6 Takeaways From First Weaponization of the Federal Government Hearing

Ranking Member Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) listens during a House Judiciary Committee mark up hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington on June 2, 2022. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Republicans on Feb. 9 held the first hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

The committee is under the wing of the important Judiciary Committee, led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

Jordan has long looked forward to gaveling in such a hearing.

During the last Congress, Jordan and other Republicans sent “over a hundred letters” to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI that were “either inadequately answered or ignored entirely.”

A crest of the Federal Bureau of Investigation inside the J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building in Washington on Aug. 3, 2007. Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

The panel heard from prominent figures like former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard, who contended for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, as well as Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

The first hearing comes after Republicans in December unveiled a huge 1,050-page whistleblower report detailing the “weaponization” of the federal government.

Democrats, as well as President Joe Biden, have accused the panel of partisanship, even as sour memories of the Jan. 6 panel linger among Republicans. That panel, which was created by Democrats and included only lawmakers opposed to President Donald Trump, long faced charges of partisanship.

Other Republicans on the panel include Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Chris Stewart (R-Utah), Mike Johnson (R-La.), Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.), Greg Steube (R-Fla.), Kat Cammack (R-Fla.), and Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.).

House GOP conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) also serves on the committee.

Here are six key takeaways from the committee’s first hearing.

Jordan’s Opening Statement

Throughout the hearing, Republicans discussed a litany of charges leveled against the FBI by whistleblowers and found by later fact discovery.

Jordan listed several of these in his opening remarks.

For instance, on Nov. 18, 2021, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee were told that the FBI had created a “threat tag” for parents voicing their concerns at school board meetings. In May 2022, another whistleblower revealed that dozens of parents designated with a “threat tag” were being investigated by the agency.

In a September 2021 letter to President Joe Biden, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) characterized disruptions at school board meetings across the nation as “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crime.”

Specifically, the NSBA was referencing an increasing number of parents across the United States attending school board meetings to voice their opposition to content being taught to their children—including controversial, Marxism-inspired critical race theory, far-left-wing positions on sexuality and gender, and, in some cases, even explicit or pornographic sexual images.

The NSBA proceeded to ask for federal assistance in dealing with these frustrated, outspoken parents—assistance that Garland promptly provided.

Days after the NSBA letter, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo directing federal law enforcement to help address the alleged “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” against teachers and school leaders.

Attorney General Merrick Garland speaks during a news conference to announce an international ransomware enforcement action at the Department of Justice in Washington on Jan. 26, 2023. Jose Luis Magana/AP Photo

The same whistleblower said that the leadership of the FBI is “rotted at its core.” Following this, that whistleblower had his security clearance revoked and was suspended from the FBI.  

In April 2022, another whistleblower told Republicans that FBI agents “were being run out of the bureau” for attending conservative political events while off duty.

Jordan also cited whistleblower testimony previously included in the whistleblower report that claimed the FBI had manufactured domestic violent extremism events (DVEs) to hit “self-created performance metrics.” Additional testimony in September 2022 revealed that Jan. 6 case files had been altered to make it appear that DVEs were on the rise. The agent was later suspended.

In the November report, Republicans said that whistleblowers “have described how FBI leadership is pressuring line agents to reclassify cases as domestic violent extremism even if the matter does not meet the criteria.”

That’s no mistake, Republicans assert, but instead a targeted effort by federal law enforcement to bolster Democrats’ claims about the threat posed by DVE.

“At a time when the Biden Administration maintains that DVE is the ‘greatest threat’ facing the United States, the FBI appears to be complicit in artificially creating the Administration’s political narrative,” the lawmakers wrote.

In at least one case of DVE, the attempted kidnapping of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, the FBI played a much more active role. Ahead of the 2020 election, a plot was uncovered to kidnap Whitmer, whose COVID policies sparked intense national debates before the election.

During the trial for the men, it became obvious that this wasn’t the case: defense attorneys argued that their clients were pushed into crime by the FBI. According to defense attorneys during the trial, at least 12 FBI informants and agents were involved in the plot.

In September 2022, yet another whistleblower revealed to Republicans that the FBI views the Betsy Ross flag, the original design of the American flag with 13 stars, “as a terrorist symbol.”

American seamstress Betsy Ross shows the first design of the American flag to George Washington in Philadelphia. Hulton Archive/Getty Images

Additional testimony found that the FBI accepts personal data on users from Facebook “without the user’s consent.”

‘Sabotage’

Johnson leveled additional charges in his opening remarks relating to the laptop of Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son. The younger Biden left it at a computer repair shop and never picked it up.

After several attempts to contact Biden to pick the laptop up, the computer repair shop owner, John Paul Mac Isaac, investigated its contents.

These included several photos of Hunter Biden in sexual situations, sometimes with people who appeared to be substantially younger than 18. Others showed the president’s son using drugs such as crack cocaine. Still other sections of the laptop’s contents raised questions about the Bidens’ business dealings, with some emails and texts suggesting that Hunter Biden may have peddled his father’s prestige and influence for financial gain.

Mac Isaac was so disgusted that he reported the laptop to the FBI.

