thank you all for what you have done for the country. Mr. Horowitz, i am dying to hear from you. I will take a little bit longer to try to lay out what i think is before us as a nation to crossfire hurricane was probably the best name ever given to an investigation in the history of investigations, because that is what we wound up with, crossfire hurricane. There has been a lot of media reports about your report before it was issued. And i remember reading all these headlines lawful investigation with a few irregularities. Everything ok, lowlevel people kind of got off track. If that is what you get out of this report, you clearly didnt read it. If that is your take away, that this thing was lawfully predicated and thats the main point, you missed the entire report. How do you get a headline like that . That is what you want it to be. You want it to be that and nothing more. I can assure you, if this had been a democratic president going through what President Trump had gone through, that would not be the headline, the headline would be the f. B. I. Takes law in own hands, biased agents cut corners, lied to court, ignore exoneration. So the first thing i want you to know is how the cake is baked here. My goal is to make sure that people, when this is over, whether you like trump, hate trump, dont care about trump, you look at this as more than a few irregularities. Because if this becomes a few irregularities in america, then god help us all. The people in charge of the investigation were hand picked by mr. Mccabe, who is now a cnn analyst. High up in the fbi. The number two guy. The first question i will ask in a bit is, is this the best of the best . Are these people normal representatives of the department of justice and the f. B. I. . I hope you will say no, because i believe it to be, no. If i believed otherwise, i would be incredibly depressed. So, ladies and gentlemen, i will assume something for the sake of argument, there was a lawful predicate to open up a counterintelligence investigation. The standard to open one up is about like that. I also want you to know that a counterintelligence investigation is not a criminal investigation. They are not trying to solve a crime, they are trying to stop foreign powers from interfering in america. That a counterintelligence investigation is designed to protect americans from foreign influence. I want the American People to know there was an effort to affect Hillary Clintons campaign by foreign actors. The f. B. I. Picked up the effort, briefed her about it and they were able to stop it. We will be receiving a defensive committeeomorrow as a from the f. B. I. , to tell us all about what we should be watching for, and there may be some specific threats against us, i dont know, but i know they will brief us to protect us, not to surveille us. Here is what i want every american to know, from the time they opened up crossfire hurricane, to this debacle was over, they never made any effort to brief donald trump about suspected problems within his campaign. They had one briefing, talking about, you know, the russians are out there, you better beware. Nothing about carter page, nothing about George Papadopoulos, nothing about the other people that they thought might be working with the russians. Why did they not tell him that . I hope you can give us an answer. Bottom line, ladies and gentlemen, a counterintelligence investigation is a good thing, until it becomes a bad thing. Because it doesnt take much to open one. And the worst thing can happen, is for people to open one up was to open one up whose real purpose is not to protect an american, but to surveil them. Senator feinstein found herself in a situation all of us may one day find ourselves in. A longtime employee was suspected of having ties to a Foreign Government. They informed her and they took action. How easy would it be for someone to come to our campaign as a volunteer. You dont know who they are, you just appreciate any help you can get, how easy would it be for all of us to get caught up in this scenario . I hope all of us would appreciate, if you really believe there is somebody in my Campaign Working with a foreign power, please tell me, so i can do something about it. Why didnt they tell trump . We will figure that out later. But i think it is a question that needs to be asked. So, for a moment, lets assume there was a lawful predicate to open up a counterintelligence investigation. What has been described as a few irregularities, becomes a massive, criminal conspiracy over time to defraud the fisa surveilto illegally american citizens and to keep an operation open against a sitting president of the United States, violating every norm known to the rule of law. Many of you are prosecutors, many of you have been u. S. Attorneys. Many of you have been defense attorneys. Trumps time will come and go. But i hope you understand what happened here can never happen again, because what happened here is not a few irregularities, what happened here is the system failed. People at the highest level of our government took the law in their own hands. And when i say defraud the fisa court, i mean it. To your team, you were able to uncover and discover abuse of power i never believed would actually exist in 2019. How bad is it . It was as if j. Edgar hoover came back to life, the old f. B. I. The f. B. I. That had a chip on its shoulder and wanted to intimidate people and find out what was going on in your life, and the law be damned Martin Luther king, and just fill in names. Who ran this thing . The people were handpicked by mccabe. The number two guy at the f. B. I. The supervisory agent, the Deputy Assistant director for counterintelligence is peter strzok, a big player in all things crossfire hurricane. Lisa page, you may have heard of her. Who was she . F. B. I. Lawyer working for mccabe. These are two central characters in this debacle. Let me tell you a little bit about who these people are and where they are coming from. Thanks to a lot of hard work by people from mr. Horowitz at the f. B. I. And others, here is what we know. Strzok, the front line supervisor february 12, 2016, oh, he is abysmal. I keep hoping the charade will end and people will just dump him. The problem then is that rubio will likely lose to cruz. I never quite made it come and i can understand why they would not consider me a serious candidate. The Republican Party is utter shambles. When was the last competitive ticket they offered . March 3, 2016, page god, trump is a loathsome. Strzok oh my god, he is an idiot. Newsrooms around the country, people are nodding. This represents the attitude of a lot of people in america, and you can have that attitude, but you shouldnt be in the journalism business, you should not be at the f. B. I. If you are in the military and you said anything like this a commanderinchief, youd be charged with a crime. Remember the mcchrystal debacle where they had a ballroom discussion with a reporter from the Rolling Stone . What is the take away . Dont go to the bar with a Rolling Stone reporter. They started talking about how they didnt like joe biden. I was one of the first people who said, that was out of bounds. You can have all the political opinions you want, but if you are an officer of the u. S. Military, you will park those opinions and you will not speak ill of the commanderinchief. That obviously is not a rule of the f. B. I. And the department of justice. March 16, 2016 i cannot believe donald trump is likely to be actual serious candidate for president. July 16, closer to when this thing opens, and well donald trump is an enormous douche. Again, a lot of people agree with that. Trump barely spoke, but the first thing out of his mouth was, we are going to win. So the whole thing is like living in a bad dream, july 19, 2016. Trump is a disaster, i have no idea how destabilizing his presidency will be. You are entitled to believe that, but you should not be an investigator. July 30 2016 when the investigation is open damn, this feels momentous and this matters. The other one did, too, but that was to make sure we did not fsomething up. This matters. Super glad to be on this with you. I hope you understand what this was about. August 8, 2016 three days before strzok was named the front line supervisor he is not ever going to become president , right . Page to strzok. No, we will stop it. These are the people in charge. August 15, 2016 i want to believe the path he threw out for consideration in andys office, that there is no way he gets elected, but i am afraid we cant take that risk that the American People will pick their president , is what they are saying. It is like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you are 40. August 26 2016 just went to a southern virginia walmart. I could smell the trump support. People in charge october 11, 2016 currently fighting with stu for the fisa. He was a lawyer who thought this thing was not on the up and up, stood his ground until he couldnt stand it anymore, eventually got run over. October 19, 2016 i am all riled up. Trump is an fing idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer. The New York Times probability numbers are dropping everyday. I am scared for our organization. november 3, 2016 oh my god, this is fing terrifying. Referencing an article entitled a victory by trump remains possible. November 9, 2016 are you ever going to give out your calendars, some kind of depressing. Maybe it should be the first meeting of the secret society. November 13, 2016 i bought all the president s men. I figured i need to brush up on watergate. November 13, 2016 two pages away from finishing all the president s men. Page to strzok, did you know the president resigns at the end . Strzok to page what . That would be so lucky. May 18, 2017, the date page accepted a position on the special counsels team for me, in this case, i personally have a sense of unfinished business. Now i need to fix it and finish it. Strzok who gives a f if one more assistant director, or whoever, an investigation leading to impeachment . May, 2017 you and i both know the odds are nothing if i thought it was likely, id be there, no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there is no big there, there. Talking about impeachment. May 22, 2017 i am torn. I am more replaceable than you are in this. I am the best for it, but there are others who can do it ok. You are different and more unique. This is yours talking to page. Alright. Thats the front line supervisor and the lawyer to mccabe. There is a guy named kleinsmith who, eventually alters and email alters an email from the c. I. A. To the department of justice and the f. B. I. Mr. Horowitz and his team found this out. How they did it, i will never know. I am jumping ahead here, but when you read this report, what they find is that a lawyer supervising the fisa process at the f. B. I. , according to mr. Horowitz, doctored an email from the c. I. A. To the f. B. I. , and he will be referred for criminal prosecution. Why is that important . Carter page, who has been on the receiving end of all this, the foundation to believe he was a Foreign Agent comes from a dossier that we will talk about in a minute. In that dossier, provided by Christopher Steele, and we will talk about him in a minute, they claim that carter page meets with three people known to be russians, russian agents, People Associated with russia. Carter page, while being wiretapped by his government, says, i dont know two of these people, and to this day, there is no proof that he ever met two of those three. The third person, he says, yeah, i met him. I told the c. I. A. About my meeting because i was a source for the c. I. A. So they would have you believe that carter page is working against our government, not with our government. So carter page, in the summer of 2017, is trying to tell anybody and everybody i was working with the c. I. A. I reported my contact with this person, and nobody believed it. The c. I. A. Had told the f. B. I. It was true earlier. But it never made it through the system. Somebody got so rattled at the f. B. I. , they asked mr. Kleinsmith to check it out. He checks it out, he communicates with the c. I. A. Is carter page a source for you . In an email exchange, they say, yes he is. What does mr. Kleinsmith do . Alters the the email to say, no, he is not. And you caught him. I dont know how you caught him, because youve got to dig into this email chain. It would be like getting a lab report from the f. B. I. The fingerprints dont match, and the agent says they do. That is how bad this is. Now, let me tell you a little bit about mr. Kleinsmith, if i can find it. This is the lawyer supervising the process, the guy that altered the email because he didnt want the court to know was actually ae source. Why does it matter . Because if the court had known there was a lawful reason for mr. Page to be talking to the russian guy, he wasnt working against his country, he was working with his country. Which undercuts the idea he is a Foreign Agent. That is why kleinsmith lied, because he didnt want to stop this investigation. This is after the election i am so stressed about what i could have done differently. The day after the election i am just devastated, i cant wait until i can leave today and just shut off the world for the next four days. I am sure a lot of people felt that way after trump got elected, maybe still feel that way, but you shouldnt be in charge of supervising anything about donald trump if you feel that way. I just cant imagine the systematic disassembly of the progress weve made over the last eight years. The Obama Administration. The crazies won finally. This is the lawyer that they put in charge of supervising the work process. This is the tea party on steroids, and i am sure there are newsrooms all over america saying, thats absolutely right. What is wrong with that . Nce is stupid. Whatever. This is what the guy is saying right after the election. And it is just hard not to feel like the f. B. I. Caused some of this. Some members of congress are staying in washington this weekend ahead of the articles of impeachment of President Trump. Today they are holding a pro forma session in the house. It is possible they could file a report on articles of impeachment resolution. We expect this to be a brief session with no legislative business or vote. We will return to the testimony of Inspector General horowitz. After this live coverage of the u. S. House. The speaker pro tempore the house will be in order. The chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. The clerk the speakers room, december 14, c. , 2019. I hereby appoint the honorable kathy castor to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. Signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. The speaker pro tempore the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. Pray. In conroy let us gracious god, we give you thanks day. Iving us another you have blessed us with all good gifts and with thankful express our gratitude. You have created us with serve other to people in their need, to share and her in respect affection and to be faithful in the responsibilities we have given. In this moment of prayer, please of this the members peoples house as the chamber wisdomietly the gifts of and discernment that in their do s and actions they will justice, love with mercy and with you. Y may all that is done this day be or your greater honor and glory. Amen. He speaker pro tempore pursuant to section 7a of House Resolution 758, the chair of the last days proceedings is approved. The chair will lead the house in the pledge of allegiance. And to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Pursuant to section 7b of House Resolution 758, the house busy agenda for the house next week. Wednesday, they plan to take up articles against President Trump and hold a final vote which would set up a trial in the senate. Later in the week, the usmca trade agreement. Follow coverage of the house on cspan. We take you now back to the Justice Department Inspector General, Michael Horowitz before the Senate Judiciary committee. That the small predicate you need has been met. Happened after they opened it up . What did they find . Where their suspicions validated . Were theirted suspicions validated, or did they find at every turn, it is really not true, and they ignored it . One of the first thing they tried to do was to get a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to follow carter page, a volunteer for the campaign, and american citizen. They applied for the warrant internally in august of 2016, and the lawyer say, you dont have enough. Why . Because they had nothing. Maybe this reasonable articulation is this small, but to get a warrant from a court, youve got to have probable cause. But the lawyer is saying, you dont have it. Everybody is frustrated, folks. Thats not the right answer. Mccabe suggests, so the number two guy at the f. B. I. Suggest, lets go look at the steele dossier, maybe that will get us over the hump. Stay tuned. We will talk about that in a minute. September 19, for the first time, they introduced the steele dossier into the warrant application process. It works. September 21, they get a signoff, lets get a warrant. The dossier got them to where they wanted to go. As you say, mr. Horowitz, it was central and basically outcomedeterminitive. Without the dossier they go nowhere, with it, they are off to the races. Who is Christopher Steele . You think these other people were bad . Wait till you hear about this guy. Christopher steele was a former mi6, is that right, 6, 5, whatever it is he was a british agent, retired. He had a new line of business. He was hired by a Company Called fusion gps to investigate donald trump, ok. You want to look at foreign influence, you are about to find it. Fusion gps was on the payroll of the Democratic National party. Christopher steele is working for a company to find dirt on trump, and the money comes from the democratic party. Did they tell the court this . No. Is that a bit unnerving . It would be to me. So Christopher Steele is on the payroll of a Company Funded by the democratic party. Here is what they say about Christopher Steele he was desperate that donald trump not elected and not being u. S. President. This was the guy that gave them the work product to get the warrant. Steele told ohr, that if trump won the election, his network would be in jeopardy by a new fbi director who would have a higher degree of loyalty to the new president and could take action against the source network. Let me tell you about Christopher Steele. Ohr was right, he was on a mission to get donald trump. Not only did he provide the dossier that made the difference in getting a warrant, his bias was wellknown, he was shopping the dossier to anybody and everybody in the media and in politics to see if they would print it. The reason the f. B. I. Cut him loose is because they found out he was shopping this thing around to the Media Outlets rather than being a valid source. But after they knew he was shopping it around, they kept him around anyway because mr. Ohr kept talking to him. Bruce ohrs wife worked with Christopher Steele. She was employed by fusion gps, the wife of the number 4 guy at the f. B. I. Christopher steele went all over the United States trying to get Media Outlets to publish this garbage. The first thing is about the golden shower. About the sexual encounter that President Trump supposedly had in a Ritzcarlton Hotel in russia. Let me tell you how i come to find out about Christopher Steeles work product. In december of 2016, john mccain goes to a National Security conference in canada and somebody tells him about the steele dossier, and its bad, and you need to know about it, and it gets to john mccain. John mccain puts it in his safe. He gives it to me, and i read it. The first thing i thought of was, oh my god. This could be russian disinformation, or they may have something on trump. If you read this document, the first thing you would think of is, they got something on donald trump. It is stunning. It is damning. It is salacious. And its a bunch of crap they finally find the guy that prepared all the information. But, a little bit about steele in 2015, the British Intelligence service said, you need to watch this guy, he is not reliable. They take time to go to london to check steele out and they are told he demonstrates lack of selfawareness or judgment, keen to help, but underpinned by poor judgment, judgment pursuing people of Political Risk but no intel value. If you had spent 30 minutes looking at Christopher Steele, you would understand this guy is biased, hes got an ax to grind, he is on the payroll of the opposing party, take anything he says with a grain of salt. In january, 2017, the f. B. I. Figures out who the sub source of the steele dossier is. What you need to know, this is not what steele found himself, this is what he gathered from one person. They finally found out who this one person is. They go talk to him in january 2017. Where is that . [papers rustling] five people interviewed the primary sub source, the guy who provided steele with everything, and they showed him the dossier. Read pages 86190. Read pages 186190. What does the russian guy tell the f. B. I. About the dossier . That steele misstated or exaggerated the prime sub source of the statement, that trumps alleged sexual activities in the hotel in moscow was rumor and speculation. He went on to say, he heard it in a bar. In the report, it suggests that a western employee at the ritzcarlton confirmed this escapade by then private citizen trump. When he read that, he says, thats not true. I never told steele that somebody working for the ritzcarlton confirmed this, i heard it at a bar. Primary sub source stated that he never expected steele to put his statements in the report or to present them as facts. They were wordofmouth and hearsay, conversations had with friends over beers, where statements made in jest that should be taken with a grain of salt. January, 2017, the person who did all the assembling of the information for the nowfamous steele dossier tells the f. B. I. , i disavow everything in there. Now, what should happen . Timeout . Lets reassess . Maybe we got this wrong what what would you hope to happen . That the f. B. I. Would slowdown . This is the outcome determinative document just had a hole blown through it . They dont slowdown. They use the document that is now known to be a