House Dem Report: It’s Official, Jim Jordan’s GOP ‘Weaponization’ Panel Is A Sham

WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 1: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) listens in during a House Judiciary Committee organizational meeting at the Rayburn House Office Building on February 1, 2023 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Ricky Ca... WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 1: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) listens in during a House Judiciary Committee organizational meeting at the Rayburn House Office Building on February 1, 2023 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post via Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Top Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee and its subcommittee investigating the so-called “weaponization” of the federal government released a 316-page report on Thursday — first reported by the New York Times — skewering House Republicans and casting doubt on the three GOP “whistleblowers” who have testified in front of the committee.

The lengthy report, penned by Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-U.S. Virgin Islands), comes in reaction to one of the countless stunt  investigations House Republicans are conducting into the Biden administration. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) — chairman of the panel — and other Republicans have been loudly claiming for months that they have testimony from numerous whistleblowers that will somehow show government agencies, like the FBI, are targeting right-wing individuals and groups.

Since the new year, three of the GOP witnesses — George Hill, a retired FBI supervisory intelligence analyst from the Boston field office, Stephen Friend, a former special agent who worked in the Daytona Beach office, and Garret O’Boyle, a suspended special agent from the field office in Wichita, Kansas — have testified behind closed doors.

But the report from Democrats suggests that instead of legitimate whistleblowers the trio appears to be a group of conspiracy theorizing, embattled former FBI agents who were compensated and supported by allies of former President Donald Trump.

Here are four key takeaways from the House Democrats’ report:

At least two of the so-called whistleblowers received financial support from a Trump ally

Two of the witnesses, O’Boyle and Friend, testified that they have received financial support from Kash Patel — a Trump loyalist and high-ranking official in the former president’s administration who advanced conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and the Russia probe. 

During his testimony, Friend detailed that Patel sent him “$5,000 almost immediately after they connected in November 2022.”  

Witnesses have ties to MAGA Trump allies

Patel didn’t just provide financial assistance to the so-called whistleblowers.

“Based on this evidence, committee Democrats conclude that there is a strong likelihood that Kash Patel is encouraging the witnesses to continue pursuing their meritless claims, and in fact is using them to help propel his vendetta against the F.B.I., Justice Department, and Biden administration on behalf of himself and President Trump,” the report said.

According to the report, Patel found Friend his current job, working as a fellow on domestic intelligence and security services at the Center for Renewing America. The center is led by Russell Vought — a former Trump official — and largely funded by the Conservative Partnership Institute, an organization run by former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows and former Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC).

Patel also arranged for Jesse Binnall — who served as one of Trump’s lawyers when he falsely claimed the 2020 election was stolen — to be O’Boyle’s attorney.

“When Committee Democrats asked O’Boyle about this financial connection, Binnall appeared to surprise his client with an announcement that he was now representing O’Boyle pro bono,” according to the report.

All three seem to embrace conspiracy theories and extremist views

Committee Democrats argued that the witnesses in question are not reliable sources because they have openly embraced conspiracy theories and extremist views around domestic terrorism and the FBI. 

“Each endorses an alarming series of conspiracy theories related to the January 6 Capitol attack, the COVID vaccine, and the validity of the 2020 election,” Democrats said in the report. “One has called repeatedly for the dismantling of the FBI. Another suggested that it would be better for Americans to die than to have any kind of domestic intelligence program.”

In a social media post Hill claimed that the Jan. 6 attack was a “set up” and part of a “larger #Democrat plan using their enforcement arm, the #FBI,” according to the report.

Friends also embraced similar conspiracy theories. He sent FBI Director Christopher Wray a public letter in Dec. 2022, asking “what he described as tough but fair questions such as, Will you commit to educating executive management personnel that J6 protesters did not kill any police officers?” and “Why didn’t the FBI open a civil rights violation investigation concerning the killing of Ashli Babbit?”

Over a four month period — from Nov. 2022 to Feb. 2023 — Friend also published several tweets calling for the FBI to be “defunded, dismantled, dissolved, aborted, abolished,or otherwise ended,” according to the report. 

Witnesses don’t meet the legal definition of a whistleblower

Per the report: “Federal law only protects FBI employees from retaliation when making claims that they ‘reasonably believe’ provide evidence of ‘(A) any violation of any law, rule, or regulation; or (B) gross mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.’ None of the three witnesses interviewed to date comes close to meeting that definition.”

Democrats argue that the trio of witnesses relied on “second hand claims and hearsay” during their interviews and therefore don’t meet the legal definition of a whistleblower.

“None of the witnesses have provided evidence related to a violation of law, policy, or abuse of authority. None are whistleblowers in any sense recognized by federal law or any federal agency,” the report read.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. {Smug facial expression followed by: “Anyone could have predicted it!!”}
    {Some sort of cat image and a “first” exclamation}

  2. “When Committee Democrats asked O’Boyle about this financial connection, Binnall appeared to surprise his client with an announcement that he was now representing O’Boyle pro bono,” according to the report.

    Felafel alert! There’s that guy, again. Attorney gets around.

  3. None of these characters have done a single day of honest work in their lives. Their mothers must be so proud of them.

  4. Avatar for paulw paulw says:

    So is it actual pro bono, or is someone else footing the bill, and if so, who. (And of course, it’s also the opposite of real pro bono, which benefits everyone.)

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

434 more replies

Participants

Avatar for ajm Avatar for austin_dave Avatar for littlegirlblue Avatar for teenlaqueefa Avatar for becca656 Avatar for dont Avatar for chelsea530 Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for mch Avatar for leftcoaster Avatar for mrf Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for darrtown Avatar for pshah Avatar for southerndem Avatar for 21zna9 Avatar for tsp Avatar for godwit Avatar for zenicetus Avatar for osprey Avatar for trustywoods Avatar for dicktater Avatar for emiliano4 Avatar for geographyjones

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: