without objection the chairs thorized to declare recess at any time we welcome everyone to today's hearing on the weaponization of the federal government the chert not recognize the gentleman from on the pledge of allegiance. america.dge allegiance to t and to the republic for which it stands "one nation," under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> appreciate the enthusiasm. [laughter]will start with openig statements and then move into our witnesses the chert

recognizes himself an opening staten was colluding with big tech to censor americans as the first thing we learn but now it is big government including a big banks and big business to spy on everything american spot, every place they go, everything they do.s once financial data at its full of sensitive information about you. our investigation started fbi whistleblower cameorwalk to thes supervisor intelligence analyst at the fbi i've told the fbi gon from bank of america specifically it received a list of any customer who purchases in the washington d.c. area generally fifth through seven, 2021. the whistleblower supersor i office corroborated his testimony when he spoke to the

committee. and so did steve domestic terrorism operation section chief. but it was not just purchased pe 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-mai that was sent to the fbi told bank of america to recapture morning call we are prepared to ask the transacting business in washington d.c. between these specific days. if you are in washington d.c., vmaybevisiting her aunt or justa friend the epic that wanted to know about every single person she made. and, are a gun owner looked out you are going to top of the list. for simply exercising your

second amendment right you on arget list. never forget the federal government got this information without any process. note warrant and frankly no notification. the bank did not tell the customer we are handling this information over to the fbi the most powerful l world. these fbi agents, they all said this was wrong. in fact sent to the information back to fbi headquarters in d.c. that is how our investigation began.e continue to investigate but since that we'vl and the financial surveillance wrote broader there is a profiles on the american people. the profiles up based on conduct but beliefs if you have the wrong political 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 anluent security work 6650 largest companies in the world. these companies have to do over billion dollars ofen year. they represent two thirds of the gross domestic product of the united states economy. they worked through a■z controld access world. but that on the screen right what are they sharing in the secret portal? we are not exactly sure because it is secret. but we do know they share formation show reports of weather reports we gotald a liaison information ror said this, any americaho o opposes minney americanho opposes firearm legislation easing of restrictis and covid mandates as someone they should be watching 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 areding to the fbi. the government should get your data. get your financial data. it actually gets wse. e federal government and banks 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 too. because everybody knows if you want a secure border you oppose covered lockdowns then you probablyan rd your bible and alf that makes you an extremist. literally that is the logic to see display from the information we have been altogether investi. now remember these are also the same folks to a couple of years ago told us of your parent

showing up at a schoo terrorist. if you're pro-life catholic you are an extremist and now if you opposed lockdown, vaccine wheegistration you are in the category as well. this is scary where things are headed. see what's happening with big banks and big government relative to your financial data. all of this being done with no process. notehe customer the banks are supposed to serve. big government is not supposed use big tech to censor americans big government sho be were with big banks to target americans for behavior that is legal and constitutional. that is the concern. that 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■5 hearing which is george hill. and what the purpose of this hearing is. at the end of the d hearing is o minimize what happened on generally six and the lawful prosecution of iivhat practice. 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 whocuted for january 6 did not engage in criminal conduct.■

that is the logic of what he is saying how we have come so low me.this house is frightening to what people will do to try to minimize the work of those individuals who came to this capitol on january 6. this entire republicany was laud based on the testimony of so-called whistleblower. transcribed last year. climb the fbi was using bank of america to survey americans■b. all americans? not all americans. but everyonewho owns a firearm? who owns a firearm.not e 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 seehe picture. until half the story you are not telling the truth. the fbi asked tan information bt individuals who fit three categories. people who came and t here on january 6. that they purchased a firearm in the last six months and, that is key, not to work, and they plan to come back for the inauguration 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

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 wer. he had dmv do it we know it dmv's are? terrorists. individuals engaged in domestic violence. that happens. when its people who fit your political agenda they are not criminals anymore they are patriots? they are victims? they are not, they are criminals. and a jury of their peers and found them. so many of them have been prosecuted in our court of 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 here today because in the same way their start witness on their impeachment alexander smirnov,emember him was her key witness in the hunter biden impeachment probe until we found out that everything you said was made up russia. we do not know what is going to happen with george hill but we can pretty much guess based on the track record. but i want to thank our witnesses for being here. we don't always agree but we thm for their willingness to come and give their thoughts and be questioned by membe 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 so that we can 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 we are in today to protect all of us in this building. the staff, architects of the■ú capitol, and members of congress to the young people who were here experience here today is nothing compared to what those officers went through. and while those of us on the dais were being protected and insecure locations, some of us fearing for our lives. many of us on both sides of the

aisle fearing for their life on that day. they have quickly forgotten mar-a-lago. i want to thank you because you saw it all because you are out there. you did not hide, you read them towards 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 occ day. run. run. noises]

[inaudible]c( [inaudible] stay in their body. if you hear me i am here. that is a battle scene. that is what that is. 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 fights, and that insurrection, those of staff were seeking shelter.

and unfortunately, you■ have 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 are still seeking shelter from the truth that they want to protect not just themselves but their political careers. their jobs. they are hiding behind allies for that. we knowby the videos and footagt the nearly 1000 convictions obtained against those rioters across an array of jurisdictions. conviction from career prosecutors, not political hacks with juries of americans who sae

evidence. evidence that has been obtained by prosecutors and investigators have worked to hold the violent individuals accountable for their horrendous abuse. and so there's a lot else i could 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 psychologist author professor emeritus of the university of toronto priestly taught at harvard university and mcgill university's published more than 100 scientific papers alert podcast through canada straight in europe offers online programs help consumers better understand their personnel as an themselves doctor peterson and target diversity is on the importance of free speech and traditional values is one of the dangers of the banking political opponents ase canada.

mr. brent knight director of innovation governance of the senior research fellow at the centerely in financial regulation include 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 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 compan works to prevent political religious d banking at major financial institutions. the allies for defending freedom is one of the entities targete 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 has researched and published on issues pertaining to financial markets and monetary policy including the bank secrecy act andon that it saves

particulars advocate for reform to individual rights against government overreach and protect personal. mr. michaels a law-enforcement analyst security consultant firearms instructor he proves us or for 20 years as a police officer with the d.c. meop department we welcome our witnesses and thank them for appearing today. we will begin by swearing you in will you please rise and raise your right hand. do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony abouto your knowledge and information and belief so help you god? they let the record show that witnesses have answered in the affirmative. 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 five minutes we will be a little leaning on the 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 this before so you know how this

works. there's a microphone rescue turn that on when you're testifying will start with dto peterson. mr. peterson you recognize for five minutes. thank you again for being here. >> yes, well i like to start byr the 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 political or real or imagined am here to talk about the rd extent and expanding llus■c o corporations in restricting the individual freedom and autonomy upon which the productive genesis stable economy and state are necessarily founded it i will begin my comments therefore in the most general termso shed light on the mounting problem.