bunch of garbage, twice more to get a warrant against carter page. I hope carter page gets a lawyer and sues the hell out of the department of justice and the f. B. I. Two more warrants were obtained by the department of justice and fbi after being told in january by the russian guy that it was all a bunch of bull. But it gets worse. Here is how they describe the interview to the court. The f. B. I. Found that the russianbased sub source to be truthful and cooperative. Nothing about and oh, by the way, he said everything and in theres a bunch of bull. You knew in january of 2017, if there was no doubt before, you know, by the guy who prepared it, he disavowed everything. Not true. A grain of salt. I didnt say all these things. Instead of stopping, they keep going. Instead of telling the court the truth, that they are required to do, they lie to the court. A few irregularities. How would you like this to happen in your life . How would you like to be on the receiving end of this . People in the news business, how would you like this to be your News Organization . January 2017, there is no benefit of a doubt to be given. These five people, from the department of justice and the f. B. I. , have been told by the one guy who did all the work that it is a bunch of garbage, and the question is, how far up to the system did it go . Why did they apply for warrants twice more . Why didnt they stop . Everybody wants to know, is there any bias here . What motivated these people . Why do you think they kept going . Maybe because they were on a mission not to protect trump, but to protect us from trump. Thats what they were trying protect all of us smelly people from donald trump. Thats what this is about. Whether you believe it or not, i believe it, and you know what, it could happen to you all next time. There are some pretty passionate people on our side i wouldnt want to be investigating any of you. So, what happens next . They get a warrant twice more when they know it is a bunch of garbage, they lied to the court about the actual interview. I dont know what mccabe and comey knew, but i am trying to find out. Should they have known . June, 2016 2017. This is the next time they take the law into their own hands. Mr. Kleinsmith. Six months after being told the dossier is a bunch of garbage, kleinsmith alters an email from he is to he is not, because if they had told the court that page was working for the c. I. A. , it explains the contact in the dossier. Mr. Kleinsmith had a chance in his mind, to make things right, and he took it. Why did he take the law in his own hands . Why did he doctor the email . Did it have anything to do with the way he sees Donald Trumps presidency . You know what, it really doesnt matter what he was thinking, it matters what he did. And i am glad you found out what he did. I am glad you told the country what he did, because im hoping nobody will ever do it again. So, mr. Horowitz, 17 irregularities that you found, some of them are earth shattering, some of them should scare the hell out of all of us. I just want to end where i began, this is not normal. Dont judge the f. B. I. And the department of justice by these characters. We are better than this. Like many of you, i have worked with the f. B. I. A lot of my time in government. I have a Great Respect for them. Director wray, youve got a problem. And for this hearing to mean anything, weve got to fix it. And the way we fix it is listen to mr. Horowitz and get the director of the f. B. I. In here to try to find out, in a way that makes sure this never happens again to any politician in this country. It is trump today, it could be you or me tomorrow. And imagine, ladies and gentlemen, if they could do this to the candidate for president of the United States, what could they do to you . So, the Trump Presidency will end in a year or five years, i dont know when, i hope he gets reelected. But we cant write this off as being just about one man or one event. We have to understand how off the rails the system got. I will leave with some optimism here, i think democrats and republicans are willing to make sure this never happens again. If you open up a Counter Intelligence investigation on the president ial campaign in the future, there needs to be more checks and balances. I want you to audit the fisa process. Mike lee and senator lahey are probably the standardbearers for liberties. Cruz, we all care. But these are the two who constantly want to make sure that someone is watching those who watch us. They are worried about metadata. While im may not agree with all of your concerns or your solutions, i respect the fact that you care. I hope you will not treat this report as finding a lawful investigation with a few irregularities. I am a pretty hawkish guy, but if the court doesnt take corrective action and do something about being manipulated and lied to, you will lose my support. I know a lot about whats going on out there to hurt us, and there are real threats, and there are real agents, there are really bad actors out there. I would hate to lose the ability of the fisa court to operate at probably the time when we needed need it the most. But after your report, i have serious concerns about whether the fisa court can continue unless there is fundamental reform. After the report, i think we need to rewrite the rules of how you start a counterintelligence investigation, and the checks and balances that we need. Mr. Horowitz, for us to do justice to your report, we have to do more than just try to shade this report one way or the other, we have to address the underlying problem of the system in the hands of a few bad people that can do a lot of damage. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I assume there is no time limit. Chairman graham take all the time you need. I wont take a long time. I have been reading these reports, ladies and gentlemen, for 25 years and i have great appreciation for the Inspector General. I just want to make those personal remarks. This is a tough arena, and as you can see, there are very tough people, part of that arena, but to have an Inspector General who tells it as they see it, and does this year after year is a saving grace. I hope people will get this report. If i have a grievance, it is that the print is too small. Chairman graham i agree with that. Thank you very much. [laughter] it is heavy to carry around, but last year, this Inspector General pledged to congress that he would examine whether political bias played a role in the f. B. I. s decision to investigate ties between russia and the Trump Campaign. The Inspector General kept his promise. His Office Conducted a 19month investigation. They interviewed more than 100 witnesses, reviewed more than a million documents, and issued this 434page report that contains several important findings. First, on the question of bias, Inspector General horowitz found no evidence that political or antitrump bias was at play. According to the i. G. Report, the f. B. I. Complied with existing department and f. B. I. Policies in opening the investigation. And the i. G. Did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced this decision. Or any specific investigative steps taken by the f. B. I. Thats the finding. This is important. Why . In public statements beginning last spring, the attorney general expressed his belief that senior government officials may have put a thumb on the scale because of political bias against trump. His comments echoed the president who has repeatedly alleged that there is a deep state within the government against him. He has used this to dismiss the entire Russian Investigation as a witch hunt, and hoax. The i. G. s report conclusively refutes these claims. This was not a politically motivated investigation, there is no deep state. Simply put, the f. B. I. Investigation was motivated by facts, not bias. Secondly, the Inspector General confirmed there was an adequate predicate, meaning, a legitimate, factual and legal basis to investigate. The basis was not, as some have claimed, the socalled steele dossier. In fact, reporting from mr. Steele played no role in opening the investigation. Instead, this report confirms that the f. B. I. Opened the investigation after being told by australia, a trusted foreign ally, that trump advisor George Papadopoulos had learned in 2016, the month of april, that russia had and was willing to release information during the campaign that would be damaging to candidate clinton. The i. G. Report found that this information provided the f. B. I. With a factual basis that is indicatede activity constituting either a federal crime or a threat to National Security, or both may have occurred or maybe occurring. The i. G. Also found that when the f. B. I. Learned that in late july, 2016 the bureau was aware of russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 elections, including russian hacking of Democratic Campaign computers, materials stolen by russia had been released online, including by wikileaks. And the u. S. Intelligence community assessed in august of 2016 that russia was considering further intelligence operations to impact and disrupt elections. Against this backdrop, the f. B. I. Was obligated to investigate possible ties to the Trump Campaign. According to bill priestap, the f. B. I. Assistant director who authorized opening the investigation, other officials conveyed a similar obligation and sense of urgency to investigate. David rothman, a National Security division chief said, it would have been a dereliction of duty and responsibility of the highest order not to commit the appropriate resources as urgently as possible to run these facts to the ground and find out what was going on. The decision to open the investigation was unanimous, not a single official disagreed. As a result, america ultimately learned extensive details about russias sweeping and systemic attack on the 2016 election, including that the Trump Campaign knew about, welcomed, and expected it would benefit electorally from russias efforts. The report also identifies several errors made by f. B. I. And Justice Department personnel when seeking warrants for surveillance on carter page from the fisa court. F. B. I. Director wray submitted a written response accepting the i. G. s findings, including the key finding that the f. B. I. Had sufficient cause to investigate Trumps Campaign ties to russia. Director wray also said that the i. G. s findings of fisa errors are constructive criticism that will make us stronger as an organization. And that he has already taken action to address the i. G. s recommendations. By contrast, attorney general barr issued a press release that continues to criticize the f. B. I. For investigating the Trump Campaign. Its really extraordinary that the attorney general continues to make unsupported attacks on the agency that he is responsible for leading. I believe strongly it is time to move on from the false claims of political bias, and those who have shown great interest in the question of politically motivated investigations against President Trump, should show the same concern about politically motivated investigations requested by the president or his attorney general. Inspector general horowitz, i want to thank you on behalf