they deliver the annual state of the state addresses. mocha c-span's at washington july form involving a view to discuss latest issues in government politics and public policy from washington d.c. and across the country. tuesday morning matt bennett cofounded senior vice president for the center left group third way discusses its role in campaign 2020 for the future of the democratic party and note labels efforts just deal the third party unity ticket this public policy foundation talks about efforts to secure the southern border with mexico amid legal battles with the biden administration. c-span's "washington journal" join the conversation alive at 7:00 a.m. eastern tuesday morning on c-span, c-span no free mobile app or online at >> hurt presiling owhen ae hea0 a.m.e spen mobile video app and online@c-span.org.

>> a hearing on federal law enforcement use of financial this follows a congressional investigation examine how the fbi and other law enforcement agencies have used their authority to monitor the financial data of the ameri evidence on generally six 2021. this is just under three hours. subcommittee will come to order without objection the chairs authorized to declaree to today's hearing on the weaponization of the federal government the chert not recognize the gentleman from kentucky mr. matthew to lead us on the pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the unite states of america. and to the republic for which it stands "one nation," under god indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

>> appreciate the enthusiasm. [laughter] wi start with opening statements and then move into our witnesses the chert recognizes himself or an an opening statement. bignment was colluding with big tech to censor americans as the first thing we learnedlearn but now it is big government inclung a and big business to spy on everything american spot, every place they go, everything they do. big government once financial data at its full of sensitive information about you. our investigation started fbi whistleblower came forward and talk to the committee he was supervisor intelligence analyst at the fbi i've told the committee fbi got information from bank of america specifically it received a list of any customer who made d.c. area generally fifth through

seven, 2021. the whistleblower supervisor in charge of the boston f office corroborated his testimony when he spoke to the committee. and so did steve jensenhe domestic terrorism operation section chief. but it was not just purchased purchase data around a specific date the fbi got from bank of america. that was actually overlaid with any firearm purchase at any time. how does the fbi get this information? they ask for it. you can see on the display on the screen here the e-mailhat the fbi told bank of america to recover morning recapture morning call we are prepared to ask the threshold customers confirm transacting business in washington d.c. between these specific days. if you are in washington d.c. visiting your kid may be visiting her aunt or just a friend the epic that wanted to know about every single person she made.

and, and if you are a gun owner looked out you are going to top of the list. for simply exercising your second amendment right you you on the fbi target list. never forget the federal government got this information without any process. notification. the bank did not tell the customer we are handling this information over to the fbi the most powerful law enforcement agency in the world. these fbi agents they all said this was wrong. information back to fbi headquarters in d.c. that is how our investigation began. but since te but since that we've the weevil and the financial surveillance wrote broader there is a specific objective. federal government is building profiles on the american people. the profiles up based on conduct but beliefs if you have the wrong political beliefs you are

potentially a domestic violent extremists. how are they doing this? are the mechanics? as an entity discovered called the orwellian in sound and title it's an entity where the fbi tment fluent security work 6650 of 6650 largest companies in the world. these companies have to do over billion dollars of revenue in ayear. they represent two thirds of the gross domestic product of the united states economy. they worked through a controlled access world. but that on the screen right what are they sharing in the secret portal? we are not exactly suretsor ais r because again they might be an extremist for stop and think about that for a second period in other words if you are against gun registration you oppose lockdowns and vaccine mandates you are a domestict according to the fbi. the government should get your data. get your financial data. it actually gets worse.

the federal g also use with occult merchant category codes to flag americans at shop at places like bass pro shop and cabela's. they flagged americans about religious we can show you that extremist. literally that is the logic to see display from the information we have been altogether thus far during our investigation. now remember these are also the same folks to a couple of years ago told us of your parent showing up at a school board meeting or terrorist. if you're pro-life catholic you are an extremist and now if you opposed lockdown, vaccine mandates when a secure border don't want gun registration you are in the category as well. this is scary where things are headed. we have seen a censorship now i see what's happening with big banks and big government relative to your financial data. all of this being done with no process. note warrants, no notification to the customer the banks are

supposed to serve. big government is not supposed use big tech to censor americans big government should not b were with big banks to target americans for behavior that is legal and constitutional. that is the concern. that if is why were having this hearing. with that ideal to the rank mayor for an opening statement before get her witnesses. >> think it mr. chairman and good morning to everyone here.i am glad the chairman open with who instigated this hearing which is george hill. and what the purpose of this hearing is. at the end of the day the purpose of this hearing is to minimize what happened on generally six and the lawful

prosecution of individuals who were engaged in tt the chairman wants us to believe people are being persecuted for their political conduct. rather than their criminal behavior. so basically he is trying to tell us everyone who has beennd prosecuted for january 6 did not engage in criminal conduct. that is the logic of what he is saying how we have come so low in this house is frightening to me. what people will do to try to minimize the work of those individuals who came to this capitol on january 6. this entire republican conspiracy theory was l testimony of so-called whistleblower. of george hill appeared for a transcri.

climb the fbi was using bank of america to survey americans. all americans? not all americans. everyonebut everyonewho owns a firearm? the chairman said, not everyone who owns a firearm. picking and choosing of a language within an entire report is just inappropriate. information given to the american people, give them all of it so that they can see the true picture. until half the story you are not telling the truth. the fbi asked the bank of america for information but individuals who fit three categories. people who came and there's evidence they were on january 6. that they purchased a firearm in the last six months and that is key, not to work, and they plan

to comeguration and they know they were coming back for the inauguration based on air b&b purchases, hotels, rsvps in the dmv area and individuals who had come on generally six and know that through those purch well. these were not all of the people they were looking up oppose the purpose of this? it was to make sure it generates six the event did not happen on inauguration because people were talking about he had dmv do it we know it dmv's are? it's terrorists. individuals engaged in domestic violence. that happens. when it is people who fit your political agenda they are not criminals anymore they are patriots? they are victims? they are not they are

and a jury of their peers and found them. so many of them have been prosecuted in our court of law. not about brownshirts not by nancy pelosi not by the by the justice department by a jury of their peers. it is surprising we do not have george hill here today because in way their start witness on their impeachment alexander smirnov remember him was her key witness in the hunter biden impeachment probe until we found out that everything you said was made up and he's got his information from russia. we do not know what is going to happen with george hill but we can pretty much based on the track record. but i want to thank our witnesses for being here. we don't always agree on things witnesses come and give their thoughts and be

questioned by members of congress and of this hearing but want to particularly thank you for being here with us today. i want to thank him publicly for his bravery and his willingness in sharing his dramatic harrowing experience so publicly understand until there can be truths juxtaposed. i am sorry for you in all the men and women who fought on the front lines who stepped away from this room were in today to protect all of us in this building. the staff architects of the congress to the young people who were here my experience here today is nothing compared to what those officers went through. us on the

dais were being protected and insecure locations some of us fearing for our lives. aisle fearing for their life on that day. they have quickly forgotten about after visits to mar-a-lago. i want to thank you because you saw it all because you are out there. you did nottowards a danger you went out to meet the mob. you and your brothers and sisters in blue went out and did that. and i wanted to share just a reminder of what really occurred on that run. run. [backgrounds]ise

[inaudible] n their body. if you hear me i am here. that is a battle scene. that is what that is. that is a battle scene. that is not political discord. that is criminal behavior. that is what that is. and while capitol police officers were slipping in blood on the ground as they fought their fellow officers fights, and that insurrection those of us who were in the capitol those members of congress staff were seeking shelter.

and unfortunately you met the times we are in. you have given up your safety to secure truth. fortunately, many of my colleagues on the other side know the truth but they are still seeking shelter from donald trump horde are still seeking shelter from the truth that they want to protect not just themselves but their political their jobs. they are hiding behind allies for that. we know what happened not just footage but the nearly 1000 convictions obtained against those rioters across an arr of jurisdictions. conviction from career prosecutors, not political hacks with juries of the defendants peers. every day americans who saw the evidence.

evidence that has been obtained by prosecutors and investigators have individuals accountable for their horrendous abuse. and so there's a talk about but i guess we will get to it. accidentally yields back all opening statements will be in the statement of doctor jordan peterson's psyologist author professor emeritus of the university of toronto priestly taught at harvard university and mcgill university's published more than 100 scientific papers hosted a public alert podcast through canada straight in europe offers online programs help consumers better understand their personnel as an themselves doctor peterson a diversity is on the importance of free speech and traditional values is one of the dangers of the banking political opponents as he has in mr. brent knight director of innovation governance of the senior research fellow at the center. he has research published wid the creation of pro- innovation

regulatory environments the credit markets and consumer protection sharing of data between financial institutions the regulators and other federal entities. mr. jeremy serves as senior counsel in the senior vice president of corporate engagement at the alliance defending freedom. in these roles he works events free speech for religious freedom and human dignity in companies he alsoigious d banking at major financial institutions. the allies for defending freedom is one of the entities targeted by the government and some of this correspondence. we appreciate being here as well. mr. norbert michael vice president director of the center for monitoring financial alternatives of the cato institute. he i has researched and published on issues pertaining to financial markets and monetary policy including the bank secrecy act and important piece of legislation it saves particulars advocate for reform to individual rights against government overreach and protect personal privacy. law-enforcement analyst security consultant firearms instructor he proves us or for 20 years as a police officer with the d.c.

metropolitan police dtmelnesses and thank them for appearing today. we will begin by swearing you in will you please rise and raise your right do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony about to give his true and correct to the of your knowledge and information and belief so help you god? they let the record show that witnesses have answered in the affirmativ thank you, you may be seated please tell your written testimony will be entered into the record in its entirety accordingly we ask you summarize your testimony and a fehe time you go a little over that's fine. if you go too far over we may have to move onto the next but many of you have done thisbefore so you know how this works. there's a microphone rescue turn that on when you're testifying will start with doctoretersoecognize for five minutes. thank you again for being here. >> yes well i like to start by expressing mye privilege awarded to me too testify here today. it really is an honor to be

asked to do so. i am not here to talk about generally six or about any particular threat, insurrection or protest?l political or real or imagined am here to talk about the rd extent and expanding collusion of governments andn restricting the individual freedom and autonomy upon which the productive genesis stable psyche economy and state are necessarily founded it i will begin my comments therefore in the most general terms to shed light on the mounting problem. they are now 700 million cctv's in china under the rule of the communis. the system to which those electronic eyes are attached is the most complete state apparatus of imagined. with the ability not only to recognize faces at a distance but gate itself when facial

features are hidden or obscured. such capability can and will soon be augmented to the movement of e themselves monitored by height resolution and intelligent cameras will soon be sufficient to identify active party. the demented naïve and prideful engineers who so enthusiastically help build the system call it after the rogue technology took a dreadfully wrong turn in the famous science-fiction movie terminator series featuring artificial intelligent robot intelligence bent on protecting themselves by destroying humanity. the name also references a well-known chinese phrase describing thef the divine itself. the net of heaven is vast yet it misses nothing which aptly describes capabilities of the

new state apparatus. the system is integrated with the so-called credit which in voluntary participants but the score indicated their compliance with the dictates of the chinese comnts now in full control over access to everything they possess certainly all modern means of travel increasingly the electronic gates even by walking if you are chinese or a visitor your access to the world reduced to zero if it falls beyond an arbitrary minimum. this allows you purposefully to be shut out of all activities that can be virtualized and in a rapidly virtualizing world this gains all activities driving shopping, working, eating, finding shelter. even fraternizing with family and friends as merely being in the presence of someone social credit

score injure own score can be lowered this is opened up the opportunity f the government to extract slave like labor from-like labor from its citizens so and women put increase their score remain part of human society. this is precisely the payment system most desired by the most tyrannical. not work for me a benefit thereby the benefits the contractual arrangement undertaken by free and sovereign citizens. but the work for me and i will lift the deprivation i impose will be in the late motif of this labor. why is this relevant to people in the west?be chinese commerce party employs as an extension of western technology. we already fell prey to the terrible temptation of a lockdown employed by that state

partly because of the hypothetical convenience of universal of identity. whatsoever that now confronts us can easily be used to justify the increasing reach of the security state.tone age people first confronted with cameras and the result in photographs by modern anthropologists objectedo having images captured as they neared the captivity of their souls. ve behind will navigate in virtual space or such close duplicates of our actual selves the capture of our essence is at this point all b guaranteed. we all now have our doppelgängers. we live so much in the virtual world t of our purchasing habits and modes of communication are very selves have been reducible to a frightening degree the data is a modern equivalent

of our footprint. the same data making up the image of identity which can be and increasingly bought and sold by the invisible corporate broker. the still mostly uses to sell us we so desperately conveniently want but could also be used to track monitor and punish everything we do and say. behavioral sciences facilitate this project with that reprehensible nudging the practice of pushing people in a given ideologically determined by manipulating incentives behind the scenes. corporations track purchasing decisions developing algorithms with increing accuracy along for the prediction of what might be most enticing. doing so in and only to offer us what we want but to determine and shape what we need. governments can and are colluding with corporate agents to develop a picture of not only our actions but thoughts and words so deviation from the

desired end can be mapped, rewarded and punished for the surveillance state. the scope of optimistic totalitarian as george orwell imagine. they are so rapidly emerging do nothing but increase the danger, providing for the possibility of the super anything mere un- augmented humans could imagine while making it searching even the perception real world shape our attitudes conduct and personality can be manipulated to the degree will not be able to see our reality for the superstate. an paranoid security abscess in the human government. we are arty already selling our souls to the superstate for imm

gratification. a big entice to do so. >> could determine to be be asked to summarize please? do i have my five minutes? >> you have gone over for. >> i am sorry. >> the witness could summarize sure. >> increasing ability to monitor not only the actual attention patterns and behaviors of its citizens but to predict the persecution of potential crime becomes ever more likely. give nothing to hide you have nothing to fear will be the slogan commandeered by those most likely to turn to surveillance to protect and control. totalitarian show me the man and i'll say the crime. her secret from as well that's nothing compared to what we will produce now a police so secret will not even be able to grasp their

comprehensive and subtle activity. monitoring crime so pervasively everyone under the dictates of the system left something to hide. >> mr. order? >> a gentleman had time expired be good to mr. knight for your statement. >> germanjim jorda subcommittee it is an honor to be asked to testify. my name is brian i am a senior research fellow george mason university

they present a pressing threat to americans privacy a glaring weakness in our cause additional order that should be addressed. a recent example of this is federal law enforcement of financial institutions collaborating shared financial records of an unknown number of americans after generally six. while publicly available information is limited appeared this was done to identify suspects based on their movement, political religious beliefs on whether and whether they own a firearm. broad relate to it lawful lawful sensitive and constitutionally protected activity. this was apparently doneíe the target of the search and until that happened. the testimony and the work of the subcommittee i don't how often similar techniques are used in the past and if their use is currently adds insult to injury it's unclear whether the date it was used felt removed by the fbi. the shared with at least two field officers. as in surprising after serious crime and fury more bios law

enforcement use every tool this appears to happen is emblematic of the serious defects in a protection of american privacy enabled by financial surveillance. that isn't the only example expands the use of surveillance. to turn it into a tool to track cocted including firearms purchases. advocates of this approach argue it will help prevent violence pretty specially mass to be sure is the noble aspiration it's unlikely it will should school by including significant across a across the privacy as well as encouraging a broader escalation of surveillance. as discuss testimony our problem is our financial system is a convenient one stop shop without the protections applied similar information elsewhere. it is too easy for the government to obtain a comprehensive and rapidpective a person's life that due process.

further problem the bank secrecy act is opaque by design. they're pro target of a report this prevents most citizens whose information is shared from challenging lawn court. moving where the courteanings for excesses. they've been kept in the dark about effectiveness be provided by law. based on the subcommittee based on the secrecy x confidentiality use the bsa how useful it is, how long it takes for government to act on it. we have these problems due to a combination technology, bad bad supreme court precedent. coming under question we cannot and should not rely on the court. as testimony congress should reform a financial surveillance system. especially bank secrecy act to restore protect privacy important and i want to emphasize this, this does not

mean law enforcement could not access the information. rather it means the excess to be done pursuant to due process. to be clear i'm not here to impugn anyone's motives. good intentions can pave the road and our history is replete at times when it motivated by real threats we have valid the rights of americans often by benefit which will provide it with liberty nor security. distinguish nemesis look subcommittee senior of corporate engagement. the financial crimes enforcement network clear with big banks to monitor their customers to identify domestic threats. shared a list of so-called hate groups published by the hyper-

partisan institute for strategic dialectal producer. echoing the discredited morally bankrupt the isv list includes edf where i work as wells other mainstream religious and conservative organizations like having research council liberty counsel, justice institute. federal government appears to have swept up christian conservative organizations and its is domestic terrorist dragnet. surveillance of american citizens have no place in a free society. neither does the weaponization of the financial industry against peaceable our story is one of many demonstrating increased rise and the threat of viewpoint -based d banking. in 2023 bank of america close the long-standing bank account of indigenous advanced ministries a christian nonprofit that helps impoverished widows uganda. the bank closed the account of a local tennessee church that donates to that ministry. the longer ones to serve their

business that indigenous advanced exceeded the bank's risk tolerance. the abrupt decision as a lo on the populations they served. the list goes on j.p. morgan chase the bank arkansas family counci at risk. incredible reason for canceling the counter former u.s. senator the national national committee for religious freedom.wells fargo denied payment processing to the pro-life group because it was a hate group. these d banking stories and many more hea of the systemic risk a political religious bias that pervade the financial industry. particularly unfettered discretion. in their view prohibition on hate speech and intelligence that include the institution to make subjective both policies are vague and ambiguous sweep in

broad swaths of content underwrote economic freedom. worsen government regulators can all too easily shield their outside power i am sorry wield outside power over financial institutions to pressure them to leverage reputational risk policies and hate speech policies and similar language against abuse with no per public accountability. financial institutions in turn can hide behind the same shield to discriminate without ever customer. regardless of whether this prompted by government pressure. there is ample evidence of the two collaborating censored views they don't like. but it's d.o.j. fdic operation chokepoint from the state of new york and nra case currently pending before the supreme court or the fbi and treasury recent revelations from the subcommittee. eaidents show the government can and will weaponize the financial marketplace against americans for political benefit.

several factors exacerbate this risk. has expansive authority on day-to-day operation and decisions. shrouded incy to impartes banks control over 50% of the market for deposit accounts. this only elevates the need to ensure viewpoint neutry provision of financial services. congress should take action for this is an issue we should all agree on and deserves our her utmost attention. we cannot continue to law enforcement, regulars and banks too big to fail run roughshod over our first amendment freedoms. i welcome your questions.thank you. you are recognized for five minutes. >> good morning chairman jordan, ranking membery to testify at today's hearing. i'm vice president director for

cato center for monetary and financial alternatives. the views i expressed today in this testimony our mind that she should not be construed as representing any official po institute. i argue it is long past the time for congress to reaffirm american cause additional rights that guarantee an expectation of financial privacy. particularly those secured by the fourth amendment. excuse me. the bank secrecy act in the money laundering framework the government has developed around it are unnecessary wasteful and harmful. typica is not a terrorist, a criminal or a tax cheat and does not want to live among such individuals. typical american however recognize the constitution protects all americans from unreasonable persecution and limitless invasions of privacy. i like to make three main points in support of my position. first congress should not pass the bank secrecy act of 1970 ish broader

bill than legislation than its original sponsor promised to deliver. its relationship to the fourth a member of several which were split decisions at the u.s. supreme court during the 1970s. further the bill so controversial it spurred congress to pass multiple bills including the right to financial privacy act just eight years after the bank secrecy act. it did so with the explicit intent of countering the very financial surveillance the bank secrecy unfortunately 1970 bill was so watered down 20 different exceptions it failed to live up to its name. as a result financial institutions remain responsible for both recordkeeping and reporting requirements and law enforcement has the authority to obtain americans financial records without first obtaining a valid search warrant. these so-called third party doctrine0. b l decisions on the 1970s

excuses this legal status by effectively claiming bank customers have no expectation of privacy from the government once they get their information to the bank. much like the dissenting justices of those cases ilieve this logic defies all reasoning. there's simply no sphere of our lives that would remain free of government involvement ends surveillance and control if it seriously. second the agency themselves and failed to demonstrate how the bank secrecy act regime provided a net benefit created information overload for federal agencies through excessive reporting. 2022 for instance financial institutions were required to file over 26 million reports with the federal government on customer activity. even though it has been decades since the first suspicious activity report was filed crimes enforcement network still cannot provide data that exprcement even uses those reports. these two points are just the tip of the iceberg difficult as it may be to believe there are

virtually no convictions to show for all of the regulating and reporting. depending upon the federal crime data that we use the per conviction costges anywhere from $7 million to $178 million. those figures do not include any implicit costs of citizens rights to financial privacy, banks decisions to terminate or limit customers accounts or a bank's refusal to ovide fin customers. finally, personal and financial privacy are pillars of life in the free society the american system of government was designed with a good reason to ensure individuals do enjoy a private spveillance and control. unless there is a reasonable suspicion someone has committed a crime or conspired to commitally be free to live their lives on molested an un- surveilled by the government. that is literally why the fourth mm to the constitution protects americans from unreasonable

searches and seizures and americans financial records should not be an exception to that it is of course healthy to debate what private companies should be allowed to do with the data they collect from customer bu america should confuse in that debate with why we have the fourth amendment the fourth amount protects us from unwarranted persecution. that is why congress should amend the bank secrecy act and restore americans fourth the member rights. th questions. >> thank you. we now go for five minutes. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee thank you for inviting me here today to answer questions regarding the events that o a the nicest capitol ungenerous six 2021. i would like to tell you that i've forgotten some of the that date or that my recollection is not as clear as it once was. but that would not be the truth.

the events of now as when they occurred over three years ago. while the physical scars so that they have healed the emotional scars remain. we government of laws, not of men. i spent nearly two decades as a law-enforcementlaw enforcement officer trying to enforce the law. my career began and the united statesin the unitedstates capitol as a capitol police officer and ended when called upon as a metropolita police officer to protect the capitol against a mob of people. much of my career involved a dangerous encounters with violent criminals that experience was unlike anything i had experienced. i am here to tell you what happened to me on that day what i saw and heard happening to fellow officers.as for me i was violently grab, restrain beaten, tased all will been called a traitor to my country. w stripped of and killed with my own a

firearm as i heard chance of killed himkill him with his own gun. my body camera video capture the violence of the crowd directed towards me during this very brutal moments. the portions of the video i have seen remain extremely painful for me too watch but doing so is crucial to fully understand what really happened that day the during those moments i remember thinking there was a is a good chance i could be killed my thoughts were of my children they may lose their father. i am here to share my experience i know hundreds of other law enforcement officers responded that day they were outnumbered and acted with tremendous bravery to protect the capitol and all of this present inside who serve our officers have sustained injuries to both physical and emotional. they too have been scarred some visible and some that cannot be seen. i think of them often like my partner jimmy albright who dragged me too safety while i

was uncons a drove me to the emergency room though injured himself. i think that about commander renee who like s self deployed to the capitol. who organize the defense in the lower west vittert tunnel and his rally cry do not give up the door. it echoes through my thoughts. i think of all the brave men and won, newly minted officers and those nearly retired who responded to the call of service that day in defense of our nation. those who were still in still the front lines each and every day to make our city safe and protect our institutions of government. i appeared today not to giveate for some action but simply to bear witness. i leave whatever action needs to be taken to your wisdom. and where we go as a nation to the american people. i have no agenda or affiliation. i do not heart but only a deep love of this country which i know is

shared by so many others both young and democrat. and in the process of speaking more importantly listening to each other hopefully we can come er as "one nation" with shared values of wanting tomorrow to be better than today with the hope and confidence that we do each and every day excuse me, as for the singular purpose of trying to provide a better life for our children come. i thank you for your invitation to be here today and the opportunity to speak with you. >> thank you mr. fanone will now proceed to the five-minute roof questions the chart recognize a genre from california for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. fanone i want to express my heartfelt thank you for being are here in january 6 in no small part oh, you and others a debt of gratitude for the work you did assuring people members

of congress and others into safety. i truly appreciate that in thank you. >> thank you sir. if this were only about january ld be done. i'm going to ask a series of questions that beg the question of something beyond january 6. for all of you if you would raise your hands are there any of you who think it would be better if we had the same rules of discovery that china cuba, iran have from a standpoint of looking for criminals among us. is there anyone here who would raise their hand? i thought for all of you let's ask some questions i will use strongman for a moment. with the way the bank stops it

administration from choosing to look at it and gather, strip away to get cap from the major banks are all the banks all the data of all of the citizens and participants in our society. haul it all in so they have a database for whatever the they need to do weathers january 6 or somebody driving in town and not paying a parking ticket too. >> , i do not know the bank secrecy act particularly well i know the i. >> not merely looking at the fourth a minute for a moment. again for the others mr. knight i think you answered on this. there is nothing that would stop and administration in secret from taking vast amounts potentially all of it under current law. the only question you'd really ask is if you can go to a court and say ish you?

from a functional standpoint from the fbi's out they get? >> i believe that's correct think is even worse than that in the sense it does not need to be evidence of a crime it could be evidence of another violation.arget of suspicious activity report is prohibited from finding out would be very hard for the person to go to court later and challenge it were the subject potentially of a prosecution of which case you are arty startingarty starting behind the ball. >> as we stand right now the fourth amendment relative to your banking records which don't just say what you spend money on its where you because by definition when you put the credit card into the gas pump we know exactly where you were. there is nothing that stops the government from finding out not only what you're spending on but what where you are and what you're doing is that correct? >> that's absolutely correct. the records are not yours they belong to the bank and therefore

you have no protectable privacy right in them. the court recently has been starting to change their thinking on that. >> we are hoping to spur the court to think legislation. summarizing we are talking most about bank records those are the ones we have a current the fbi and other agencies want the same access to all your phone records which would include where you are moment by moment and who you talk to? isn't that correct? >> yes that was an issue in the carpenter casecement tried to pull location data from cell phone towers the court found they have a protectable fourth amendment rights evengh the record belongs to the phone company not to the customer. if i want to get those kinds of records on the fbi in the case of your phone records for all practical purposes we need to

get a warrant. you don't need it for bank records but isn't ite records very often provide the same information and thus are equally invasive and not just your first first amendment but your four reasonable expectation for privacy and the keeping of your files and personal effects appear. y are more sensitive and provide more accurate information cell phone towers. >> i for one would close by saying i a problem getting warrants it. do not see a problem getting judges. this committee has a significant role with pfizer and other like that by the question per the question is will we amend that law so that no matter where the data is being grabbed by the government it is being grabbed pursuant to a reasonable expectation we have a reason to get it in a jugs of degrees. mr. chaileness i yield back too. >> it recognizes from massachusetts. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i want to thank the witnesses for their willingness to testify before the committee.'s hearing of the so-called subcommittee on weaponization of the house republican leadership proliferation or ironically the weaponization can bind w to develop evidence of the impeachment of president biden these proceedings have become increasingly bizarre at every turn. once upon a time we were told the key to all this was the hunter biden laptop that was the smoking gun that would solve all of this. until it wasn't. then it was getting hunter biden to testify. that was going to be the close of evidence. until at one point he had the courage to walk into a hearing sit in the front row and then republicans r to testify and instead voted to hold him in contempt.

the testimony of the top legal expert witnesses. who appear before congress and offer evidence against president biden lay out the legal the impeachment. they showed up, all with great resumes but with no evidence. oath, under oath they could not find any evidence that would support or suggest such the trump trump appointed special counsel david weiss announced he had chairman jim jordan star witness former fbi informant alexander smirnoff for making false statements and fabricating evidence of federal investigation of president millions in bribes now smirnoff, some of you may not remember

chairman jordan described as the most corroborating evidence they have." the trump appointed special counselng and fabricating evidence. the pathetic show republicans and put on so far. that assessment is probably correct. now the chairman of the subcommittee is determined to obscure the facts conservative americans the federal government. in statements made by several housesummerhouse members and downplaying the attacks that officer's capitol complex capitol complex as quote acts of vandalism" in a normal tourist visit.

that could not be further from the truth as reported by the bipartisan select committee and generally six in its final report our nation endured an insurrection specifically sought to violently block congressional certification of the 2020 election. the sheer scale you saw on the video earlier the lawlessness that was exhibited that day tested the fabric of o democcy with a savagely beating law enforcement officers like officer fanone amid repeated crowded chance such hang mike pence shoot him with his own gun. the republican vice president hang mike pence. extremist. that is what makes you a terrorist. not just your desire to purchase under the second amendment a weapon that you are legally entitled to have. it also warranted an additio investigatory evidence by federal law enforcement authorities to prevent more

violence leading up to the 2021 presidential inauguration. officer fanone as a former metropolitan police officer could you please tell us of the promulgation of false narratives like thisust a tourist visit or a simple vandalism. how that distorted description affects your ability to do your job? >> thank you for the question. well essentially the distortion mischaracterization about january 6 resulted in or partially played a of leaving my job as metropolitan police officer. they have inspired fellow americans to threaten me, threaten members of my family si statements i have made about my experience both on january 6 2021 and in

the. >> i thank you very much my time ired. [inaudible] thank you for your service. >> a gentleman yields backup. >> mr. chairman asking m's consent to enter into the record gerry 72021 e-mail the financial institutions requesting inrmatiohind quote claim to be armed and intending to travel to d.c. and asking m's consent to enter into the record a press release the eastern district of new york and anson edwards sentencing to making threats to kill elected officials at san raphael warnock queens man sentenced to 33 months in prison posing threats to kill a member of congress illegally possessingof that objection pay. >> a demo from florida is made for five minutes for. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'm sitting up your listings your testimony is absolutely insane the level of the deep

state acting to after pro lifepro-life groups. pro-gun groups that you talked the arkansas pro-life group now bank they were banking at because of their political beliefs. the information the chairman the religious attacks and firearms. all without a warrant. we go to law school and go to the fourth amendment in all basins that have to happen in order for the government on searcher information. all of this is happeningon and knowing it is going on without a warrant without an ability to defend themselves. in the aftermath of presidential election. u.s. department of treasury told major banks to be on the lookout for credit and debit cards for purchase of legal firearms for it is a gun owner's strong proponent of a second member writes it is appalling federal agency would ask private companies to spy on their conducting perfectly legal business transactions. it's not like there is a

suspicion of criminality going on. these are just typical purchases of firearms. also pass along's bankrolling of bigotry and overview of the online funding strategie american hate groups. included among the supposed of hate groups as the alliance defending freedom. we just represented before us today. i found this characterization curious because the adf that i know is anything but a hater. adf defends god-given rights to religious liberty aro seems biden ministration vs advocacy for religious liberty as hate these days. that's as far more about the administration that it does about adf. president obama many conservative americans coming to guns or religion. given the actions seems president biden's administration shares the same hostility for millions of americans like me who proudly cling to our first person secondment

shutdown an event by of liberty. donald trump junior was speaking at it and they shutdown that event on the basis of a know they are being weaponize did in the financial industry and again because the bank secrecy act and the shrouding of the way wave in the banking context it's hard to know why are these things happening. we just know it's on the rise and a concern. of my colleagues said this is a narrative we are creating but you've gone through

specifics. y specifically some of the instances you are referring of facts where pro-life groups or orga conservative have been debunked by these private entities. >> the highest profile one is a member ofel brownback's organization for religious freedom. j.p. morgan chase canceled that in 2022 gave very different reasons that were contradictory over the next year's as scrutiny mounted. neverd any weight and interestingly enough they refer to anti-money laundering financing tough terrorism, a concept calle politically exposed persons. all of these are within the banking regulations and are used as tools ultimately to suppress people because of their views. again the secrecy and shrouding of the reasons for the decisions is a huge part of the problem and something congress needsaddress. >> are there circumstances the consumers may never know their

information was disclosed from the bank to the fbi or part of the problem is our clients to a person any time anytime they go to the vague policy the only thing the bank will say is high risk or business type or risk tolerance. every time they go back specific reason the bank just stonewalls them. >> i have a couple seconds left. what is your recourse if you do find out because let's say i've ticked a lot of the boxes that were referenced. if you find out your information was divulged from the bank that you bank to a government agency do you have any recourse whatsoever to go after the government or >> it's difficult for consumers in that position because they usually don't know what happens. there are complaints you can file with attorneys general land other avenues people could pursue but that's part of the reason congress should act to ward off some of the secrecy and

confidentiality that's happening in the banking industry and also stop using reputational risk and the other categories to determine whether they are going to bank with someone. >> thank you for being here today. >> i have a unanimous consent request. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record of the fbi's situation report to send toncial institutions with respect to an explicit and clear threat on january 16, 2021. >> with respect to the >> the gentlewoman from california is recognized. >> i thank the witnesses for being here and i want to examine some of theo financial institutions in the wake of the violence that occurred on purposely trying to scare americans into believe they are being surveilled every single day without any crime prevention or solving. january 14, 2021 the fbi asked financial institutions for

information about robert lemke who made quote interesting threats of violence targeting the family of a u.s. congressman as well as other in the furtherance of antigovernment, antiauthority extremism and i would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the e-mail dated january 14, 2021 from fbi employees to financial institutions into the record. >> lemke ultimately pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years in prison for making threatening communications journalists in connection with the 2020 election and says threatening electronic mess approximately 50 victims he targeted because of their statements about donald trump losing the 2020 presidential election. heme city congressman's brother threatening him and the brothers children. he send messages to the family of a journalist and i would ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the press release

entitled california man sentenced to three years in prison for making threats against political officials and journalists relating to the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. >> without objection. >> in your experience is it appropriate for law enforcement to use all wall fully available tools in the investigation of somebody who's threatening the family of members of public officials or journalists? >> yes ma'am. not only appropriate it's law enforcement's responsibility to do so. >> wou a dereliction of duty if you didn't use every lawfully available tool to try to prevent a crime from happening or to solve a crime that has already happened? >> yes ma'am i believe so. >> thank you. the data from inauguration the fbi requested information about samuel fisher who was photographed on the steps of the capital and is suspected of unlawfully entering federal property on january 6th 2021. the fbi noted that fisher may also have been, quote manufacturing trafficking guns and preparations for civil war.

additionally he is racially motivated ideology. the fbi noted that it was quote, currently preparingial information that corroborates fisher's involvementfisher's involvement in firearms trafficking and i would ask unanimous consent to entero the record the e-mail from fbi employee to financial institutions about this matter into the record. >> without objection. m i and law enforcement agencies seek financial information in cases of arms trafficking? the obvious potential receipts for purchases made would provide evidence that in purchased by a specific individual. my understanding is within these requests it was the fbi seeking voluntary compliance from a number of banking institutions which there ask was very specific in that they

were looking for individuals who were present on january 6th which i think we all can agree was an incredibly violent assault against law enforcement officers. those individuals that also had purchased firearms in the past six months and were at least evidence tola the nation's capital on january 20th. >> so they were not just looking for people based on their beliefs but there wereferent criteria that all had to be present to do this search, is that correct? >> that's my understanding. >> samuesh was arrested the next day and when he was arrested, agents found over a thousand rounds of ammunition and several weapons modified ar 15 rifle and machetes in the upper east side apartment and his car. fisher by the way he wrote after the capital riot, quote seeing cops literally run was the coolest thing i've ever seen in my life, and of quote andimous consent

to the article into the record. this is a clear example of people committing criminal acts that my colleagues across the aisle are claiming the innocent victims of surveillance but in reality of the fbi was doing their jobs. they were working to threats to the inauguration and hold january 6th rioters responsible for their criminal actions. i want to thank you for being here today and i appreciate your willingness to bear witness to what really happened and to sp di overly broad fear mongering tactics that innocent americans are being surveilled simply because of their beliefs or religion and with that i yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. >> do you need a gun registration, the government can

just ask the bank any time a customer purchases a >> thanks know if you purchase a gun per se but bank records they are not perfect but for almost everything. it's almost like a backdoor registration right? >> one of the challenges is highly sensitive information can be accessed through financial rds that are of the otherwise are constitutionally protected. >> do you think this is going to stop with conservatives? historyls us the cancel culture, the surveillance state whatever you want to call it, they never are satisfied with just it always expands and i will give you an example. a few years ago senator feinst california the folks in san francisco renamed the dianne feinstein elementary school, they took her name off the school because they found she years ago that the cancel culture mom didn't like so even a liberal democratic senator wasn't good enough. they came after her to into this is what scares me we've invited

probably more democratic witnesses on the committee more than any other becausee first amendment second amendment, fourth amendment and constitution. my concern is it never stops with certain people. it always goes further. would you agree with that? >> the reason i prefaced my remarks with nonpartisanship increasing ability of governments and large corporations to collude threatens everyone's freedom equally and it could well be that at the moment, and i thi here are trying to make is the people in the sights of that collision tend to h conservative leanings but that will shift and a in a moment whenever the political tides shift and we are concentrating in this of january 6th very partisan issue that produces a very intense partisan divide. we are not addressing the fundamental if she issue is here directly which is our new

technology enables a surveillance that is so intense that no one will escape its purview regardless of their political >> it also seems to me there seems to be a pattern emerging. i want toake you back to when we first started getting in with this issue with the now famous memorandum from the departmentustice and you probably remember what i'm talking about but the opening sentence of the attorney general's document, this memorandum says in recent months there's been a disturbing spike interests board members teachers, staff at the hearing where we had the attorney general. i asked a simple question i said you make that opening state need this memorandum to go after moms and dads showing up at the school board meetings, what was that fst sentence based on and he said it was based on the

national school board association the memorandum they put outnd at the same thing happened to you guys because we had an entity called the global disinformation index that put out this information and then the government uses that as the basis to say you're some terrorist group. th is frightening because since then the treasury department used an agency put out organ entity as a basis to say you are some hate group or terrorist group. i find that alarming and particularly the pattern that makes you start to wonder. >> the fbi used the report on the radical traditional catholics to target them as well in the interim between the moms for liberty and parental rights groups and what's going on today. i think it's very alarming that the government uses these discredited third-party arbiters

of truth who are just promoting their own political agenda to try to make decisions about anything let to financial institutions as some kind of financial surveillance. >> unless the group says you're better than the government is going to use that information to send to banks and say you might want to be concerned about this. that is a frightening world and the point is i don't think it's just going to be limited to conservative people in the future because there were people in black lives matter who got targeted when all the protests were happening around the country and i disagree with a lot of things that happened that summer but i also don't like the fact they are going after liberals either. that is the thing. in both parties that activity should be protected. second the right to pricy should be protected but unfortunately now it's gotten to partisan. with that, to the other side.

the gentlelady from florida is recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman. for nearly 20 years in the chamber i know i've heard time and again they claim that they back the blue. recently chairman jordan put out a press release about the resolution that said when it comes to supporting the police, republicans put words into action yet when it comes to walking the walk, republicans too often take a seat. just yesterday we took a vote on at includes spending for the criminal justice program and of those that make up the committee, a handful of you voted against it. it would mean state and local law enforcement agencies and more criminals on the streets and neighborhoods. it means enforcement tools that keeps online predators away from our children. those actions sure don't back the blue andrepublicans want to target law enforcement yet again. this time they purposefully downplay the violence that traumatized hundreds of capitol police officers in the january 6th introduction and

perhaps the most intimate assault on american history. specifically, the republican colleagues are taking aim at the abilities of the financial records to prosecute the criminals that attempted to constitutional transfer of power in congress. these are the very financial tools that help hold to account the people who trytial election. officer, thank you so much for repeatedly testifying about your experiences. i'm sure it isn't easy to relieve these dramatic moments. can you explain the violence that police officers were subjected to on january 6th? >> i like many otherom the department self deployed that day and tha i heard the stress calls coming out from officers who were

already deployed at the capitol complex and took it upon myself to respond to those calls for assistance. when i arrived at the capital, i made my way to a specific distress call coming from officers were defending the tunnel against a large group of violent rioters they were trying n access. >> thank you. >> when i entered the tunnel, i observed about 400 dc police officers and a few u.s. capitol police officers attempting to hold back the violent mob. the officerswith a variety of different weapons. everything from metal polls two by fours aluminum bats. batons and other police equipment that had been stripped from police officers themselves were then used against officers. >> thank you. i'm sorry. i want to make sure i can get

some other items in. the video we saw earlier was disturbing and a video i don't have time to show. you can hear words being yelled at police officers that serve to the capital and some died the insurrection? >> on the cause of death was unrelated to the capital riot. that being said i think decent people would understand that if it were not for his participation brian would be here with us today.

i understand i think better than most the posttraumatic stress that accompanied my participation and then and during the mischaracterization of what i experienced from people in positions of power themselves. i understand what brought many to taking their own lives and i attribute their to their participation in defense of the u.s. capital on january 6th. >> thank you mr. chairman, once again i ask that you stop

trivializing the violence assault. theákire world's so that and please do not cavalierly discard law enforcement tools to prevent the next january 6 the necessity of making thel law enforcement is even more imperative considering all but promises yet another assault violence or otherwise and i yield back. before you go to the next member and if i could ask for a unanimous consent rask unanimous consent to enter into the record the situation report sent to financial institutions on j kind of threats the fbi tried to prevent leading up to the inauguration that day with threats to murder members of congress and at the inauguration. the exact type of threats the fbi is responsible for investigating and i quote inrmation wa received regarding a video posted on a website encouraging people to kill senators and congress members the poster of the video was social media

exploitation and threatening violence in washington d.c. on inauguration day and advised people to bring guns. >> without objection. we want them to do their job in a way that is consistent with the constitution and i welcome the gentlelady from new york. >> thank you for your testimony today. in 2022, activists amalgamated at the far left politicians pushed for the of an unconstitutional merchant category to be assigned to firearms retailers to identify, quote, suspect purchases and report patterns to law enforcement. a clear infringement and back door to fact failed new york attorney general james specifically mentioned the importance of labeling gun and ammunition sales to indicate in imminent crime. since then as some have banned the code while states like california mandated. this is why i introduced the protecting privacy purchases act with congressman barr and hudson

to put a stop to the code and americans from this infringing overreach. can you explain how does this code to threaten privacy and constitutional rights? >> thank you very much. this code, and if we were to do similar creating false positive where individuals who are potentially engaged in the activity because it's important to know they don't tell you what people by. will it be reported to the government as potentially suspicious for no real basis that is likely to be reasonable, and that's going to create a database that is available that could be searched later. one of the dangerous things about this financial database, the financial records is that they are retrospective. and perhaps there's precious little reason to believe it would be effective the stated goal for a host of reasons i

could get into if you want. >> yes please expand. the problem is you won't know what someone buys. the expecting banks to correctly identify what is a hallmark of the violence. you're expecting them to report it promptly, law eor act on it promptly and effectively. so i would like to point to the report that advocates but if you look at the examples they point to as possible examples where it's helped, it's hard toecause there is such a short timeframe, 12 days. there is a reason to believe, i don't see why we would believe it would be enough time to act on it because we don't know how it's going to view anything. it's hard toferentiate from legitimate activity. rather look at the cases and then work backwards so we don't know how many false positives e be.

also in the recent report methodology it's very,oad and overinclusive and it has thresholds that are such so how confident should we be to signal the noise? i don't think we should be given how little we know about how it's treated as is. i think we should be skeptical. >> do you think this is the back door to a gun registry? >> some of the supporters of view it as a backdoor to discourage firearms purchases. >> in my district that upstate new york americans are proud to stand up for a constitutional rights and understands in ananan infringement on our constitutional rights. why is my bill so important? >> the efforts to restrict the collection of data at the bank

level are the best option we have currently because under law once the bank has that data, the government has the data so preventing the collection at the bank level was the first best option. >> thank you very much. i yield back. the gentleman recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman. i just want to say to officer, i was on the house floor january 6th. we haven't had a chance to talk, but i know you have kids. my wife is at home with our son she was seven months pregnant and thanks to your bravery and the bravery of your colleagues and true patriots of defendant this capital i got to meet my son. i want to thank you for your service and bravery. i'm sorry that you had to endure so much of the personal attacks

to try to undermine what you actually did that day. the country know what you did respect you and appreciate your service so thank you and i will yield to the ranking member. >> thank you. i believe we all share those sentiments. i want to say that this is not a partisan issue. i heard it said that january 6th is a partisan issue. i just want to read something.ahe was assaulting in his name, carrying banners hanging flags and screaming their loyalty to it was obvious that only president trump could it could be restored.

instead he watched television happily as the chaos unfolded. he kept pressing the team to overturn the election even after it was clear to to any any reasonable that he was in danger even as the mob carrying trump banners were beating cops and breaching parameters the president sent a tweet attacking predictably under the circumstances members inspiration to lawlessness and violence. that was the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. g to expand the scope of what the fbi was trying to do. it wasn't to evade banky. records

or about a violation of the fourth amendment against search and seizure. i've been a practitioner of the law, not just a professor or someone with a graateegree, but a prosecutor and investigator and you use the tools you have to prevent from happening. i've shopped at bass pro shop plenty of times and read the bible on a regular basis and my family happened to be gun owners but i am not afraid the fbi is going to be searching my account because i wasn't a writer january 6th and i didn't purchase a gun in the last six months before the inauguration and make plans to come back to attempt again stop the free and fair election of our

government. this is getting ridiculousl the violence on january 6, 2021 and it's all the individuals you were up close and way too personal with many of them. you also like many of the people here attended hearings, trials and sentencing of many of those individuals. based upon the knowledge that you have that many of us here do not, do you know what ideology they embraced and if you do, how do you know that? >> i can't speak to every individual that was there that day. i didn't have an opportunity. i was fighting for my life.

that being said i was present at a number of the hearings regarding individuals that were specifically charged with and pled guilty to violent assaults of myself and other officers and many of those individuals in their plead for leniency to the judge at a sentencing cited the fact that they had been inspired by and by rhetoric used by the former president of misinformation from news media outlets that led them to believe the 2020 election had been stolen and it was their duty to respond to the e-uppercase-letter and fight to save their country. >> the gentlelady yields back. we begin the hearing by reciting the pledge of allegiance and i'd like to begin myreciting the fourth amendment because i think the other side of the aisle forgot to some of the terms. the right of the people to

secured against unreasonable searches and seizures cell not being violated or warrants issued but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation particularly describing the place to be searched and person or things to be seized. can yo secrecy act and rights to financial privacy act may not be in compliance with the amendment or how the implementation may violate the amendment? >> sure. once the bank or financial it the government house has it so this came up in the early court challenges and cases that went to the supreme court in that we effectively have law that is a blank check for the government

or law enforcement to obtain all of the information without# a warrant. they do not have to show probable cause. >> they have to go to the bank. it seems to me these acts are not just out of date but outside of the constitution. mr. knight, you began your opening statement by characterizing some of the things the government could no or infer about you based on how you spend your money. can you elaborate what are the things the government can no? >> everything about you with a relatively high degree of confidence they know where you live and figured out where you wo potentially things like your sexual orientation and degree of accuracy and guessing what your interests are and they can

figure out what your religion is, what political beliefs you support and have a better than average chance of knowing you own a firearm. they could also potentially know if you have an abortion and after the dobbs decision there was a lot of concern raised about the sensitivity of medical information that would be available in a state that prohibits or restricts abortion and so this isn't a left or right, this is a situation where everyone has information accessible. doctor peterson, why don't you igence and facial recognition and massive computer surveillance and cameras on every street corner so we can all safer?

>> if the emerging collusion between government and gigantic corporations continues in a manner that is discontinuing there won't be anything you do that can't beand will be used against you in very short order and at the concerns expressedbo consequences of that with regards to january 6 seem to fail to take into account a broader threat that lurks underneath that everyone should be attending to. we are in danger of eliminating the private that's already happening at places particularly china which is why i made reference to that. that technology is at hand and appears both giant governments and corporations are utilizing it in every way they can manage and its genuinely often motivated by the claim that that

is forestalling an immediate threat. for engaging in a tremendous long-term engagement and it should be perceived as dangerous to those on the left that are committed because it will be those that are first identified by such that you have a phd? >> yes. why can you tell us about that? >> the entire transcript was submitted as evidence what i was doing primarily in that interview that was criticized was questioning the validity stacked upon the models detailing the climate change 100 years into the future that was deemed sufficient with regards

to my professional confidence to licensed psychologist. that was one of only many anonymous complaints that were fostered directly in relation to my political views. >> thank you for sharing that today. use your testimony is evidence thatas evidencethat your education hasn't [inaudible] >> well done. the gentl bs the gentleman from virginia is recognized. >> i of c george mason university where you were located and i had a question for you. the chair recently said people who imprisoned for crimes committed during january 6th areta hos been arrested, tried, c sentenced and

are serving those sentences are hostages? >> i have not studied at that. my initial inclination is no. and if i read all the transcripts of all the convictions -- >> thank you. i find it interesting you can opine about the constitution and infringements and warrants but you haven't looked at the issue whether people commit crimes are hostages or not. thank you for that equivocation. maybe you don't want to equivocate. there were peaceful citizens protesting on behalf of their first, second amendment rights

carrying bibles who assembled peacefully to express themselves here in the capital. isn't that what you encountered on january 6th? >> that couldn't be further from the truth. my accou a number of individuals restraining and beating me and one individual to electro shock on my neck, all the while resulting in injuries i sustained heart attack. so among other things, law enforcement running roughshod over citizens expressing first and second amendment rights. i had at the d depression they were violently seizing bibles on good christians who are simply trying to exercise their faith because we them.