they are now 700 million cctv's in c the communist party. the system to which those electronic eyes are attached is the most complete stus of survet 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 the movement of eyes themselves monitored by height resolution and intelligent cameras will soon be sufficient to identify any aware and active party. the demented, naïve and prideful engineers who so enthusiastical system call it after the rogue technology took a dreadfully wrong turn in the famous science-fiction movie terminator

series featuring artificial intelligent rob bent on protecting themselves by destroying humanity. the name also references a well-known chinese phrase reache divine itself. the net of heaven is vast yet misses nothing which aptly describes capabilities of the new state apparatus. the system is integrated with eo- system. which in voluntary participants but the score indicated their compliance with the■tta party. now in full control over access to everything they possess certainly all modern means of electronic gates come up even by walking if you are chinese or a

visitor your access to the world can be reduced to zero if it falls beyond an arbitrary minimum. purposefully to be shut out of all activities that can be virtualized and in a rapidly virtualizing world this gains all activities driving,cú shopping, working, eating, finding shelter. even fraternizing with family and friends as merely being in the presence of for the low social credit score injure own score can be lowered this is opened up thenity for the government to extract slave -like labor from its citizens so burden. by which arrington chinese men and women put increase their score remain part of human society. is is precisely the payment system most desired by the most tyrannical.

not work for me a benefitit angement undertaken by free and sovereign citizens. but the work for me and i will e will be in the late motif of this labor. why is this relevant to people in the west? because the other technology 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 partly because any problem whatsoever that now confronts us can easily be used to justify the increasing reach of the security state. it said stone age people first

confronted with cameras and the result in photographs by modern anthropologists objected to having images captured as they neared the captivity of their souls. the images would leave behind will navigate in virtual space or such close duplicates of our actual selves the capture of our essence is at this point all but guaranteed. we all now have our doppelgängers. we live so much in the virtual■r 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 is increasingly bought and sold by the invisible corporate broker. the still mostly uses toell we so desperately, carelessly and 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 increasing accuracy along for the prediction of what might be most enticing. only to offer us what we want but to determine and shape what we need. governments can and are colluding with corporate pictury our actions but thoughts and words so deviation from the desired end can be mapped, rewarded and punished for of the surveillance state. the scope of optimistic

totalitarian as george orwell could scarcely imagine. they are so rapidly emerging do nothing but increase the dangere scope exceeds anything mere un- augmented humans could imagine while making it searching even perception real world shape our attitudes conduct and personality can be manipulated to the to see our reality for the superstate. an paranoid security abscess in the human government. we are alrea superstate for imme gratification. a big entice to do so. >> could determine be asked to summarize please? do i have my five minutes?

>> you have gone over for. >> the witness could summarize for a little lenient with the time to fix 10 more seconds? not sure. >> increasing ability to monitor not the actual attention patterns and behaviors of its citizens but to predict the persecution of potential crime■k likely. give nothing to hide you have nothing to fear will be the slogan commandeered by those most likely to turn to what was it famous totalitariane crime. nothing compared to what we can and likely will produce now a police so secret will not even be able to grasp their comprehensive and subtleactivit. 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. >> jim jordan, ranking member members of the subcommittee it is an honor to be asked to testify. my name is brian i am a senior research fellow george mason

universityrch focuses on financial regulation is as a tool for broader policy. americans read the story of their lives and their bank accounts. a functioning in a modern economy the trail of records it sexual preferences, health conditions whether they are likely to own a gun or have an abortion. the government can access these records without meaningful due process without the person i ever happen. perhaps surprising efforts to expand financial surveillance are while potentially while meeting they present a pressing threat to americans privacy a glaring weakness in our cause additional order that should be addressed.s federal law enforcement of financial institutions collaborating shared financial records of an unknown number of information is limited, itsix. appeared this was done to identify suspects based on their movement, political religious beliefs a w

firearm. broad categories many of which relate to lawful sensitive and constitutionally protected activity. this was apparently done 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 use is currently ongoing. that 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 enfo tool available? the way 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 tool to track

consequently protected behavior including firearms purchases. advocates of this approach argue it will help prevent violence pretty specially mass shootings. to be sure is the noble aspiration it's unlikely it will, should school by including trust, the ability as well as encouraging a broader escalation of surveillance. as discussed in more detail my written testimony our problem is our financial system is a convenient shop without the protections applied similar information elsewhere. it is too easy for thel$ retrospective person's life that due process. further problem the bankt is op. they're prohibited from the target of a report this prevents most citizens whose information is shared from challenging lawns

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 theseroblems due to a combination technology, bad law bad supreme court precedent. coming under question we cannot and should not rely on t court. as discussed further my written testimony congress should reform a financial surveillance system. especially bank secrecy act restore protection for americans privacy important and i want to emphasize this, this does not mean law enforcement could not access the information.

to due process. to be clear i'm not here to impugn anyone's motives. entions 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 byxbet with liberty nor security. distinguish n subcommittee senior of corporate engagement the financial crimes enforcement network clear withignitor theiro 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 well as other mainstream religious and conservative organizations like having research council, liberty counsel, justice institute. simply put the federal government appears to have swept up christian conservative organizations and i d surveillance of american citizens have no place in a free society. neither does the weaponization of the financial industry peaces groups. our story is one of many demonstrating increased rise and banking. in 2023 bank of america close the long-standing bank account of indigenous advanced ministries a christian nonprofit that helps impoverished widows and children in uganda. the bank closed the account of a local tennessee church that donates to that ministry.e longr

business that indigenous advanced exceeded the bank's risk tolerance.s a logistical nightmare and inflicted real harm on the populations they served. the list goes on j.p. morgan chase the bank arkansas family council for being high at risk. incredible reason for canceling the counter former u.s. senator the nat national committee for religious freedom. wells fargo denied payment processing to the pro-life group because it was a hate these d banking stories and many more head 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 their 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 discriminate wir explaining it to the customer. regardless of whether this prompted by government pressure. there evidence of the two collaborating censored views they don't like. but it's d.o.j. fdic operation chokepoint from the state o nray pending before the supreme court or the fbi and treasury recent revelations from the

each of these incidents show the government can and will weaponize the financial marketplace against americans for political benefit. exacerbate this risk. has expansive authority on day-to-day operation andons. set these benefits the top five banks control over 50% of the market for deposit accounts. thisnly eletes the need to ensure viewpoint neutrality in the provision of financial services. congress should take action for this is an issue we should all attention. we cannot continue to law enforcement, regulars and banks too big to fail run roughshod ond welcome your questions.