of this side and your staff for the hard work. We look forward to hearing from you. Mr. Horowitz thank you. Chairman graham, senator feinstein, numbers of the members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today. The report that my Office Released this week is a product of a comprehensive and exhaustive review conducted over the past 19 months by an oig team that examined over one million documents, in the departments and the f. B. I. s possession including documents other u. S. And Foreign Government agencies had limited had provided to the f. B. I. Our team had conducted over 170 interviews involving more than 100 witnesses, and we documented all of our findings in the 434page report issued this week. I would encourage everybody to read the report, although i understand 400 page reports can be hard to get through. We do have a 19page executive summary with it that i would encourage people to read at a minimum. I want to commend also the tireless efforts of our outstanding review team for conducting such a rigorous and effective independent oversight. Its exactly what we are supposed to do as inspectors general. The f. B. I. Investigation that is the subject of this report, crossfire hurricane, was open in july of 2016, days after the f. B. I. Received reporting from a days after the vi received reporting from a friendly Foreign Government. The reporting stated that in a may 20 16 meeting with the friendly Foreign Government, George Papadopoulos suggested the trump team had received some kind of a suggestion from russia that it could assist in the election process with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to candidates clinton and then president obama. Following receipt of that information, the fbi opened an investigation. Anen the sensitivity of such investigation, we would expect fbi personnel to adhere to the detailed pollack policies of the fbi. The fbi has developed and earned a relationship as one of the worlds premier Law Enforcement agencies, insignificant part for its adherence to those policies and its professionalism, nonpolitical and enforcement of the law. We identified significant concerns with how certain investigation were conducted, particularly the adhere toure to standards when filing paperwork. As to surveilled carter page two was connected to the Trump Campaign. We determined that the decision to open crossfire hurricane was made by then assistant director choiceestick his reflected achoice consensus. We reviewed fbi policies and exercise ofat his discretion in opening the investigation was in compliance with those policies. We also reviewed as we detailed in the report to the emails, Text Messages, and other documents that those involved in we did notn, and find testimonial evidence that indicated political bias or improper motivation influencing his decision to open the investigation. While the information in the fbis position possession at the time was limited, in light of the low threshold established by policy, which is not a legal requirement, but rather a prudential one, we found that crossfire hurricane was open for an authorized purpose and with sufficient factual predication. Open crossfireo hurricane, which involved activities of individuals involved with a major Party Campaign for president was under fbi policy a discretionary judgment left to the fbi. As we pointed out in our report, there was no requirement that apartment officials be notified of that decision prior to the fbi making that decision. Policy, theith this fbi advised supervisors in the National Security division of the investigation days after it had been opened. As we detailed in our report, highlevel notice and approval is required in other circumstances where investigative activity could substantial lead substantially impact rights. To s would then have we concluded that simpler notice should be required in circumstances such as those president present here. After the fbi opened the crossfire hurricane investigation, the fbi conducted consensually monitored meetings between fbi confidential human sources, which we refer to as and affiliates of the Trump Campaign. We found that the chs operations receive the necessary approvals under fbi policy, that an fbi assistant director knew about and approved of each operation, even in circumstances where what was only required was a first level supervisory approval and the operations were permitted under department and fbi policy because their use was not for the sole purpose of monitoring activities protected by the First Amendment or the lawful exercise of other rights secured by the constitution or laws of the United States. Ordid not find documentary testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influence to the fbis decision to conduct those chs operations. Additionally, we found no evidence that the fbi attempted to place chss in the Trump Campaign or recruit members of chss. Mp campaign as it would have been sufficient for an fbi supervisor to chsze a domestic cs operation and there is no Applicable Department or fbi policy requiring the fbi to notify Department Officials of a decision to task a confidential human source to consensually monitor, record conversations with members of a Political Campaign. It is worththat, noting that had a midyear investigation the fbi could levelt the supervisory or arized an undercover confidential human source to have a consensually monitored conversation with either of the president ial candidates with no notice to a lawyer or the department of justice. Thesfire hurricane, each of operations had the potential to gather sensitive Campaign Information protected by the First Amendment, we found no evidence that the fbi consulted with officials before performing those operations. There is no policy requiring them to do so. We concluded that current fbi policies are not sufficient to ensure appropriate oversight and accountability when such operations potentially implicate sensitive constitutionally protected activity and require requiring we make a recommendation to that effect. One investigative tool that we expressesly require advanced approval from a senior a seeking of a court order under fisa. Crossfire hurricane first proposed seeking a pfizer order targeting carter page in mid august 2016. Fbi attorneys assisting order targeting carter page in mid august 2016. In september 2016, after the reporting from the steele dossier, fbi attorneys advised the department that they were ready to move forward to obtain fisa authority to surveilled page. This pushed the proposal over the line in terms of establishing probable cause. We concluded that the steel reporting played an essential role in the decision to seek a order. Order a fisa after beingg advised of concerns expressed by Department Attorney that steel may have been hired by someone associated with a rival candidate or campaign. Surveillance authority under fisa can significantly assisted the governments efforts to combat terrorism, clandestine intelligence activity, and other threats to the National Security. At the same time, the use of this authority unavoidably rages raises Civil Liberties concerns. In some cases, the surveillance will foreseeably collect information about the individuals constitutionally protected activities, such as carter pages legitimate activities on behalf of a president ial campaign. Moreover, proceedings before the court, which is responsible for ruling on applications for fisa unlike most court proceedings, they are the only party present for the proceedings. Fisa orders have not been for otherr scrutiny proceedings like wiretap applications. Light of these concerns, the in fbiatute and policies and procedures have established safeguards to protect the fisa application process from abuse. Are thee most important requirements and fbi policy that every fisa application must contain a full and accurate presentation of the facts. Allts must ensure that factual statements in fisa applications are scrupulously accurate. For alle the standards fisa applications, regardless of the investigations of sensitivity and it is incumbent upon the fbi to meet them in every application. Nevertheless, we found that investigators failed to meet their basic obligations of ensuring that the feiss applications were fight were scrupulous the fisa applications were scrupulously accurate. Seven in the first application and a total of 17 by the final application. The Crossfire Hurricane Team stealsd information from that raised significant questions about the reliability of the steel report. This was noteworthy because the fisa application relied entirely on information from the steel from the primary sub sources reporting to support the application allegation that paige was coordinating with the russian government. Not sharehe fbi did this information with Department Lawyers and it was therefore omitted from the last two renewal applications. All of the applications also it omitted omitted information that the fbi obtained in august 20 16 from another u. S. Government agency detailing its prior relationship with carter page, including that carter page had been approved as an operational contact for the it the other agency from 2008 two 2013. And that an employee of that other agency assessed that carter page had been candid with them. The fbi never followed up on that information. As a result of these seven significant inaccuracies and omissions, relevant information was not shared with and consequently considered by Department Lawyers in the fisa court. The fisa applications made it layer that they evidence supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case. We also found basic, fundamental, and serious errors during the completion of the factual accuracy reviews known as the woods procedures which are designed to ensure that fisa applications contain a full and accurate presentation of the facts. Department lawyers and the court should have been given complete and Accurate Information so they could meaningfully evaluate probable cause before authorizing the surveillance of a u. S. Person associated with a president ial campaign. That did not occur. As a result, the surveillance of carter page continued even as the fbi gathered information that weakened the assessment of probable cause and made the phis applications less accurate. Fisa applications less accurate. They do not Pay Attention to facts that ruled against probable caused because. Cause. S against probable agents ande supervisory agents did not follow or even appear to know certain basic requirements in the woods procedures. Although we did not find testimonial or document tree evidence of intentional misconduct, we also did not receive satisfactory explanations for any of the errors or admit omissions we identified. Hereund as we outlined many fundamental and basic errors were made by three separate handpicked investigative teams on one of the most sensitive investigations. Even though the information closely to an so ongoing president ial campaign and even though those involved with the investigation knew that there reactions would likely be subjected to close scrutiny. The circumstances reflect the failure not just by those who prepared the applications, but those by but by those in the chain of command, including fbi senior officials who were briefed as the investigation progressed. Fbisieve that in the most sensitive and highpriority manners, especially when seeking Court Permission to use an intrusive tool such as a fisa upon the is incumbent entire chain of command at the organization, including senior officials, to take the necessary steps to ensure that they are sufficiently familiar with the facts and circumstances surrounding and potentially undermining a fisa application, in order to provide effective oversight consistent with their level of supervisory responsibility. Greaterrsight requires familiarity with the facts then we have saw in this review where fbi managers, supervisors, and senior officials displayed a lack of understanding or awareness of Important Information concerning many of the problems that we identified. See in why as you will the report, our final recommendation was to refer the entire chain of command that we theined here to the fbi and department for consideration of how to assess and address their performance failures. Of thenally, in light significant concerns we identified, the oig announced this week that we are announcing an audit will further examine the fbis compliance with the woods procedures in price applications that targeted u. S. Persons not only in counterintelligence investigations, but also encounter terrorism investigations. Otherg made a number of recommendations we believe that implementation of those recommendations, including those that seek individual accountability for the failures identified will improve the fbis ability to more carefully and effectively utilize its important National Security authorities while also striving to safeguard the privacy and liberties of private u. S. Persons. The oig will continue to conduct rigorous oversight of these matters in the months and years ahead, including the recommendations that we made in this weeks report. That concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. Thank you the former fbi director james comey said this week that your report vindicates him. Is that a Fair Assessment of your report . Mr. Horowitz i think the activities we found here do not vindicate anybody who touched this. Lets run a clip. This is what comey said in 2018. It would be nice to have sound. We have sound . Nevermind, i will read it. Reporter isey, the aking him, can i ask you question on fisa abuse . Do you have entire confidence in the dossier when you used it to obtain a warrant . I have total confidence that the fisa process was followed, that the case was wayt with in a responsible by the doj. I think the notion that fisa was abused here is nonsense. Would it be fair to say that you take issue with that statement . If comey speaks about fisa, you should not listen . You should listen to mr. Horowitz. Steele, is itpher fair to say that he had a political bias against donald trump . Mr. Horowitz given who he was paid for, there was a bias that needed to be disclosed to the court. Did he personally have a bias . We heard about that he was desperate to prevent mr. Trump selection. This is the guy who provides the dossier that he is paid for by the democratic party. And he personally believes it is bad for donald trump to win. He is marketing the dossier, which is a bunch of garbage, to anybody and everybody. To me that is important. Is that important to you . Any evidence of bias is supposed to be disclosed to the court and to Department Lawyers. Sen. Graham lets play this out. When they figure out the primary to therce and talk russian guy who provided steal all of the information, what should the fbi have done at that moment . Things reconsidered internally where things stood and most importantly told the lawyers at the Justice Department to they were asking to up them get a fisa. There were 5 sen. Graham and there were five people in that interview . Mr. Horowitz yes. Sen. Graham did they have a duty to report to their supervisors and eventually to the court exculpatory information . Mr. Horowitz yes. Sen. Graham they did not . Mr. Horowitz they do not. Sen. Graham why . Mr. Horowitz i cant tell you. Sen. Graham was it because of political bias . Mr. Horowitz i do not know the state of their mind. Sen. Graham im trying to figure out what would motivate people. Do you think a comey and mccabe should have known . Mr. Horowitz that is a challenging question as we have explained in their part. There were multiple briefings up the chain, including to the director and deputy director. We do not have a clear record of what precisely they were told. Mr. Horowitz would you be surprised if it did not make it up the system sen. Graham would you be surprised if it did not make it up the system . Mr. Horowitz i will not speculate. Sen. Graham did struck know . Mr. Horowitz mr. Struck transitions off on this matter in january of 2017. I would have to go back and look precisely. Sen. Graham in february he mentions that steel cannot verify. Pretty clear to me that it got up. The court should have been told, but were not. How did they describe this meeting to the court . The second andn thed renewal, they told court that they had interviewed steeles primary sub source on whom steele relied in the reporting and they found the primary sub source to be credible. They did not tell the court or the Department Lawyers anything any of the information that would have allowed them to know that if you found the primary sub source credible, you could not have also found the steel reporting credible. Sen. Graham did they mislead the court . Mr. Horowitz that was misleading to the court. Sen. Graham there were two things in january 2017 they failed to report exculpatory information and when they did report to the court about the interview, they lied about it. Alsoorowitz let me add oft a year later in june 2018, when the department sent a team letter to the court, informing them of other information that had not been provided to the court, the department is still did not know about the primary sub source information. When the department in its letter said that it still stood behind the fisa application, they reference the primary sub source again and the fact that the fbi found that person sen. Graham are these the best and brightest we have . Mr. Horowitz certainly the actions of the fbi agents on this were not mccabe handpicks these people. Are they representatives of the department as a whole in your view . Mr. Horowitz i certainly hope that this is not how others are following these practices. Sen. Graham me too. June ofstforward to 2016. I am going to defer sen. Graham mr. Horowitz im going to defer on speaking about people who we do not address specifically in the report. There was a line attorney anding with the agents counterparts at the National Security division on the fisa. That individual in june 2017, as the last application was being prepared and immediately following carter page going to news outlets after of the fisa hit the news media and said to the news media i was someone who works with u. S. Intelligence agencies, not someone who works against them. Lawyers and agents went and said we need to figure out what is the story. Is that what happened . Attorneyr, the ogc reached out to a liaison that the other Department Agency Government Agency that was at issue and asked the question was mr. Page a source or contact of some sort for your organization . The report back into the email emailnced and the reference to the memorandum that agency had provided to the fbi that i mentioned in the Opening Statement that the fbi did not follow up on. They said what that liaisons general recollection was was that mr. Page was someone who still had a relationship with the entity, the other government you go but why dont look at the airport for confirmation. Ae lawyer then had conversation with the fbi agent who was going to swear out that fisa application. The agent told us he was concerned about what he had learned about what paige said publicly and wanted a definitive answer as he put it as to whether sen. Graham if carter page was actually telling the truth, it changes mr. Horowitz that was the concern of the agent. Sen. Graham it would be helpful to mr. Page. Andhorowitz it could have very well may have been helpful. It is at minimum should have been known. Sen. Graham what did the lawyer do . Mr. Horowitz when the lawyer had the discussion with the agent and the agent said do you have it in writing . The lawyer said he did. Email,arded the liaisons wordlternate to insert the and not a source into the email. Sen. Graham so he doctored it . Mr. Horowitz he doctored the original email. Sen. Graham it looks like the cia denied knowing mr. Page. Statedowitz it flatly that mr. Page was not a source. Sen. Graham i hope somebody pays a price for this, whether you like trump or not. Kleinsmith what motivated him to do that . As horowitz it is unknown to precisely why he did it. La. Graham this is the viva resistance guy. We mentioned in here the Text Messages you mention, but we have not made a determination. We notified the attorney general. Sen. Graham you did a great job. , into the lawn is wet, you can assume it rained. If you have a guy who thinks pence is stupid and everybody who voted for trump is an idiot and you give him power over trump, maybe you are making a mistake. Or maybe all of these people who had these biases did nothing about it. We know what they did. Is it fair to say that after january 2017, when the guy who dossier, doowed the you think the second and third warrants had a legal basis after that point . Mr. Horowitz we do not reach that conclusion. Sen. Graham would you have submitted a warrant application to the lawyers accu lawyers . Mr. Horowitz i would not submitted the one they put in. In january 20 17, the whole foundation for surveilling carter page collapses. Exculpatory information is ignored. They like to the courts about what the interview was all about. Is that a fair summary . They certainly misled it was misleading to the court. Sen. Graham in january, six months later, when they find more information that could be helpful to mr. Page, they lie about it. You feel like mr. Page was treated fairly by the department of justice and the fbi . Mr. Horowitz i do not think they fairly treated sen. Graham you would not want to be on the receiving end of this, would you . Mr. Horowitz i would not went anyone failing to put forward information to the court. Verygraham i would be comfortable with you investigating anybody. I think you know the difference between getting somebody and theng to get to find truth. Counterintelligence investigations what is the purpose of a counterintelligence investigation . Identifyitz it is to potential threats to the nation. Sen. Graham this was opened up as a counterintelligence investigation, right . Russians were screwing around with the democrats. Right . That is one of the concerns. It was the russians who hacked into the dnc and got their emails. So it is ok for everyone to be concerned about what the russians are up to. Starts the standard to one of these things . Mr. Horowitz there are two both of investigations have relatively low threshold for predication. Sen. Graham lets assume for a moment that relatively low threshold was