Johnson reported that when the FBI took possession of the laptop, Mac Isaac overheard one agent say, “It is our experience that nothing ever happens to people that don’t talk about these things.”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) questions Neera Tanden before the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee on her nomination to become the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on Feb. 9, 2021. Ting Shen/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

Johnson said, “That statement was the opening salvo in a coordinated effort over the next ten months to sabotage any public revelation of Hunter Biden’s laptop or any wrongdoing connected to the Bidens.

Johnson said that “the most egregious and effective act of sabotage against the truth, was the public letter signed by 51 former intelligence officials that claimed the laptop had ‘all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.’”

Just before the 2020 election, 51 former intelligence officials claimed the laptop story to be Russian disinformation—a claim that was later proven false.

Johnson contended that the effect of this false claim “was an information operation that interfered with and impacted the 2020 presidential election to a far greater extent than anything Russia ever could have hoped to achieve.”

Johnson called for further investigation into the “mastermind” of the letter.

Johnson further noted how the FBI had lied to Congress about the Steele dossier, which purported to show that Trump had colluded with Russia.

A court-ordered report on abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) found that the FBI had used a section of the bill to spy on over 3 million Americans without a warrant.

Johnson cited testimony from FBI official Bill Priestap in the same report saying the FBI “didn’t have any indication whatsoever” of Russian influence on the Steele dossier.

“Our investigation uncovered redacted footnotes that completely contradicted that statement. Why would Priestap’s false statement appear in the report but the truth be hidden in classified footnotes?” Johnson said. “Fourteen months later, in February 2018, the FBI still briefed the Senate Intelligence Committee that the dossier had validity.”

‘The FBI’s Trajectory Transformed’: Former FBI Agent

During emotional testimony, former FBI Agent Nicole Parker reported that after 12 years in the agency, “the FBI’s trajectory transformed.”

Parker was friendly to the investigation.

In her opening remarks, Parker said: “The people of this country deserve the right to have faith in those sworn to protect. Faith is the foundation of hope; hope can be restored through honest reflection of who we have become, and who we could and should be.” (pdf)

Parker reported that, after initially working a lucrative job with a hedge fund, the trajectory of her life changed dramatically after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

“As I watched the mayhem unfold to include people jumping to their deaths, I was shocked. Heartbroken. I vowed to God that I would give back and serve this great nation,” Parker said. “This vow led me to leave a multi-billion-dollar hedge fund in 2009 and apply to become an FBI Special Agent.”

Parker applied for the FBI in 2009, and became one of 900 agents admitted to the bureau that year out of 45,000 total applicants.

Parker was a field agent where, she said, “I believed I could make the strongest impact in rescuing victims and putting criminals behind bars.”

“It was my privilege to work alongside the finest and brightest in the FBI, local law enforcement and our federal partners, participating in the investigations of myriad criminal cases: The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida,” Parker said, growing emotional before continuing, “the 2017 Fort Lauderdale Airport shooting; the Cesar Sayoc pipe bomb case; multi-million-dollar Ponzi schemes; crimes on the high-seas; bank robberies; murders for hire; sexual assaults; extortions and more.”

“Yes, it was physically taxing and emotionally jarring,” she said. “But I believed I was making an impactful difference. Every day I woke up and embraced being an FBI Special Agent.”

That was, Parker said, “Until things changed.”

The FBI, Parker said, began to become “politically weaponized.”

“Over the course of my 12-plus years of service, the FBI’s trajectory transformed,” Parker said. “On paper, the Bureau’s mission remained the same but its priorities and governing principles shifted dramatically.

“The FBI became politically weaponized, starting from the top in Washington trickling down to the field offices,” Parker said. “Although FBI employees have their first amendment rights, they are not at the liberty to allow their personal political views or preferences to determine their course of action or inaction in any investigation. Lady justice must remain blind. Those that do not uphold these responsibilities cause a negative ripple effect throughout the agency in the field.”

“Americans see this,” Parker said, “and it’s destroying the bureau’s credibility.”

She concluded by insisting that she was not testifying on behalf of the Republican Party, or the Democratic Party, but on behalf of the truth.

“I am not here today to show favor to any political party,” Parker said. “I am here to stand for the truth based on my experience at the FBI. In all humility, I hope to make an impact in creating a stronger agency which is what Americans deserve.”

Democrats Claim Partisanship, McCarthyism

Democrats were quick to claim that the committee was constituted for partisan ends at best and was a reiteration of “McCarthyism” at worst.

“Led by Jordan and Congressman Matt Gaetz, this committee plans to weaponize the MAGA agenda against their perceived political enemies, going after civil servants, private citizens, and the rule of law,” the statement said.

In his opening remarks, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) alleged that the hearing was a forum for “conspiracy theories,” and cited the now-defunct Jan. 6 panel, on which Raskin served, as a model of bipartisanship.

Notably, that committee’s creation was also plagued by charges of partisanship.

For the first time in congressional history, then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) refused then-Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) picks for the panel—Jordan and Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.).

Instead, Pelosi chose former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) as ranking member and also placed Rep. Adam Kinzinger (D-Ill.) on the panel; both were virulent Trump critics.