>> thank you. you are recognized for five minutes. >> good morning chairman jordan, ranking■v thank you for the opportunity to testify at today's hearing. i'm vice president director for center for monetary and financial alternatives. the views i expressed today in this testimony our mind that she should not be constru a representing any official position of the cato institute. i argue it is long past the time for congress t 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 harmful. typical american is not a terrorist, a criminal or a tax cheat and does not want to live among such individuals. american does however

recognize the constitution protects all americans from unreasonable psecuon privacy. i like to make three main points in support of my position. first congress should not pass the bank secrecy act 1970 is a much broader bill than legislation than its original relationship to the fourth a member of the constitution was controversial enough for several which were split decisions at the u.s. supreme court during further the bill so controversial it spurred congress to pass multiple bills including the right to financial privacy actrs after passing the bank secrecy act. it did so with the explicit intent of countering the very financial surveilla secrecy act itself created but unfortunately 1970 bill was so watered down 20 different 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 doctrine born largely on supreme court decisions on the 1970s excuses this legal status byelyk 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 i believe 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 were taken seriously. second the agency themselves and failed to demonstrate how the bank secrecy act regime pvided a net benefit it is merely created information overload for federal agencies through excessive reporting. instance fl institutions were required to

file over 26 million reports with the federal government on customer even though it has been decades since the first suspicious activity report was filed crimes enforcement network still cannot provide that explains how law enforcement even uses those reports. these two points are just the tip of the iceberg difficult ase virtually no convictions to show for all of the regulating and reporting. depending upon the federal crime data that use the per conviction cost ranges anywhere from $7 million to $178 million. those figures do not include any impl costs of violating citizens rights to financial privacy, banks decisions to terminate or limit customers bao provide financial services to certain 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 sphere free of government involvement, surveillance and control. unless there is a reasonable suspicion someonee or conspireda crime people should generally be free to live their lives on molested an un- surveilled by the goveiterally 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 rule. it is of course healthy to debate what private companies should be allowed to do with the customers. but no america should confuse in that debate with why we have the fourth amendme the fourth amount protects us from unwarranted government persecution. that is why congress should amend the bank secrecy act and restmember rights. thank you and i welcome any

questions. >> thank you. we now go for five >> mr. chairman and members of the committee thank you for inviting me here t questions regarding the events that occurred at the nicest capitol ungenerous six, 2021. i would like to tell you that i've forgotten some of the events of that date or that my recollection is not as clear as it once was. but tt w truth. the events of january 6 are as vivid to me now as when they occurred over three years ago. while the they have healed the emotional scars remain. we government of laws, not of men. i spent nearly two decades as a law enforcement officer trying to enforce the law. my career began and the united capitol police officer and ended when called upon as a metropolitan

police officer to protect the capitol against a mob of peoplea dangerous encounters with violent criminals, that experience was unlike anything i . i am here to tell you what happened to me on that day what i sawng to fellow officers. as for me i was violently grab, restrain, beaten, tased, all country. i was at risk of being stripped of and killed with my own a firearm as i heard chance of kilkill him with his own gun. my body camera video capture the violence of the crowd directed towards me during this very al moments. the portions of the video i have seen remain extremely painful really happened that day theo is extent of violence.

during those moments i remember thinking there is a good chance i could be children they may lose their father. i am here to share my experience i know hundreds of other law icers responded that day they were outnumbered and acted with tremendous bravery to protect the capitol and all who serve our country. those 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 dragged me too safety while i was unconscious and drove me to the emergency room though injured himself. i think thatbo renee who, like so many of us is 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.■d women, newly minted officers and those nearly retired who responded to the call of service that day in defense ofon. those who were still the front lines each and every day to make our city safe and protect our institutions of government. noty opinion or analysis or advocate for some action but simply to bear witness. i leave whatever actionee to■( be taken to your wisdom. and where we go as a nation to the americanpl i have no agenda or affiliation. i do not come with malice in my heart but only a deep love of this country, which i know is shared b both young and old. both republican and democrat. and in the process of speaking more importantly listening to each other hopefully we can come together as "one nation" with shared values of wanting

tomorrow to be better than todae that we do each and every day, excuse me, as for the singular purpose of trying to provide a■ better life for our children and our children's children and generations to come. i thank you for your invitation to be here today and t opportunity to speak with you. >> thank you mr. fanone will now proceed to the five-minute roof a genre from california for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman.j mr. fanone i want to express my heartfelt thank you for being here today for those of us who are here in january 6 in no small part oh, you and others a debt of gratitude for the work you did assuring people membe safety. i truly appreciate that in thank

you. >> thank you sir. if this were only about january 6 that would have been my last comment and we would be done. i'm going to ask a series of questis that b 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 china, cuba, russia, iran have from a standpoint of looking for criminals amons. is there anyone here who would raise their hand? i thought not. for all of you, let's ask some questions i will use as my strongman for a moment. with the way the bank■[ stops it administration from choosing to

look at it and gather, strip away cap from the major banks are all the banks all the data of all of the citizens participants in our society. haul it all in so they have a database for whatever they need to do weathers january or somebody driving in town and not paying a parking ticket too. >> , i do not know the bank secrecy i know the implications. >> 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 secre from taking vast amounts, potentially all of it under current law. the only question you'd really t and say is it excessive and with the court side with you?

from a functional standpoint from the out they get? >> i believe that's correct i think is even worse than that in the sense it does not need to be evidence of a crime it cou evidence of another violation. and also because the target of suspicious activity report is prohibited from finding out would be very hard for the person to go to court later and challenge it unless they were the subject potentially of a prosecution of which case you arhe 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 were because by definition when you put the credit card into the gas pump we knowxactly 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 is that correct? >> that's absolutely correct.

th bank and therefore you have no protectable privacy right in them. the court recently has been starting to change their thinking on that. the court to think more through legislation. summarizing we are talking most about bank records those are the ones we have a current example. isn't it true the fbi and other agencies want the same accesoch would include where you are moment by moment and who you talk to? isn't that correct? rpenter case law enforcement tried to pull location data from cell phone towers the court found they have a protectable fourth amendment rights even though 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 practical purposes we need to get a warrant. you don't need it for bank records but isn't it true those records very often provide the same information equally invasive and not just your first amendment but your fourth amendment, reasonable expectation for privacy keeping of your files and personal effects appear. >> i would argue they are more sensitive and provide more accurate information cell phonec towers. >> i for one would close by saying i do not see a problem getting warrants it. do not see a problem getting judg a significant role with pfizer and other cases like that per the question is will we amend thatre the data is being grabbed by the government it is being grabbed pursuant to a reasonable expectation■ a jugf

degrees. mr. chairman think of her hold s i yield back too. >> itm massachusetts. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want tonkestify before the committee. evidence by today's hearing of the so-called subcommittee onoue republican leadership appears to be the proliferation or ironically the weaponization can combined with the efforts to develop evidence of the impeachment of president bidenoe increasingly bizarre at every turn. once upon a time we were told the key to all this was the hunter biden laptop tt was the smoking gun that would solve all of this. until it wasn't.