met. Would it be fair to say that if you stopped there in looking at your report, youre making a mistake . Mr. Horowitz you would be making a mistake. There are 400 pages here for a reason. Sen. Graham there is a mountain of misconduct. Please do not ignore it. If this is a counterintelligence investigation, who are they trying to protect . Should they be trying to protect . Mr. Horowitz if it is the threat outlined in the friendly Foreign Government allegation, you would be looking to protect the allegation the election process which would include the candidates, the campaign, and the American People. Sen. Graham did they ever brief Hillary Clinton on efforts of foreign elections foreign campaigns on her campaign. Mr. Horowitz i havent heard. Sen. Graham they did. Was there ever a briefing giving to donald trump about their concerns . Mr. Horowitz there was not. Callgraham what would you a counterintelligence investigation that never had any protective it element . Mr. Horowitz i am not sure. Without eventually trying to protect the entity being influenced is that legitimate . Mr. Horowitz it would depend on each fact and circumstance . An. Graham if you open up counterintelligence investigation to protect somebody, you should do it. Did they ever tried to protect donald trump from foreign influence . A briefing,it didnt they have an fbi agent to a 302 on the briefing itself . Mr. Horowitz they sent one of the agents from the crossfire hurricane to the briefing and that agent prepared a report to about what mr. Trump said and mr. Flynn said. Sen. Graham when we get to defensively briefed tomorrow, would it be ok for fbi agents s on what we02 said . Mr. Horowitz we have concerns about that. Sen. Graham to those who can set aside how you feel about trump for the moment, under the guise of protecting the campaign from russian influence, they never lift a finger to protect a campaign. Every time they had information that the people they suspected were rush working for the russians, it went the other way and they kept going. What they did generically brief andidate trump on, they sent fbi agent in to do a 302. If this does not bother you, you hate trump way too much. Was that fbi agent spying on donald trump when he went in there . Mr. Horowitz it was a pretext meeting that i am not going to the process by which they have to do these meetings sen. Graham if you do not have a warrant im sorry, go ahead. Do you need to say anything else . The incident, the event, the meeting was a briefing and the fbi considered and decided to send the agent there to do the briefing. The agent was doing the briefing, but also using it for the purpose of investigation. Sen. Graham i hope that does not happen to us tomorrow. I will be really pest if it does. If itill be really pissed does. Is it fair to say there came a point at which surveilling carter page cam unlawfully . Became unlawful . If you do not have a Legal Foundation to surveil somebody is it bad . Sen. Graham absolute you and mr. Horowitz mr. Horowitz yes. Sen. Graham whatever league whatever illegal surveillance means, they did it. Basis afterlegal the january 2017 data dump by the russian guy to believe that the dossier was reliable. They authored exculpatory information that would have further proven that carter page is not a russian agent. Let me ask you very directly do you believe carter page is or ever was in agent of the russian government trying to do harm to his country . Mr. Horowitz im going to refer to the evidence that we found. Fbi at the end of these fisas fountain for found no information to corroborate these. Sen. Graham they continued to surveilled him. The people who continued getting warrants after they knew it was not legitimate had a bias that wreaked. How this thing was opened, i do not know. I respect your view that they may have been a there may have been a lawful predicate, but peter strzok was pushing this from day one. 80s ended gentlemen, we have a task at hand ear to make sure this never happens again, change our laws, save the fisa court if we can, and i hope this chapter in American History is never repeated. If youre a part that this 435 lawfulport was a investigation with a few irregularities, youre doing a great disservice to the American People. Thank you very much. Thank you mr. Chairman. General,ke, inspector your office spent 19 months and interviewed 100 witnesses and york report ash your report concluded that the fbi had inadequate predicate to open the investigation. Could you briefly define that predicate . Mr. Horowitz the predicate was the information that the fbi got at the end of july from the friendly Foreign Government that a meeting that the friendly Foreign Government had with mr. Papadopoulos. Who was thein friendly Foreign Government . To horowitz we do not want say. Sen. Feinstein is it classified . Sen. Graham i dont know mr. Horowitz i dont know. Mr. Horowitz as i mentioned in statement wasthe that mr. Papadopoulos had made a statement that there had been a suggestion to the Trump Campaign that the russian government could provide information that candidateamaging to clinton and then president obama. Your reportin states that you do not find documentary or testimonial evidence of political bias or improper motivation . T you and mr. Horowitz new line mr. Horowitz mr. Horowitz that is correct. We found no evidence. Sen. Feinstein and no rationale for a deep state . We did not find any evidence in his emails or texts of having engaged in any bias or having any bias. Sen. Feinstein fbi director ray provided a response to your report accepting all of your findings. This includes the key finding that there was an authorized purpose and actual factual predication for the investigation. Contrast, attorney general barr expressed his doubt about the legitimacy of the fbis investigation in press statements. It did attorney general barr provide any evidence that caused you to alter this key finding that the fbi investigation had adequate predicate . Mr. Horowitz no, we stand by our finding. During yourin investigation, attorney general barr stated his belief that spying on the Trump Campaign did occur. As you have said, your investigation found no evidence that the fbi placed any confidential source within the Trump Campaign or task any confidential source to report on the Trump Campaign. Mr. Horowitz that is correct. Sen. Feinstein no further evidence of improper motivation or political bias influenced the decision to use Confidential Sources as part of the investigation. Mr. Horowitz that is correct. Sen. Feinstein did your office ask attorney general barr or john durham to share whatever evidence they had that might be relative to your investigation . Mr. Horowitz we asked mr. Durham to do that. Sen. Feinstein what about attorney general barr . Mr. Horowitz and attorney general barr. Sen. Feinstein nothing they could provide altered your offices conclusion that the fbi did not place spies in the campaign . Mr. Horowitz none of them changed our findings. Sen. Feinstein john durham passed by attorney general barr to also investigate the origins of the Russian Investigation, he stated last month we advised the ig that we do not agree with some of the reports conclusions , as to predication the end as to how it was open. What is your reaction to that . Surprised i i was the statement. I didnt know it was going to be released on monday. We did meet with mr. Durham as i mentioned. We provided with him him with a report. We met with him in november. We did discuss the opening issue. Soon who built those whose early agree with our conclusion to open an investigation, but there is also an investigative means by which the fbi can move forward with that investigation. It is called a preliminary investigation. Opened the full investigation here. He said during the meeting that the information from the friendly Foreign Government was in his view sufficient to preliminary investigation. As we noted in the report, investigative steps such as confidential human source activity are allowed under a preluminal preliminary investigation. Did either barr or durham present anything that altered your findings . Mr. Horowitz no. Sen. Feinstein i wanted to ask you since we have the author of the whistleblower legislation very proudly sitting here, you previously told this committee that whistleblower rights and protections have been one of your highest priorities since becoming ig. As you know, there have been calls for the ukraine whistleblower to be identified publicly, even though that person was not a direct witness to the event. Should ther view ukraine whistleblowers confidentiality be breached and that person identified publicly and why not . Whistleblower protections are one of my highest priorities. We wrote a letter recently as the ig community quitting his statement on the issues and the importance of whistleblowers. Was the blowers have the right to expect full confidentiality. It is in the law, in the ig act that congress wrote. It is a very important provision. Hearing before the house intelligence committee, beatty secretary of state george kent testified that politically prosecutions against opponents of those in power during the rule of law. Do you agree with that . Do politically motivated investigations undermine the role of log . Mr. Horowitz any politically motivated undermine the role of rule of law . Mr. Horowitz any politically motivated investigation undermines the rule of law. We do not find any dust sen. Feinstein you have a policy recommendation regarding the use of confidential human sources. I would like to ask you a few questions about it. Your investigation found that the use of confidential human sources was consistent with existing rules, correct . Mr. Horowitz correct. Sen. Feinstein the use of confidential human sources here was not solely to gather first protected information. Mr. Horowitz correct. Sen. Feinstein you found no and fitted evidence that the decision was motivated by political vie bias, correct . Mr. Horowitz correct. Sen. Feinstein what if anything should be changed and why . Mr. Horowitz as i mentioned in my Opening Statement, i think we were surprised and concerned to learn that in an investigation into any National Party Political Campaign the confidential human source usage would be approved by just a first level supervisor. Some of these were approved at the assistant director level, but they could have been approved at just the supervisor level. For the investigation of a major Party President ial campaign of either side or any side, that was concerning for us, particularly because there was not a requirement that any department lawyer, whether it is a criminal division, deputy directors office, attorneys general attorney generals office, did not need to be a notified notified at any point. Givefeinstein did you interviews during the investigation . Mr. Horowitz no. Sen. Feinstein did anybody on the ig team . Mr. Horowitz no, and it would have been entirely inappropriate for them to do so. Sen. Feinstein what are the dangers of discussing in investigation when it is ongoing . Mr. Horowitz i wrote a 500 page report about that last year on the midyear investigation and among other things criticize what happened last year. Oing investigations