is that what happened on january 6th? >> i had other purpose than assist fellow officers who were calling out for help. i didn't care about the capital bungnd i didn't care about other members of congress. i came here because cops needed help. by theau heard interesting testimony again how long were you in law enforcement? in those 20 years were you made aware of any effort by the fbi or law enforcement in general to survey individuals? twenty years of experience have you ever experienced wt they are describing? would you find that all it if you did stumble upon it? >> yes because it violates the

principles of law enforcement upholding the constitution and respecting americans rights. >> i cannot tell you how much -- i was on the floor, i heard it and a soul it. i cannot imagine what you've gone through and how you were still living through ptsd. we are still living through ptsd. i can only imagine, and you are a hero. no matter what the attempts may be of some to minimize, diminish, fabricate what happened, i assure you there are a number of us who will continue to fight to make sure the american people know what equivocate about whether criminals who are justifiably in u. are

criminals. a violent attempt to prevent the free exerc an election being counted here in the capital. yield back. >> thank youman for the witnesses being here today. we are here to talk about a range of things that don't involve the topic of the hearing, and i think that's disappointing. few of the rights protected by the constitution are more my colleague brad the actual text of the fourth amendment and mr. peterson, doctor peterson, you referenced what people might wish it aside. it doesn't say that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. that you have a reasonable expectation of

complete secrecy reasonable expectation of privacy is ar process, warrants and subpoenas for u.s. citizens. you might not know many of the members of the committee are a part of something really rare in congress, which is a nonpartisan view. we'vbreak on party lines on privacy. there are republicans and democrats who want to rollback the patriot act what a beautiful name. but it's being used to violate american citizens rights to privacy. you have mr. jordan and mr. nadler in complete agreement on how to reform the act and of the foreign intelligence act works pretty well. it's the domestic surveillance act. the fourth and says you're supposed to get

warrants and we are covering a giant hole not about january 6th but the bank secrecy that are being abused, weaponize against the citizens of the country. i don'tpeterson, you've experienced some of the consequences of not having the safeguards that we do in this country. i wonder if you could elaborate on how consequential to have the safeguards we do have here on privacy and speech. >> i know that my colleagues on the psychological front and medical front are increasingly frightened of me making any political opinions known in any form whatsoever because they usually have the mid-level bureaucratic sort that have been empowered as the consequence of the lack of first amendment rights to intervene as they see fit in relationship to stated opinion, political or otherwise and it's not good. there is no legislation coming

up also reflecting that protection that will make even ding. >> these are dangerous ideas and i appreciate that you highlighted how china is using it and there are people pushing for a central bank currency that at the core is a violation of privacy and the one ring to rule them all a massive amount of power. that you highlighted with the consequences of the bank secrecy act. a couple of you highlighted the cost-benefit ratio. we have the stated goal of safety. >> one of the consequences as people blur the distinction not

being able to access information or being able to it subject to due process. there is no reason to believe th convinsnsned would be impossible without getting a warrantwe also have to worry about the fact that information is being collected and if you are worried about your political opponents having power why do you want this available to them? >> you mentioned the third-party doctrine and frankly i am reminded of a story that's disputed whether it was accurate or not but when the leader of the soviet union started he pointed out how brutal it had been under stalin and someone

from a large crowd yelled to him why didn't you dodhere he is the dictator of the soviet union everyone knowing the kind of power he could yield and he said who said that? i demand to know who said that. and everyone got quiet and he let it stay quiet for a long time and he said that's why because you know the coercive power of the state. the police state powers that have existed in previous areas of history are minor compared to the capabilities we have and when you link that to the unmitigated third-party doctrine out for us what is at stake? >> it literally means any time you engage in any kind of a commercial transaction saying i don't have due process anymore which is rather insane in terms of the concept completely on its head that we all have due process. >> so we have a burden to produce legislation that does reclaim the freedom surrendered and i hope we continue to work

in a bipartisan fashion. i have a unanimous consent request entitled an fbi liaison report emboldened and aftermath of the capital breach that sites online rhetoric regarding the presidential inauguration with some calling for unspecified justice for the january 6th shooting by law enforcement of an individual at the capital building and another that many armed individuals would return on the 19th of january according to the open source reporting. >> the gentleman from california recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman. if any of you need a break just let us know. we've probably a half-hour to go but if you need a break let us

know. >> no problem mr. chairman. it's unfortunate that this hearing is intended to focus on january 6th and the inaugural that followed two weeks later because it is a legitimate question mostly by private sector businesses and the like and then thenment accessing that information. it's a worldwide phenomenon and something we should be focusing on. unfortunately what has happened taken the january 6th issue the violence the harm to the officer and others and morphed into a larger question. that here we are using this hearing to somehow degrade the violence

and the insurrection itself and theltimate effort to destroy our democracy. a couple of questions. do you have the found guilty? >> correct. >> the number is think over 1100? >> that's my understanding. in this process was any information developed that indicated there might be future violence? for example of the inaugural? >> that's my understanding from speaking to those involved in the investigation. >> do any of the witnesses disagree with that?

and based on this, is it reasonable for the federal government, fbi and other agencies to investigate certain individuals in the effort to prevent future violence? do? >> i not only think it is reasonable, i think it is a requirement. >> do a of you disagree that it would be reasonable to investigate those who were involved and threats that there might be future violence, is that something the fbi and others should do? >> i would disagree to some degree. it depends on how you do >> point well made. at the notion of continuing the investigation based upon information received as a result of the investigation of those that were involved in the the rioting

would be reasonable so now we get do the point and this is where it really got on to equate this issue of the personal civil liberties and privacies with the january 6th insurrection. we need to defiant divide these two issues. there's no doubt we had an insurrection. a film that was shown earlier clearly demonstrates that and we thank you for your work that day and i think that i agree you may not think it is important to protect us, but we thank you for having done so. the reality is it history. it was the single largest

assault on police ever in the history of this nation. based upon that, where do we go? and then mr. chairman if you would, put all of that aside and stop trying to protect mr. trump or anybody else involved in the riot and that insurrection and let's get down to the issue of protecting our civil liberties. there are examples that could be used in evidence to get to that point. unfortunately wrapped up in the january 6 insurrection and subsequent question of the inaugural. why is it that in america today we have the need for new 7-foot high fence around the capital on the day the president arrived to give a state of the

union? i think i will just leave it there with of the seconds left and if you would put aside your desire to go after and protect the precedent and get down to the issues that were critically important for all of us, i would appreciate it and i think the country wouldnk you mr. chairman. we have been focusing on how technological platforms and advancement further fuels the weaponization at least that was the intention on this side of the aisle. we how ai is expanding the suppression of speech. i want to focus on the new reporting that connects the surveillance together.

the surveillance by the irs is being done without a warrant in coordination with the doj. before the revelation senate informed us banks were beginning to deploy ai technology. meanwhile we are watching the failures for the politically biased which the cofounder called left-leaning that is the understatement of the year and report documented information to assist on these its. you noted that we are limited to speak on what has been reported

related to the financial service regime because so many is known by the public and congress and the timeline that i just described doesn't show that the area is developing really quickly and raises further concerns about federal agencies undertaking the dragnet surveillance using financial records. based on what we know so far about the coordination between the financial sector and tl government, does the addition of ai into this equation because even greater concern regarding the scope and scale we can expect you recruit in the future? >> i believe it does for several makes something less expensive you get more of it and that it's not well tuned either intentionally or unintentionally you're going to get the risk modeling of the false positives but it's going to start selecting for information that may not be appropriate.