During the creation of the Weaponization panel, McCarthy honored Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’s (D-N.Y.) picks for the panel.

The ranking member of the panel, Del. Stacey Plaskett, a Democrat from the Virgin Islands, was herself a leader in impeachment efforts against former President Donald Trump.

Ranking member Del. Stacey Plaskett (D-Virgin Islands) delivers opening remarks during the first hearing of the Weaponization of the Federal Government subcommittee in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington on Feb. 9, 2023. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

In her opening remarks, Plaskett likewise claimed that the panel would be a forum for “conspiracy theories,” and accused it of partisan intent.

Meanwhile, Plaskett said she was “proud” of her work to impeach Trump.

In a statement, the White House called the panel “a political stunt that weaponizes Congress to carry out the priorities of extreme MAGA Republicans in Congress.”

The White House claimed that it was Republicans who are weaponizing the government.

The White House further suggested a comparison with Sen. Joe McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC).

Practically all those investigated by McCarthy and the HUAC were indeed affiliated with communists, who had the overt goal of overthrowing the U.S. government. Many of those originally investigated by McCarthy were investigated not for merely being communists, as is commonly believed, but were instead actively working in the State Department at the time.

U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy holds a picture showing Clement Richard Attlee, British statesman and prime minister (1945–1951), making a communist salute during the Spanish civil war. AFP/Getty Images

In fact, the presence of communists on the payrolls was so high that the chairman of one committee at the time quipped that “It makes me wonder if there is any representation of the United States in the State Department.”

Some historians have sought to repair McCarthy’s image, but in the popular consciousness, he remains a pariah.

The White House statement relayed a quote from historian Julian Zelizer, who compared the Weaponization Committee to the HUAC.

“[Joe] McCarthy’s goal wasn’t to find where communist threats in the US may have been; it was primarily the same tool Republicans are using now,“ Zelizer said. ”The House Un-American Activities Committee was, like this one, itself a weaponized committee: The goal turned into using that platform to go and make allegations about Communist ties among Democratic and progressive circles. That’s a useful model to keep in mind as this committee’s work goes forward.”

Former Democrat Tulsi Gabbard Testifies

Tulsi Gabbard also appeared before the committee on Feb. 9.

Gabbard, a former Democrat and representative from Hawaii, gained national notice during her 2020 presidential run. She marketed herself as a moderate, and spent much of her campaign energy on opposing the many foreign entanglements and wars the United States is involved with.

Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) speaks during a campaign event in Lebanon, N.H., on Feb. 6, 2020. Brendan McDermid/Reuters

Since then, Gabbard has moved away from her party, officially leaving the Democratic Party in October 2022.

Afterward, Gabbard announced she had signed on with Fox News as a contributor, making her debut in December 2022 with a surprise appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight.

During one appearance on the program, Gabbard denounced the FBI raid on President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, which many Republicans point to as an instance of the “weaponization” of the federal government for partisan ends.

In her Feb. 9 testimony to the committee, Gabbard said that Americans’ free speech rights were under attack, propelled by a collusion of the federal government with Big Tech firms like Twitter.

The “Twitter files,” a trove of documents released by Twitter owner Elon Musk, have proven that the previous owners of Twitter cooperated with federal agencies to censor or limit the reach of certain stories or facts.

Gabbard noted her own experience with Big Tech censorship during her 2020 presidential run.

After the first Democratic debate, Gabbard said, “I was the most searched-for candidate.”

Later, Gabbard continued, something changed. Gabbard’s impressions on Google dwindled; her campaign’s Google Ads account was suspended with no warning or explanation. The account was subsequently restored, but by then Gabbard had lost key momentum.

Gabbard refuted claims that the task of the committee was a partisan one, giving her endorsement of the panel’s work.

Big Tech

Big Tech was also a focus in the Feb. 9 hearing.

In his opening statement, Johnson said, “With the release of the Twitter files and the Missouri and Louisiana lawsuit against the Biden administration, we are getting a clearer picture of how active government officials were in suppressing free speech and controlling the narrative.”

The November whistleblower report notes the FBI’s role in suppressing the since-authenticated story about Hunter Biden’s laptop, with Republicans saying that the president’s son has received “preferential treatment from federal law enforcement.”

Prior to handing over the laptop to the FBI, Mac Isaac made a copy of its contents, which were delivered to Republican Rudy Giuliani.

Giuliani relayed the story to the New York Post, a conservative-leaning media outlet that was founded by Alexander Hamilton. After posting the story to its Twitter page, the New York Post was suspended by the platform pending the removal of the story. Similar suppression followed with other media outlets that reported on the contents of the laptop.

According to the report, some of that may not have been organic behavior by social media platforms.

Republicans noted during the hearing that in an August appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg acknowledged that Facebook had suppressed the story at the FBI’s urging.

Around the same time, Republicans unveiled a report showing that the FBI had been aware of the allegations surrounding the younger Biden’s business dealings with Chinese and Ukrainian interests for years, but hadn’t taken action to look into the potential national security threat.

For its part, the FBI has repeatedly denied allegations of politicization. The Epoch Times has reached out to the agency for comment.