are need to be protected from outside influence. You do not know if n or you should not conclude as an investigator until youre done with the investigation. Should not be reaching your conclusions until that point. Ideas,preliminary advice, guidance could be misleading and you should not be reaching final conclusions until you get to the end of the investigation. Sen. Feinstein there is a lot of misimpression about two people peter strzok and carter page. Years, trumptwo has relentlessly attacked a former fbi officials as a way to undermine the investigation. For example, the president theted that how can witchhunt proceed when it was started, influenced, and worked page and peter strzok, who exchanged Text Messages critical of trump. Thatinvestigation found while paige attended some meetings, she did not play a role in opening crossfire hurricane. He also found that while peter strzok was directly involved in the decision to open crossfire hurricane, he was not the sole or even the highest level decisionmaker to any of those matters. That decision, as i understand it, was made by fbi assistant director and by consensus after multiple days of consensus. Most importantly, you found that the decision had a proper, factual basis and that there is political biast or improper motivation influenced it. Investigation,ur personal political views expressed in Text Messages did not motivate the opening of the investigation of ties between Trump Campaign advisors and russia, is that correct . Mr. Horowitz that is correct. We concluded that those Text Messages we found last year were entirely inappropriate, but did not ultimately play a role in the investigation the decision to open the investigation. Your investigation also uncovered Text Messages between other fbi employees expressing support for then candidate trump. Mr. Horowitz that is correct. Sen. Feinstein fbi employees held political views that were both favorable and unfavorable towards the candidate at the time. Mr. Horowitz that is correct. ,e noted in last years report we did not find the Text Messages were inappropriate solely because people expressed a view as to which candidate they supported or did not support. What concerned us with the Text Messages we outlined last year and in this years report, was the connection between their views and their work on the investigation. Sen. Feinstein to conclude my questioning, what do you believe with your long experience, are the most important points that this 400 plus page report brings forward . Mr. Horowitz i think there were several. As you might expect. Sen. Feinstein that is why i still have time. Mr. Horowitz i think as we outlined in the executive opened, first it was with the proper predicate, sufficient predication, by the person who is not one of the text message persons and senior to this people. The confidential human source persons while permitted by policy, it should give pause as to whether that policy is sufficient. Finally, the fisa process here was not used appropriately and the rules were not followed. That concludes my questioning. I just want to say thank you and thank you to your staff. I am very grateful to the Inspector Generals office year in year out. Yield the balance of my time. Will have a vote at 12 00. We will try to get through senator grassley and senator lee. Then take a brat break for lunch. I hear what youre saying about fisa. Senator graham pointed out earlier, senator lee and i ine worked on trying to put some protections. The fbi accepted all of your findings, is that correct . Mr. Horowitz that is correct. You raised questions about the use of fisa, is that correct . Doing build the application for a fisa warrant with respect to carter page, is that right . Mr. Horowitz yes. Errors regarding the carter page application came after and did not impact the Russian Investigation, which became the special counsels investigation. Mr. Horowitz thats correct. Those occurred in october and later. Not in august when the matter was over. Leahy the investigation came after. In the mueller report, how many reportid the mueller refer to carter page . Mr. Horowitz i do not recall the exact number, but it was not a large number. In. Leahy i do know because read it it was seven pages. T was out of 400 and 48 448 pages. Barely mentioned. Im not trying to minimize the mistakes here. But keep this in context the fbis air or encarta pages in carter errors pages context mr. Horowitz we describe in the report the information about conclusionsthe about russias meddling in the 2016 election. Sen. Leahy one of the political opinions that trump expressed a look it russia, take at best. Russia, if you are listening, take a look at this. It undermines the legitimacy of anddozens of convictions indictments, is that correct . Mr. Horowitz the errors and Serious Problems we identify concerning the carter page fisa, we do not make any other findings about crossfire hurricane. Sen. Leahy the reason i mention that i do not to undermine these errors nothorowitz our review was of the mueller investigation. It was the of the fisa and of the opening of the investigation and the is it correct that you found no evidence that the investigation was motivated by antitrump or political bias, is that correct . Mr. Horowitz we found no evidence that it was motivated by political bias. The question gets more challenging when you get to the phi said then went to get to when you get to the other elements. Sen. Leahy did you conclude that there was a legitimate basis to investigate ties between the Trump Campaign and russia . Mr. Horowitz we concluded that the fbi had the predication to the it on july 31 and subsequent subfiles that they opened 10 days later or so. Sen. Leahy some of that came from the trusted foreign ally . Mr. Horowitz the information came from the friendly Foreign Government. Did you find that the fbi complied with and even exceeded Current Department rules on who can authorize the investigation and who has to be notified . Mr. Horowitz they followed all the rules with regard to that. Was the deep state involved . Mr. Horowitz it finds that it was a properly predicated investigation based on the rules of the fbi. Sen. Leahy did you find anything where the fbi planted spies in mr. Trumps campaign . Use ofowitz we found no confidential human sources or trying to put them in the campaign. Sen. Leahy i have used up the five minutes that were left. You will get your 10 minutes. Isen. Grassley has anybody been withcuted or charged anything in this investigation . Mr. Horowitz on this matter i am handling . No one, i am aware of. Sen. Grassley following up on a question that senator feinstein asked, did the Obama Administration or president obama himself is the one im know about the counterintelligence investigation . Mr. Horowitz we do not know. Our authority was over the fbi. Fbi activities. Grassley we referred Christopher Steele for potentially lying to the fbi. Department fbi the that what the fbi told the court about the media context did not match with what he told the british court. Did four questions in regard to that did the fbi ever ask steele whether he was a source for the 2016 yahoo news article that cited western intelligence sources . If not, why not . Mr. Horowitz they did not have asked that question, despite having the opportunity to do so. We got a variety of explanations, including that issuesome of these they did not want to offend him or jeopardize their relationship with him. Sen. Grassley question two on october 11, the draft of the pfizer applications dating the fbi believes steel was a source for the yahoo news article, but it was taken out in the october 14 draft. Why did the fbi originally say steele was the source and what factual basis did the fbi have to change that and tell the court that he was not a source . Mr. Horowitz this is what was so disturbing about that event, which is the initial application said, as you noted, that the fbi assessed that steele was the direct source or was a direct source. October 14, the draft changed to the direct opposite. We found that the fbi had no basis for the first statement, no evidence in their file it turns out the first statement was the accurate statement. The point was, they had no evidence to support that. And when they flipped it, they had no evidence to support that either. That is the kind of issue that, under the basic woods procedures, the factual accuracy procedures, had someone been doing their job and followed up, and would have seen that found that. And of course, had they bothered to ask mr. Steele, they might have found out which of the two versions was true. Sen. Grassley maybe they werent interested in doing their job. Question 3 chairman graham and i sent our appeal on january the fourth, 2014. According to your report, although the fbi already knew that the British Intelligence and fbi officials discussed the litigation with director comey, the fbi never got the statement in that litigation until we provided them. The fbi also never considered updating the court on these men. These statements. Why did the Court Learned no, when did the Court Learned about these contradictory statements about whether steele did or did not have contact with the media, and did anyone in the fbi seemed concerned at all that it was not updating the court, that it was knowingly providing the court with incorrect and misleading information . Mr. Horowitz so the fisa Court Learned about it in a letter sent in june 2018, a year after fisaast authorization, when the Justice Department lawyers sent a letter informing them of new information that they had learned, including from the litigation that mr. Steele had acknowledged that he was a direct contact for yahoo news in that story. That was the first time the court was told about it. Sen. Grassley would you look at footnote 461 for me . Mr. Horowitz yes. Footnotesley that states that a former fbi confidential human source contacted an fbi agent in an Fbi Field Office in late july to report information from a colleague who runs an Investigative Firm, hired by two entities, the Democratic National committee as well as another individual who was not named, to explore donalds Donald Trumps longstanding ties to these entities. Was that Investigative Firm fusion gps, or did the dnc hire another firm to peddle antitrump information to obamas fbi . Mr. Horowitz i do not know definitively which it is, but i can follow up and get back to you on that. I will have to double check on that. Sen. Grassley if you couldnt, would that be a case of privacy or something . Mr. Horowitz we ultimately figured out the answer to that question because it was any in a different field office with different people to have to interview and that sort of thing. I am not sure how much we went down that road. Sen. Grassley ok, thank you. I have been asking questions since december 2017 about what kind of defensive breathings the briefings theve fbi provided to the Trump Campaign. The fbi told me its briefings to both campaigns were similar and that it was not aware of action that it took as a result. Chairman johnson and i wrote to the fbi again two months ago and noted that Text Messages between stzrok and page indicated that the fbi may have used defensive briefings not