There’s evidence that the House GOP was a little less keen on the subjects of Thursday’s hearing on the “weaponization of the federal government” than it has been about other facets of its investigations. And one of the witnesses got right to the point in his opening statement.
This was the backdrop of the hearing, which focused on claims of FBI abuses of power and featured witnesses who alleged retaliation for raising red flags. Democrats have pointed to conspiratorial comments by the witnesses and their ties to a key ally of former president Donald Trump, Kash Patel, to cast doubt on their claimed whistleblower statuses. We learned Wednesday that the FBI recently stripped two of the witnesses of their security clearances, citing wrongdoing.
The hearing was a long time coming, as the claims gradually worked their way into the GOP’s “weaponization” push. Friend complained in late December on Truth Social that House Republicans used his whistleblower complaint for “campaign rocket fuel and 4 minute appearances on Fox News” but then “ignored me” in favor of other investigations. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the “weaponization” subcommittee, confirmed in September that his panel had had contact with Friend, but Friend’s claims weren’t featured in an early November “FBI whistleblowers” report.
More recently, Democrats issued a report noting two of the witnesses have harbored conspiracy theories about Jan. 6, 2021, and other issues, like coronavirus vaccines. The FBI has questioned another’s “allegiance to the United States” over his actions regarding Jan. 6. Friend engaged with Russian propaganda outlets while still at the FBI and called for the FBI to be “eradicated,” a view few national Republicans have embraced.
Democrats were a little gentler in spotlighting these counterarguments than they were in a recent hearing featuring “Twitter Files” journalists, but a few exchanges got at how dicey the proceedings were.
Friend, the most outspoken of Thursday’s four witnesses, was asked about his calls to dismantle the FBI. When a Democrat noted that Republicans have decried efforts to defund the police, Friend suggested the bureau wasn’t really a police agency.
“The FBI — it is my contention that they’re a domestic intelligence agency with law enforcement capability,” he said.
At another point, Friend equivocated somewhat on his most well-publicized claim: that it was wrong for the FBI to use a SWAT team to arrest a Jan. 6 defendant on a misdemeanor charge.
Since Friend made his whistleblower complaint, we have learned that the arrested individual actually appears to have been a self-described militia member affiliated with the far-right Three Percenters ideology. The defendant, Tyler Bensch, was photographed on Jan. 6 wearing fatigues, a tactical vest and a gas mask, and possessing what the criminal complaint against him labeled as “one or more chemical irritants.” The complaint cites witnesses who say he appeared to have an AR-style rifle on the streets of Washington.
Friend acknowledged in his earlier deposition that he hadn’t known the identity of the man or many details of the case when he objected to taking part in the arrest. He also said that owning guns could be sufficient grounds for employing use of a SWAT team.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) asked Friend whether, given all of that, it was appropriate to use a SWAT team, to which Friend responded, “I can’t answer that with a yes or no.”
Pressed again, he referred to the idea that Bensch had offered to cooperate.
“My opinion remains to be anybody who has been cooperative and pledged to surrender in the case of law enforcement, including criminal charges … a SWAT team is not necessary for that,” Friend said.
Democrats have cast doubt on whether Bensch actually intended to cooperate — Friend cited a transcript of Bensch saying, “If you need anything from me, just let me know” — much less that he promised to surrender. In his initial complaint, Friend did not mention an offer to cooperate, which he has blamed on an “oversight.”
Another witness Thursday was Marcus Allen, an FBI staff operations specialist who, like Friend, had his security clearance revoked this month ahead of his testimony.
The FBI said this was done because of concerns about Allen’s personal conduct and “allegiance to the United States.” It said he urged caution to others about investigating Jan. 6 and failed to provide relevant information about a Jan. 6 defendant. This allegedly led to the case’s being closed before another agent discovered “readily available” evidence that the defendant assaulted police officers on Jan. 6.
Allen was asked repeatedly Thursday whether it was appropriate for an agent to express support for those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6. He at one point offered a brief “no” in the context of his answer, but he otherwise declined requests to state “yes or no,” even asking for the question to be rephrased. Ultimately, he said, “You should not be voicing support for criminal conduct.”
The final FBI witness was Garret O’Boyle, a suspended special agent. O’Boyle has allegedly liked tweets claiming the 2020 election was stolen and compared coronavirus vaccine mandates to Nazi Germany.
O’Boyle in his opening statement repeatedly referred to the idea that the government had indeed been weaponized. Toward the end of his testimony, he spoke emotionally about the hardship he said he and his family faced as a result of his suspension. He alluded to a popular theory on the right about the government allegedly targeting Catholics.
“I’m grateful for everyone who has provided charity to me; that even includes a former colleague’s church,” O’Boyle said. “I would name the church to give them recognition, but I’m too worried that the FBI would send informants to infiltrate that church as well.”