then it was getting hunter 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 rejected his offer to testify and instead voted to hold him in contempt. the testimony of the top legal expert witnesses. who appear before congress and ■q against president biden lay out the legal theory to justify articles of impeachment. they showed up,resumes but with. they testified under oath, under evidence that would support or suggest such charges. the t■ tru apecial counsel david weiss announced he had indicted chairman jim jordan

star w, former fbi informant alexander smirnoff for making false statements and br investigation of president biden. millions in bribes now smirnoff, some of you may not remember chairman jordan described as the most corroborating they have." counsel for lying and fabricating evidence. the pathetic s republicans and put on so far. that assessment is probably correct.

now thened to obscure the facts conservative americans baseless financial by the federal government. in statements made by several summerhouse members and downplaying the attacks that officer's capitol complex as que acts of vandalism" in a normal tourist visit. that could not be further from the truth as reported by the bipartisan select committee and report our nation endured an insurrection specifically sought to violently block congressional rt election. the sheer scale of the mob violence you saw on the video earlier the lawlessness that was exhibited that day tested the fabric of our democracy with a savagely beating law enforcement

officers like officer fanone amid repeated crowded chance such as hang mike pence, shoot him with his own gun. the republican vice president hang mike pence. that is what makes you an 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 additional investigatory evidence by federal law enforcement authorities to prevent more vi the 2021 presidential inauguration. officer fanone as a former metropolitan police offics of te promulgation of false narratives like this is just a tourist visit or a simple vandalism.■' n affects your ability to do your job?

>> thank you for the question. well, essentially the distortion mischaracterization in or partially played a role of leaving my job as metropolitan police they have inspired fellow americans to threaten me, threaten members of my family simply because of the statements i have made about my experiencen the aftermath. >> i thank you very much my time is expired. [inaudible] thank you for your service >> a gentleman yields backup. >> mr. chairman asking m's consent to enter into the record gerry 72021 the financial

institutions requesting information met edward luria behind 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 priso p to kill a member of congress illegally possessing ammunition. >> of that objection pay. >> a demo from florida is made for five minutes for. mr. chairman. i'm sitting up your listings your testimony is absolutely insane the level of the deep state acting to go after pro o-ou talked the arkansas pro-life group now they cannot even bank at the bank they were banking at politl

beliefs. the information the chairman signed up in the religious attacks and firearms. go to lawo constitutional law the fourth amendment in all basins that have to happen in order for ther information. all of this is happening without the person and knowing it is going on without a warrant, wiouend themselves. in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election. u.s. departmentfasury told major banks to be on the lookout for credit and debit cards for the 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 customers conducting perfectly legal business transactions. it's not like there if criminalg on. these are just typical purchases of firearms. also pass along's bankrolling of

bigotry and overview of the online funding strategies of american hate groups. included among the supposed of hate groups as the allianc 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 around this country. it seems biden ministration vs . that's as far more about the administration that it does about adf. president obama conservative americans coming to guns or religion. given the actions it seems president biden's administration shares the same hostility3merice who proudly cling to our first n secondment rights.

shutdown an event by defense of liberty. donald t they shutdown that event on the basis of a hate policy is so we know they are being weaponize did in the financial industry and again because the bank secrecy act and the shrouding of the way wave regulation happens in the banking context it's hard to know why are these things we just know it's on the rise and a concern. >> one of my colleagues said this is a narrative we are

creating but you've gone through specifics. if you want to highlight specifically some of the instances you are referring offr organizations that are conservative have been debunked by these private entities. >> the highest profile one is a member of the senate samuel brownback's organization for religious freedom. morgan chase canceled that in 2022 and gave very different reasth next year as scrutiny mounted. never the reasons held any weight and interestingly enough they refer t anti-money laundering, financing tough terrorism, a concept called politically exposed persons. all of these are within the nk regulations and are used as tools ultimately to suppress people because of their views. again the secrecy and shrouding of the reasons for of the problm

and something congress needs to address. >> are there circumstances the consumers may never know their information was disclosed from the bank to the fbi or government agency? >> this is a huge part of the problem is o clients to a person anytime they go to the bank there is a vague policy the only thing the bank will say is high ris or business type or risk tolerance. every time they go back and ask for an answer or 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 you have any recoe whatsoever to go after the government or the bank? >> it's difficult for consumers in that position because they usuallns.

there are complaints you can file with attorneys general land other avple could pursue but that's part of the reason congress should act to ward off some of the secrecy and confidentiality tha in the banking industry and also stop using reputational risk and the other categories to determine whether they are going >> thank you for being here today. >> i have a unanimous consent request. i ask unanimous consent to enter record of the fbi's situation report to send to financial institutions with respect to an explicit and clear threat on january 16, 2021. >> with respect to the inauguration. >> the gentlewoman from california is recognized. >> i t i want to examine some of the actual requests the fbi sent to financial institutions ithe wakef violence that occurred on purpoy

trying to scare amerins into believe they are being surveilled every single day without any crime prevention or january 14, 2021 the fbi asked financial institutions for information about robert lemke who ■> lemke ultimately pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years in prison for making threatening communications against members of congress and the journalists in connection with and says

threatening electronic messages to approximately 50 victims he targeted because of their losing the 2020 presidential election. he send messages to a new york city congressman's brother threatening him and thethers 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 manhree yean prison for making threats against political officials and journalists relating to the outcome of the 2020 presidentia. >> in your experience is it appropriate for law enforcement to use all wall fully available tools in t■he investigation of somebody who's threatening the family of members of public not only appropriate, it's law enforcement's responsibility to do so. >> would it be a dereliction of duty if you didn't use every lawfully available t from happening or to solve a crime

that has already happened? >> yes ma'am i believe so. >> thank you. the data fromd information about samuel fisher who was photographed on the steps of the u.s. capital and is suspected of unlawfully entering federal property o■n january 6th, 2021. the fbi noted that fisher may also have been, quote, manufacturing trafficking guns d civil war. additionally, he is racially quote, currently preparing enforcement action and it's interested in financial informatiofisher's involvement s trafficking and i would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the e-mail from fbi employee to financial institutions aboatter into the record. >> without objection. >> why am i and law enforcement agencies seek financial information in cases of arms

trafficking? >> outside of the obvious potential ip purchases made would provide evidence that in fact the weapons were purchased by a specific individual. my understanding is within these particular requests it was the fbi seeking voluntary)t compliae from a number of banking institutions in which there ask was very specific int they were looking for individuals who were present on january 6th which i think we all can agree was an incredibly violent enforcement officers. those individuals that also had purchased firearms in the past six months and were at least evidence to plan on returning to the nation's capital january 20th. >> so they were not just looking for people based on their