to warn the Trump Campaign but to investigate it. Four questions along this line question number one, would you agree that with respect to the defensive briefings, the Trump Campaigns briefings were treated differently than those provided to the Clinton Campaign . Mr. Horowitz if i could they were called strategic it was not an fbi briefing if they went to an office of the director of National Intelligence briefing, it was strategic. I mentioned that because it was not a defensive briefing. It was an intelligence briefing and they were treated differently in that the agent wrote it up to the file and put the information in the file. Briefings were identical, but the net result with one was for investigative purposes and the other was for the intelligence briefing. Sen. Grassley at think what you said touches on question two, but i am going to ask it anyway. In this case, the agency at the Trump Campaign briefing documented statements and interactions of Michael Flynn and candidate trump for the fbi s investigating files. Is it normal for the counterintelligence briefers to document statements and interactions of individuals that they are briefing for investigating purposes . Mr. Horowitz it was documented in one and not documented in the other, as you said, senator. Based on wha we saw, there is actually no policy on it, but based on the current leadership and the response, where he underlined this will not happen going forward, i think it is pretty clear what he thinks and this should not have occurred. Sen. Grassley did the fbi make any investigative use on the information garnered in the defense briefing, for example, to inform its later interview with Michael Flynn . Mr. Horowitz i dont know definitively as to whether that did occur, but was certainly the stated purpose for the agent being present. Sen. Grassley lastly, campaigns placed trust in the fbi to provide an environment of cooperation and honest assessments about the risk of foreign threats. How can the fbi repair that trust after abusing the briefing process . Mr. Horowitz that is where we make the recommendation. We think that the fbi has to clearly state what its policy is. These kinds of strategic briefings, as the chairman member chairman mentioned, for private citizens, members of congress, when they get attacked on their computer systems, for example, transition for transition purposes, as was the case here, there needs to be clear guidance so that those getting the briefings understand. Sen. Grassley according to your report, bruce orr told the fbi that steele reporting had gone to the Clinton Campaign november 2016. By january 11, 2017, key investigators knew the dossier was prepared in part for the dnc. And by february, march 2017, it was broadly known in the fbi and by senior Justice Department officials that dent simpson was working for the democratic party. How many people in the fbi and doj knew that the steele dossier was Political Opposition Research funded by the democrats . Who were they and did any of them approve information in the fisa or any of its renew a while knowing who was paying for it renewals while knowing who was paying for it . Mr. Horowitz on the fbi side, as we lay out on page 258 and forward, there were a number of people who knew. It is challenging to know what was known at the highest level of the fbi and when because of the lack of any direct record. Was much certainly information, as we lay out here, known in the fbi. At the Justice Department, much of the information was not known and one of the concerns we note orr wasnformation, mr. Passing along this information from mr. Steele to the fbi. That information was not being given back by the fbi to the Justice Department, so the at theues of mr. Orr Justice Department were reviewing the findings and did not know that there colleague there colleague their colleague had passed along that information to the fbi. We will have senator leahy, then we will break for lunch and then we will come back and vote. Sen. Leahy i read an awful lot of reports in my years here. Am i correct that when the Justice Department or a component disagrees with or has comments about a finding in the ig report, the general practice is to provide a written response to publish along with your report. Is that correct . Mr. Horowitz that is correct. We would always include that in our appendix to our reports. Leahy my staff looked at reports filed. Not only did they find three dozen reports, but the Justice Department component. How many ig reports under your name involve the justice facttment arguing that in it committed more misconduct in your investigation than it uncovered . Mr. Horowitz i do not recall that happening before. Sen. Leahy none. That is why i find it very unusual that attorney general barr did not go into the report. He just went to the Television Cameras to talk about it. There is a lot about the personal Text Messages involved in your 2018 report. svolving fbi lawyer investigation based on an animus order to President Trump. He also did not find pro trump Text Messages from agents who worked on the russia investigation, including one that was an expletive ridden exchange, where the agents were enthusiastically talking about trumps election and their desire to investigate the clinton investigation under President Trump. You found that too, didnt you . Mr. Horowitz thats correct. It is in the report. Sen. Leahy i think it is potentially problematic, whether they are pro trump or pro clinton. I assume the fbi investigators can have strong views on politics, but the question is, does it impact their work . Mr. Horowitz exactly right. I think it is very important to keep in mind that while they frankly should never be using their government devices to be having political discussions, whether they are working on a in ourve matter or not, view, and we took the view last year and laid it out, we were not holding or referring people for performance failures simply because they expressed support or lack of support for certain candidates. It was precisely as you indicated, connecting it to their activity. Leahy protrump or pro clinton. Thank you. There was one occasion. I think my listed impact one or more russian works i think bias did impact one or more russian workers the fbi appropriately kept quiet about investigationia during the 2016 election. The same cannot be said about the clinton administration. Rudy giuliani and others appeared to receive highly sensitive links from the new york fbi office, links that likely contributed to director announcement that they were investigating hillary days before the election. I asked thendirector comey about these leaks. He said he was investigating. These leaksmber of to Rudy Giuliani, he actually bragged about talking about. What can you tell us about the new york field offices leaks to Rudy Giuliani and others . Mr. Horowitz as we noted publicly in our report, we were very concerned about that. We put in charts showing the different contacts. Subsequent to that report and this continues to this day, we are investigating those contacts. We issued a couple public summaries so far about people we found that violated fbi policy. We have other investigations ongoing that when we conclude it, we will also post summaries of. What is proving to be very hard is to prove the actual substance of the communication between the thets and the reporter, or individuals, as you might guess, but we can prove the contacts neednder fbi policy, you authorization if youre going to disclose information and have certain contacts. Sen. Leahy thank you were your central findings involving the Trump Campaign was not influenced by political bias is that correct . Mr. Horowitz the opening of the investigation, we found, was not connected to any of the biased texts that we identified. Leahy now the elephant in the room maybe you have heard of it at the president s direction, the attorney general has been finding support for fringe theories to cast doubt on the russia investigation. I am not clear. Clear what legitimate Law Enforcement purpose it serves. How do we know that politics is durhamiving the barr investigation . Mr. Horowitz i am not sure how anybody knows what you dont know unless you do an investigation or if someone looks through, as we did here, a million records and an exhaustive effort. Sen. Leahy but you would agree that Justice Department investigations have to be free of improper political motivation. Mr. Horowitz absolutely. 1000 . I did public\ investigations, i ran the public york. Tion office in new you had to be straight down, the yellow line in the middle of the road on anything that you touched. Sen. Leahy doesnt concern you that the attorney general is running around europe to find any kind of theories that might cast doubt on any russia investigation . You haveitz i think to ask the attorney general about those meetings. I do not know what those meetings were about. Obviously i have not done any investigating. Sen. Leahy i am concerned because they did not follow the wenhen they have a question or a disagreement with the Inspector General report by letting you know. It would include any disagreements. Think about when they investigated the politically motivated party of nine u. S. Attorneys during the bush administration. He said that Department Leaders abdicated the responsibility to ensure that prosecutorial decisions would be based on the law. The evidence in the policy, not the political pressure. In this case questions were not sent to you by the attorney general, but instead given to the press. Is that correct . Mr. Horowitz i do not know a situation where we did not get those attached in our appendix to our report. Sen. Leahy thank you for your comments. Absolutely. We will adjourn and recess until 1 00. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Morning, Senior Communications advisor to the 2016 Trump Campaign jason miller will be on to talk about impeachment and the Trump Campaigns reelection strategy. And randi weingarten, American Federation of teachers president , discusses the role her union will play in the democratic primaries and general election. And a National Political reporter talks about campaign 2020 and her book the great revolt inside the populist coalition reshaping american politics. Be sure to watch cspans washington journal, live at 7 00 a. M. Eastern sunday morning. Join the discussion. Mr. Chairman, there are 23 nos. And 17 with the House Judiciary Committee approving two articles of impeachment against President Trump, the House Rules Committee will meet to debate the guidelines on how the debate will unfold on the house floor. Watch online at cspan. Org impeachment, or listen live with the free cspan radio app. 2020 president ial democratic candidate talked with voters at a town hall in des moines, iowa, focusing on the states first in the nation caucus. Mr. Castro has advocated changing the primary and caucus system to better represent the broader electorate. Secretary who secretary Julian Castro was born on the west side of san antonio, the son of rosie castro, a prominent activist. He and his twin brother joaquin, now a member of congress representing san antonio, were in School Together before they went to stanford and harvard together. Se