there is a concern that does exist that ai tends to beje opaque and it's already opaque enough if the great powerful laws is spinning a record of that is suspicious and you don't know why and we can't assist how appropriate that is, that's problematic. and so i think that we do need to be cautious and i would say one distinction between this and maybe some other areas is here we are talking about feeding information to the government s implications here that don't exist that doesn't mean we shouldn't be cautious from others but we should be cautious

what could another layer of secrecy achieved by displacing human action with aai do to further erode our liberties and basic guarantees of privacy? what's up first i would banks and financial institutions of using technology get increasing rate for very long time. still the bigger problem is the principal. over guaranteed due process and law enforcement needs a warrant to get that information i think that's a better place. aside from that the better and broader the technology allows people to reach of the finer detail allows people to get then obviously the more of it you're going to get. brian is right going to make it more efficient and less clock costly seal get more of it. but again the principal the fourth amendment is key here for a quick thank you i appreciate

that with audio back. accidentally it yields back the gentle lady from california is recognized or texas i'm sor. huge difference. thank you. thank you mr. chairman and thank you to all the witnesses who are here this morning. in the morning of january 6 age of my colleagues in the house to certify the historic election of president joe biden and vice president kamala harris spray that became a dark day the nation's history. overrun by domestic terrorists, sent there by president trump i don't mean terrorists and academic or definition i was terrified myself with him it was terrified many of my colleagues sees both democrat and republican this is not a partisan issue. have forgotten the violence and terror we all experience together. we have heard some of the comments they think they shouldbe

called hostages. they should be treated as patriots they were terrorists played in simple in my books. i learned for the first time their gas masks underneath our seats on the house floor designed to keep us from chemical and biological attacks when i was told to put one on, imagine we were told to put on gas masks. my colleagues and i on the floor were hiding between seats barricading doors and some calling their families as it grew louder and more terrifying. they were pounding at the door trying to get where is nancy hang mike appends where is nancy? where's nan galas to keep them from coming on the intentions of these terms were clear overturn the election and kill the democratic elected leaders they their way. anyone who claims this was not a terrorist attack play violent insurrection was simply not facing reality as our witnesses said you're plain and simple

lying. even in california they were called at lying. despite that here we are today more myths and misleading information given to the american people. what officer thank you for being there also for having the courage to come and testify today and to r about the truth of that day. some colleagues wrapped themselves in banner flex flexor social over those who watch over the democracy brown never forget what i saw and felt sacrifice and some ofthose who died that day or were injured that day of sending the constitution and all and was foreign and domestic. so officer fanone. the compass safe in the capulet outside you are facing reports indicate the west side of the crowd outnumbered officers 58 -- one. what officer requested back upwn

at least 17 times in 78 minutes. did you and your colleagues ever gets the sense we were defending democracy that >> that is not anything, those thoughts never crossed my mind. again, like i said i responded to the capitol heating distress calls coming from fellow officers. and when i was fighting i was more concerned with my own survival and that of my lleagues than the totality but that they would later come to represent. >> as you reflect now do you see the connection do you see what is really happening that day was that the violence of the mob it was the attack on everything that was in for the country. >> yes ma'am that is my assessment. >> thank you.

many members of publicly spoke about a record of recorded members of their experiences we know many members of congress have struggled with trauma from that we know that you have. is it possible and it may bring a lot of emotion but is it possible for you to share with us you have dealt with personally as the aftereffects of that day? >> assure,ly it was the experience of the day itself. the level of violence. for me and my personal experience i think what was so difficult to deal with was the first time in my law enforcement career when i worked narcotics though it's to say i have experienced a few things. i had never been -- i had lost all control of own survival in those moments. it was only because of a few

individuals in the crowd and the efforts of law ece i was able to survive that. until that level of vulnerability for me as an officer was more than i could deal with. in the aftermath there was criticism -- inter on behalf of other officers in the department that may be experienced much more difficult. and eventually the mischaracterizations, the lies about what happened that day the lies about me specifically who i was or what role i played at the capitol on january 6. inspiring threats against myself and members of my family. and in a way i think it's e that trauma. even in attending this hearing today i received threats.

when so how do you resolve that when it is ongoing? i am sorry that is happened and thank you for your courage thank you for coming and sharing with us today i yield back. accidentally yields back the chair recognizes himself. check to their getting information uuation and other situations the government because the banks as of the name of the customer who is making purchases in a certain day time and i want the name of the customer who may have bought a firearm at any time. if they're going to do that you think they need to get a warrant first? >> i thi should? well yes. >> do you think they need to get a warrant to do that? >> yes progress since her nights? >> esp. >> mr. peterson? >> yes. mr. fanone. the bank out the name of persons who

may have bought a firearm should there be a warrant requirement for the bank has to be compelled by the gover information, should there be a warrant requirement first? what's my experience i was sought voluntary compliance. it's less paperwork. that being said if i was uncooked voluntary compliance? >> corrects records how is a voluntary this is a third party the bank is giving. >> know if i go to the bank requested certain information regarding an investigation i'm participate. >> and the fundamental sense should there be a warrant requirement for a financial institution hands over the name of a customer based on certain purchases they may have made? in a general sense? x yes. >> you think there should be? yes that's great you're calling something so let me go to this. do you think mr. michel should there be a notification so should at least the bank say hey mr. smith, the fbi for all of your purchases on a certain day and they want to know if you've ever bought a gun do you think the bank should at least tell the customer their

customer or they are supposed to serve should they'd at least be compelled to tell them that course. >> yes. mr. knight could. >> yes with the reasonable exceptions for ongoing criminal case for quick sphere enough, mr. peterson? >> this should get a warrant. >> back to the first thing. mr. fanone? >> again with the exceptions are criminal investigations works we have agreement on a pound the first time we've had that since this morning. doctor peterson, point to talk about the deed banking issue we saw so much of particularly w truckers because i see it coming. i see it coming here and it frightens me. i want you to talk about what canada and if it any way impacted you? >> there is essentially a working-class protest against the extent think the length of the covered lockdowns. one consequence of that was the canadians who partipated even

by donating to the protest and by donating small amounts to the protest had their bank accounts and consequence of a collusion between the banks and the government. it was extrajudicial that was unconstitutional despite the fact we don't have strong first amendment claims. so this happened. the government is currently at maneuvering and candidates make the possibility of such collusion a certainty across multiple actual and potential domains of so-called harm. particularly in relationship to government defined hate. this is absolutely coming and it is facilitated by advancements in technology we talked about today. >> we know it is coming we have seen what they call the liaison information report from the fbi to the bank assaying a possible include firearm education has to

do with limits on public land discontent with renews measures to mitigate the spread of covid 19. the very issue these are truckers were deep bank in canada is the very thing the government is saying to banks winning to look at this as well. that single issue that is again what frightens me so much. and frankly when you're getting this information for going to get why should we be compelled to get the war work before you go get it? >> jump right in. >> want to clarify one part of my answer. to the second question about notification. the right to financial privacy act does a good job of this notification can be delayed if the government has to go to a court to get permission to delay delay. click to shift the burden. >> the burn is or should be on the government to go get it from a court. >> absolutely i do believe this should be a warrant requirement so the notification would only be delayed in that event

progress in this world we are now in the full committee i think i've made mentioned earlier on the reauthorization we have said the same thing if you are going to go search an american citizen based on their phone number, their e-mail address in this haystack of information that's out there if you are going to do that will get a warrant we have the same fight there. it seems to me that getting eight warrant a fourth amendment constitutional right is how it has to begin. my times expired by yields of the ranng member. >> thank you very much. i thought it was very telling mr. knight said going after bank records would be inappropriate except in a criminal investigation.that is what the fbi was doing was involved in a criminal investigation. >> it's not necessary to have awarrant, back to criminal procedure you don't always need a warrant when you have a

voluntary authorization. everyone who o account is told in the open their bank account information bait may be disclosed to law enforcement. now if you want to ct than we need to do that. but until that they have a reasonable expectation law enforcem information because once you are banking with the banking institution that information in that record belongs to the banking institution not solely belong to you anymore. when you are using a bank and the banking institution and they have given disclosure. now if we want to make an affirmative disclosure were an individual has to specifically check off the box that allows them to be aware of it when they're opening a bank that is something else. but you do not need a warrant you can have voluntary disclosure because under our lawthe banks have a possession andpossession and ownership of that information. now, the other thing you have talked about is are we going to happen to on

conservatives? no i am also concerned if the fbi were to do overreach. i am concerned with that. and i do understand this is so and we need to be careful about what they do. i find it very interesting that my colleagues witnesses mr. fanone is not a colleague of ours and is giving his opinion as a law-e was or something else you wanted to add? >> is in the context of this particular investigation one of the reasons why i believe the