beliefs but there were different criteria that all had to be present to do thisat correct? >> that's my understanding. >> samuel fisher by the way was arrested the next day and when he was arres ammunition and several weapons including an illegally modified ar 15 rifle and machetes in t upper east side apartment and his car. fisher by the way he wrote after the capital riot, quote, seeing cops run was the coolest thing i've ever seen in my life, and of quote and i would ask unanimous consent the article into the record. this is a clearmp people committing criminal acts that my colleagues across the aisle are claiming are the innocent victims of surveillanc[ but in reality of the fbi was doing their jobs. they were working to prevent

threats to the inauguration and hold januaryth 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 dispel these overly broad fear mongering 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 ask the baa customer purchases a gun? >> thanks know if you purchase a gun per se butan records they are not perfect but for almost everything. >> it's almost like a backdoor registration, right? >> one of theay3gllenges is highly sensitive information can be accessed through financial

records that are otherwise are constitutionally protected. >> do you think this is going to stop with conservatives? history tells us the cancel culte, the survenctate, whatever you want to call it, they never are satisfied with just it always expands and i will give you an example. a few ago, senator feinstein from the great state of california the folks in san e feinstein elementary school, they took her name off the school because they found she said to something like 40 years ago that the can 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 because we respect the 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? he reason i prefaced my remarks with nonpartisanship is the danger posed by this increasing ability of governments andarge corporations to collude threatens everyone's freedom equally and it could well be that at the moment, and i think this is the case the republicans here are trying t make is the people in the sights of that collision tend to have more conservative leanings but that will shift in a moment whenever the political tides shift and we are concentrating in this hearing a fair bit on the events of january 6th, veryyr partisan issue that produces a very intense partisan divide. we are not addressing the fundamental issue h directly which is our new technology enables a mode of surveillance that is so intense that no one will escape its purview regardless of their political views.

>> it also seems to me there seems to be a pattern emerging. i want to take you back to when we first started getting in with this issue with t memorandum from the department of justice 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 thettorney general. i asked a simple question i said you make that opening statement as the basis for why you need this memorandum to go after moms and dads showing up at the school board meetings, what was that first sentence based on and he said it was based on the national school board association the memorandum they put out and 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 terrorist group. that 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. particularly the pattern that makes you start to wonder. >> the used the report on the radical traditional catholics to target them as well in the interim between the moms for liberty a ptaghts groups and what's going on today. i think it's very alarming that the government uses these discredited arbiters of truth who are just promoting

their own political agenda to t about anything, let alone sending them to financial institutions as some kind of financial sull.n 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 b got targeted when all the protests were happening around the country and i disagree with a lot of things that happened that su going after liberals either. that is the scary thing. that activity should be protected. second, the right to privacy should be protected but unfortunately now it's gotten to part other side. the gentlelady from florida is

recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman. for nearly 20 years i 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 a bipartisan spending bill that 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 less funding for state and local law enforcement agencies and morex crimina on the streets and neighborhoods. it means funding for the key law enforcement tools that keeps online predators away fro children. those actions sure don't back the blue and now today republicans want to target law enforcement yet again.ly 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 to prosecute the criminals that attempted to stop the legitimate constitutional transfer of power in congress. these are the tools that help hold to account the people who try to overthrow a presidential election. officer, thank y s much for repeatedly testifying about your experiences. i'm sure it isn't easy to relieve these dramatic m explaie that police officers were subjected to on january 6th? >> i like many other officers from the department self depled that day and that i

heard the calls coming out from officers who were already deployed at the capitol complex and took it upon myselfr assistance. when i arrived at the capital, i made my way to a specific distress call coming from officers that were defending the tunnel against a large group of violent rioters they were trying to gain access. >> thank you. >> when i entered tunnel, i observed about 40 or 50 dc police officers and a few u.s. capitol police officers attempting to hold back the violent mob. the officers were being assaulted with a variety of different weapons. everything from metal polls, two by fours, aluminum baseball

bats. batons and other police equipmenth been stripped from police officers themselves were then used against officers. >> thank you. i can get some other items in. the video we earlier was disturbing and a video i don't have time to show. you can hear words being yelled at police the capital and some died in the insurrection? >> ons unrelated to the capital riot. that being said think decent

people would understand that if it were not for his participation, brian would be here with us today. i understand i think bette than most the posttraumatic stress that my participation and then and during the mischaracterization of what i experienced from people in positions of power many of whom were here at the capital themselves. i what brought many officers to taking their own■

lives and i attribute their actions to their participation of the u.s. capital on january 6th. >> thank you mr. chairman, once i ask that you stop trivializing the violence assault. the entire world so that and please do not cavalierly discard law enforcement tools to prevent the next january 6 the necessity of making the tools will law enforcement is even more imperative considering all but promises yet another assault, violence or otherwise and i

kind of threats the fbi tried to prevent leading up inauguration that day with threats to murder members of congress and started shooting at the inauguration. the exact type of threats fbi is responsible for investigating and i quote information was received regarding a video posted on a webs senators and congress members the poster of the video was identified via 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 consien with the constitution and i welcome the gentlelady from new york. >> thank you for your testimony today. amalgamated at the far left politicians pushed for the creation of an unconstitutional merchant category to be assigned to firearms retailers to identify, quote, suspect purchases and report patterns to law

enforcement. clear infringementk door to a gun registry. in fact failed new yorky mentioned the importance of labeling gun and ammunition sales to indicate in imminent crime. since then as someave banned the code while states like california mandated. this is why i introduced therivt with congressman barr and hudson to put a stop to the code and protect law-abiding americans from this infring■fg 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 wherels who are potentially engaged in the activity because it's important to know they don't tell you what people by.

will brnment 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 dangeroushings about this financial database, the financial records is that they are retrospective. would be effective the stated goal for a host of reasons i could get into if you want. problem is you won't know what someone buys. the door expecting banks to correctly identify what is a hallmark of the violence. you're expecting them to report it promptly, law enforcement to 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 to believe it would because there is such a shortrame, 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 view anything. it's hard to differentiate from legitimate activity. rather look at the cases and then backwards so we don't know how many false positives there will be. the recent report methodology it's very, very broad and overinclusive and it o 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■, york ao stand up for a constitutional rights and understand this is in anan infringement on our nstitutional rights. why is my bill so important? >> the efforts to restrict the collection the bank level are the best option we have currently because under current law, once the bank has thatñthe data so preventing the collection at the bank level was the first best option. >> thank you very much. i yield back. the gentleman from texas is recognized.

>> thank you mr. chairman. i just want to say to the officer, i was on the january 6. 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■] undermine what you actually did that day. people all across 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. he was assaulting in his name, carrying banners, hanging flags and screaming their loyalty to him. it was obvious that only president could so 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 rease observer that he was danger

even as the mob carrying trump banners were beating cops and breaching parameters the president sent a tweet attacking his vice president predictably unr circumstances members seemed to interpret this as a further inspiration to lawlessness and violence. that was the senate republican leader mitchk, mcconnell. they are trying to expand the scope of what fbi was trying to do. it wasn't to evade bank recordse fourth amendment against search and seizure. i've been a practitioner of ther

someone with a graduate degree, but a prosecutor and investigator and you use the tools you have to prevent crimes 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 six months before the inauguration and make plans to come back to attempt to again stop the free and fair election of our government. this is getting ridiculous.

use all the violencen■o# 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. bad you have that many of us here do not, do you know what they embraced and if you do, how do you know that? >> i can't speak to every individual that that day. i didn't have an opportunity. i was fighting for my life. that being said i was present at a num 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 mi 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 my questioning by reciting the fourth amendment because i think the other s somf

the terms. the right of the people to be 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 you tell us how the bank 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 institution has the information the government has it so this in the early court challenges and cases that went to the supreme court in that we

effectively have a law that is a blank check for the government or law enforcement to obtain all of the information without a warrant. they do not he show probable cause. >> they have to go to the bank. it seems to me these acts are not jt of date but outside of the constitution. mr. knight, you began your characterizing some of the things the government could no or infer about you based on how you spend your money.÷x you elae 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 work and figure out pexual orientation and a high degree of accuracy and guessing what your interests ar0■e what your relign is, what political beliefs you n 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 bet 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 and brace artificial intelligence and facial recognition and massive computer surveillance and cameras on every street corner so we can all be safer? >> if the emerging collusion between government and gigantic corporations c there won't be anything you do that can't be used against you and will be used against you in very short order and at the concerns expressed about the local 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 sphere entirely. 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 it is genuinely often motivated by the claim that that is forestalling an immediate proximal threat. for engaging in a tremendous long-term engagement and it should be perceived as dangerous to those on the left th are committed because it will be those that are first identified by such systems. is it true that you have a phd? >> yes. why did canada decided that you needed more information? can you tell us about that?

transcript was submitted as evidenceha 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-p deemed sufficient with regards to my professional confidence to serve as a 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. as evidencethat your education t [inaudible] >> well done. the gentleman yields back into the gentleman from virginia is recognized.

>> i of course represent george mason university where you were located and i had ast for you. the chair recently said people who were being imprisoned for crimes committed during january 6th are hostages. do you agree yes or no that the people that have been arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced are serving those sentences are hostages? >> i have not studied that. my inial is no. and if i can elaborate, i've not read all the transcripts of all the convictions -- >> thank you. i find it interesting you can opine a

infringements and warrants but you haven't looked at the people hostages or not. thank you for that equivocation. maybe you don't want to equivocate. there were peaceful citizens of tir 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 account was brutal and violent and involved a number of individuals restraining and beating me and one individual

subjecting me to electro shock on my the while resulting in injuries i sustained as a traumatic brain injury and heart attack. so among other things, law enforcement running roughshodent and second amendment rights. i had at the end of depression thiolently seizing bibles on good christians who are simply trying to exercise their faith because we were targeting them. is that what happened on januar? >> i had responded to the capital for no other purpose

than to assist fellow officers who were calling out for help. i didn't care about the capital building and i didn't care about other members of congress. i came here because cops needed help. by the way because we've heard enforcement? in those 20 years were you made aware of any effort by the fbi or law enforcement in general to survey? twenty years of experience have you ever experienced what 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■e you how much- i was on the floor, i heard it and a soul it. i cannot imagine what you've go were still living through ptsd. we are still living through ptsd. i can only imagine, and you are. no matter what the attempts may be some to minimize, dish what happened, i assure you there are a number of us who will continue to fight to make sure the american people know what happened and that we won't equivocate about criminals who are justifiably in jail are not hostages, they are

criminals. a violent attempt to prevent the free exercise of an election being counted here in■ the capital. i yield back. >> thank you, chairman 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 infringed than the right to privacy. my colleague 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 privacy or

complete secrecy, reasonable expectation of privacy is guarded by due process, wagñrra. you might not know many of the members of the committee are a part of something really rare congress, which is a nonpartisan view. we've got divisions that don't break 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 greement on how to reform the act and of the foreign intelligence act works pretty well. it's the domesticlance act. the fourth amendment guards it

and says you're supposed to get warrants and we are covering a giant hole not about january 6th but the bank secrecy act, things that are being abused, against the citizens of the country. i don't have all the same safeguards in canada and doctor peterson, you'veof not having the safeguards that we do in this country. i wonder if you could elaborate on how consequential it is to safeguas we■ de here on privacy and speech. >> i know that my colleagues on the psychological front and medical front are increasingly frightened of me making in any form whatsoever because they usually have the mid-level bureatthe lack of first amendmet 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 upls reflecting that protection that will make even the suspicion that a crime may be committed punishable. that is pending. >> these are dangerous ideas and i appreciate that you highlighted how china is using it and there■m are people pushig for a central bank currency that at the core is a violation of privacy and the one ring to rule them all, a mas of power. a lot of that you highlighted with the csequences secrecy act. a couple of you highlighted the cost-benefit ratio0■0.

we have the stated goal of saonsequences as people blur the distinction not being able to access information or being able to access it subject to due process. there is no reason to believe that convictions obtained would be impossible without getti a warrant. we also have to worry about the fact that information is being collected and if you are worried about your political opponents t this available to them? >> you mentioned the third-party doctrine and frankly, i am a sts

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 crowd yelled to him why didn't you do anything and here he is the dictator of the soviet union everyone knowing the kind of power he could yield anho said that. and everyone got quiet and he let it stay quiet for a long time and he said that's because you know the coercive power of the state. the police state powers that have existed in previous areas of history are minor compared■dg when you link that to the unmitigated third-party doctrine, can you lay out for us what is at stake? >> it literally means any time you engage in any kind of a commercial transaction you are

effectively saying i don't have due rather insane in terms of the concept completely on its head that we all have due process. >> so we have a burden to produc legislation that does reclaim the freedom surrendered and i hope we continue to rk bi. i have a unanimous consent enti; report emboldened and aftermath of the capital breach that sites online rhetoric regarding the some calling for unspecified justice for the january 6th shooting by law enforcement of an individual at the capital on the 19th of january according to the open source reporting.

>> the gentleman from calornia,f recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman. if any of you need a break just let us know. we've probably a half-hour to go 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 weeksbecause e question mostly by private sector businesses and the like and then the government accessing that information. it a and something we should be focusing on. unfortunately what has happened in the hearing is we've taken the january 6th issue, the violence, the harm tthe

officer and others and morphed into a question. that is unfortunate. here we are using this hearing to somehow degrade the the ultimate effort to destroy our democracy. a coupled questions. do you have the number that have been charged and f guilty? >> correct. >> the number is i think over

1100? >> that's my■8■4 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 violence? is that reasonable for the government toa do? >> i not only think it is reasonable, i think it is a requirement. >> do any of you disagree that it would be reasonable to investigate those who were

involved and threats that there might be future violence, is thom others should do? >> i would disagree to some degree. it depends on how you do it because -- >> point well made. at the notion of continuing the investigation based upon information received as result of the investigation of those that were involved in the insurrection and the would be reasonable so now we get down to 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

we need to 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■y■ thaty and i think that i agree you may not think it is important to protect us, but we thank you for ■. so. the reality is it was an extraordinary event in america's history. it was the single largest assault on police ever in the history of this nation. based upon that, where do we would, put all of that aside and

f 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 the inaugural. why is it that in america today we have the need for a new 7-foot high fence around the capital on the day the president arriveto give state 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 us, i would appreciate it and i think the country would also thank you mr. we have been focusing on how technological platforms and advaement further fuels the weaponization at least that was the intention on this side of theí[ aisle. we focused 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 revelatioe

informed to deploy aiog biased model whichhethe understatement of the year and the report documented inat to assist on these its. you noted that we are limited to speak on whas 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 records. based on what we know so far about the coordination between the financial sector and the federal 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 reasons one to the extent it 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 's going to startcting for t may not be appropriate. there is a concern that does exist that ai tends to be opaque and it's opaque enough

if the 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 be cautious and i wouly one distinction between this and maybe some other areas is here we are talking about feeding information to the government so there are constitutional implications here that don't exist that doesn't mean we shouldn't be cauti what could af secrecy achieved by displacing human action with aai do to further erode our

basic guarantees of privacy? what's up first i would caution6 banks and financial institutions of using technology get increasing rate for very long time. still the bigger problem is thed 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 thee going to get. brian is right going to make it more efficient and less clock costly it. but again the principal the fourth amendment is key here for a quick thank you i appreciate with audio back. accidentally it yields back the gentle lady from california is recognized or texas i'm sorry. >> the lady here's a huge

difference. thank you. thank you, mr. chairman and thank you to all the witnesses who are here this morning. in thery 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. within hours it was overrunby pn terrorists and academic or defi terrified myself with him it was terrified republican this ises sees both not a partisan issue. some of my colleagues have forgotten the violence and together. we have heard some of the comments they think they should be 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, gas masks. were my colleagues and i on the floor were hiding between seats, barricading doors and some of us calling their familiesms■!p7 lo. they were pounding at the door trying to get in where is nancy, hang mike appends, where is nancy? where's nancy? they set up galas to keep them from coming on the intenon clean the election and kill the democratic elected leaders they believed stood in their way. anyone who claims this was not a terrorist attack play violent insurrection was simply not facing reality as our witnessese

lying. even in california they were called at lying. despite that h today more myths and misleading information given to the american people. what officer thank you for for e courage to come and testify today and to remind us all about the truth of that some colleagues wrapped themselves in banner flexor social media over those who watch over the democracy brown never forget what i saw and felt that day. without your sacrifice and some day or were injured that day of sending the constitution and all and was foreign and domestic. officer f. the compass safe in the capulet outside you are facing staggering odds but reports indicate the west side o the crowd outnumbered officers 58 --

one. what officer requested back up at least 17 times in 78 did you and your colleagues ever gets the sense we were defending democracy that day? >> that is not anything, those thoughts never crossed my mind. again, like i said i respond to capitol heating distress calls coming from fellow officers. fighting i was more concerned with my own survival and that of my colleagues totality but that they would later come to represent. >> as you reflect now7r do you e 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. >> tha recorded members of their experiences we know many members of congress have struggled with trauma from that day. we know that you it may bring a lot of emotion but is it possible for you to share with us what you have dealt with personally as the aftereffects of that day? >> assure, initially 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 caern though it's to say i have experienced a few things. i had never been -- i had lost

all control of my own survival in those momen. it was only because of a few individuals in the crowd and the efforts of law enforcement that i wasbl that. until that level of vulnerability for me as an officer was more than i could deal with.in the aftermath thers criticism -- internal criticism 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 and members of my family.

and in a way i think it's impossible for me too fully resolve 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 happene 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 understood what happened in the situation and be of the customer who is making purchases in a certain day time and i want the name of the firearm at any time. if they're going to do that you think they need to get a warrant first? well yes.k they should? >> do you think they need to get

a warrant to do that? >> yes progress since her nights? >> esp. >> mr. peterson? >> yes. mr. fanone. to repeat the question? works of the government owes t 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 government to get that information, should there be a #w■swhat's my experience i was sought voluntary compliance. it's less paperwork. that being saidf 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 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 just asked me for all of your purchases on a certain dayndought 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 e saw so much of particularly with the t because i see it coming. i see it coming here and it

frightens me. i want you to talk about what took place in canada and if it you? >> there is essentially a working-class protest against e length of the covered lockdowns. one consequence of that was the canadians who participated even by donating to the prote and by donating small amounts to the protest had their bank accounts seized and consequence of a collusion between the banks and the government. it was extrajudicial that was deemed unconstitutional despite the fact we don't have strong c. so this happened. the government is currently at maneuvering and candidates make the of such collusion a certainty across multiple actual and potential domas of particularly in relationship to

government defined hate. this is absolut facilitated by s in technology we talked about today. >> we know it is coming we have 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 canada is the very thing the government is saying to banks winning to look at this as well. 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 wk before you go get it? >> jump right in. >> want to clarify one part of my answer. to the second questn 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. 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 a in thei 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 ranking member. >> thank you very i thought it was very telling

mr. knight said yes g bank records would be inappropriate except in a criminal investigation. was involved in a criminaloing investigation. >> it's not necessary to have a warrant, procedure you don't always need a warrant when you have a voluntary authorization. everyone who opens a bank account is told in the open their bankwm account information bait may be disclosed to law enforcement. now if you want to change that rule in the consumer protection lawshan we need to do that. but until that they have a reasonable expectation law enforcement may disclose that information because once you are banking with the b institution that information in that record belongs to the banking institution. it is 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 affirmatdie 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 law presently the banks have a possession and ownership of that information. now, the other thing you have talked about is are we worried about that that this is only going to happen to on conservatives? no i am also concerned if thei . i am concerned with that. and i do understand this is something law enforcement does what they do.o be i find it very interesting that my colleagues one of our ours and is giving

his opinion as a law-enforcement officer. was or something else you wanted to add? >> is in the context of this particular investigation, one of the reasons why i believe the fbi would have compliance as opposed to applying for a warrant is the sheer magnitude of the events. you had literally thousands of people who participated on the attack on the capitol and generous sixth. and an abundance of caution and really the responsibility of the fbi is investigating agencies is to ensure that violence does not occur again at our inauguration which was only about two weeks r that. and so i think it is wholly appropriate as you just said it's completely within our capabilities as law enforcement agencies to seek voluntary

compliance from these institutions to investigate cral acts. >> thank you so there is an imminent threat on the american people, individuals who said they were going to come back and finish the job they had started on generous sixth to try and stop the placement of joe biden as president of the united states. no we could have hearings on. you have not sat down with me at any point in time like we do what other committees and talk about on? you came to my office one time and we had a discussion i gave you a liste a hearing on you completely ignored me and that. your team does not give up testimony until the very last you do not even lettuce of the subjects of hearing sometimes i

find out about what we are going to -- what a hearing is goingo operating as a fair deal in this so don't try that here in front of everybody. what i am concerned about whatas get reelected because on november 92023 in the univision interview he said if happen to be president and i see somebody doing well feeding meat very badly i say go down and indict them they would be out of business they be out ofhe election. on november 11 and 2023 at a veterans day rally i cannot believe he is at a veterans day rally after what he says of those of our men and women in uniform he said we pledge to you it will root out the communist marxist fascist and radical leftist thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country. that lie, steal, cheat on elections. he seems to be a threat to the first, the fourth, whole bunch of amendments are not going to try to have an hearing on him in

this weaponization of the federal■ernment which we know donald trump is going to use for his own dictatorial narcissistig presidency failing. >> are gentle at it yields back the judgment from north dakota's recognizeds a carjacking outside of a 711 in downtown washington deceived the cop calls the bank of america says i need every person in your bank's ever bought a gun anytime anywhere. it's an ongoing criminal investigation. everything everywhere all at movie it's not the standard for for the moment warrant. i think this is about is it important to have a hearing as we can have it they're doing it to members of congress and numbers of congress staff, reporters engaging in all the semester was going on by the supreme court agrees with me will get into that a little bit. the bank of america provided the fbi list of people who made financial transactions

with bank of america card in washington d.c. between generally fit and generally seventh 2021 the practice was sweeping thousands of americans without probable cause for in a search for specific suspect inconsistent with specific requirement of the fourth amendment and the entire criminal justice system. considering how many americans use bank of america credit or debit cards this must've included thousands of people. this was almost certain included members of congress, their staff constitutionally mandated functions as well as reporters who are engaged in first amendment perspective activity. countless other individuals were swept into the surveillance without probable cause. phyllis include a people had a history of purchasing a firearm at any time which is a we likely violation of first, second, fourth amendment. the fact americans that is handed over to the feds on a fishinbanking industry because r customers were present in a particular region or purchase

that constitutes item is acceptab any argument the financial information is subject to third party doctrine and therefore exception to the fourth amendment. i've been arguing this foryears. third-party exception in the modern economy threatens to make the fourth the moment irrelevant. the fourth amendment is o lenses, drones, listening devices, tracking devices the fourth amendment is proved to be incredibly resilient this is the place where congress has to act. in the supreme court seems to agree that concern based on. the majority the cell site information information is quote detailed encyclopedic effortlessness he transaction data that is released urinate less detailed in relation to fourth the memo legal analysis? >> i don't believe. >> can you imagine any judge in the country who would make a

probable cause find to authorize a service search wrant for all this detailed financial information on this many people with the side effects? >> nova. >> no. also similarities with the is a federal court found an geo- moji offense warrants our ortho practice or law enforcement six location data on any device within a specific time and geographic region where crime took place. cement to obtain the data based solely on information a suspect possess the cell phone while in the committed. be on the court's concern with probable cause that highlighted no judicial review whatsoever was attained at law enforcement has unchecked discretio to izsive data. mr. michel are the same factors that was turned over to the federal government in this case? >> yes.

>> yes. >> mr. knight? >> owns were> my colleagues across the aisle have raised many concerns abo broad violation of privacy and financial technological institutions and tripping private user data revealing to government authority factoring energy and commerce during debate on comprehensive amendments to prohibit the collection of geolocation data geolocation data onfacilities sd parenthood that the transfer of that■. data to law enforcement r government authorities. we note the cdc was collecting data to see if people were going to church during q, church during quarantine. this conversation, how we deal with this is theundamental question we have to answer as we move forward we can talk about generally six the event we can talk about all of that. thousands of innocent to bass pn virginia in the two days before and after january 6 it does not

matter how bad you think the event was or where i ever, you t warrant on someone's exercising their constitutional right. if you can't get a warrant for somebody to do it then we have to create a situation where banks and large corporations or anybody else or third-party data brokers by the allowed to sell that information and law enforcement is allowed to obtain it without getting eight warrant this is a fundamental question it's a perfect place to have it it is exactly what happened in this case without a yield back frequent attention but yields back the gentleman from new york is recognized. >>hank y, chairman to follow on with my colleague from north dakota notion subpoenas are not sufficient to get information and every be obtaina search warrant has of course been ripped speedily rejected by the supreme court over and over and hearing, the reason why mr.k

about january 6 was because i understand this hearing was spurred on by an fbi whistleblower who is not here testifying today. information about alleged wrongdoing is not here to stand in front of us to testify under oath, to be questioned by me both sides. mr. knight i want to ask you a hypothetical. let's say there is a riot in an attack on our democracy on a particular day. we will just call j+anuary 6 for the purpose of this hypothetical. what say the fbi has information that an individual was near the. and let's say the fbi had evidence that individual purchase a firearm on the past six months. and, what say the fbi had evidence that same person

planned to return two weeks later to interfere with another democratic process involving the president of the united stas. as it actually your testimony here today to say that it is a violation of the fourth a memo r fbi to seek bank records for that individual? >> mass are clever in question? what sure. >> based upon public information i have they did not know on an individualized basis people were planning to return to cause violence. i think that is a distinction it's worth mentioning. >> i agree with you that someone hypothetical. they knew they're going to return pricks you said something evidence they're coming back to interfere. >> let's just say that. do you think the fourth amendment prohibits the fbi from getting bank records for that individual if ty know they are going to commit violence? >> is an easy warrant to get.

eight warrant i think a be easy warrant to go for a you are notd to get a warrant for bank records? >> i am saying you should have to get a warrant for banko not e the supreme court which is upheld the constitutionality of the bank secrecy act progress if you like stop us supreme court precedents and t b carpenter isl recent case points to some very strong questions about the constitutionality of ban secrecy act. i've written something about it. >> by the way i agree but carpenter also demonstrates the supreme court is evo,lving on te fourth amendment and there is no question and i will tell as a former prosecutor if i had that predication i would fire off a subpoena to that bank every single day 10 of 10 times for. >> respectfully. >> i have to move on i have to it is absolutely absurd we are sitting here trying to maken

amendment is being violated when there is specific reasonable suspicion about every individual whose bank records were obtained bought a gun they were at the insurrection and they were going to come back. the fact of the matter is, we are once again here on a completely sham■3 rationale. there was no first amendment or fourth mm violation on generally six. this is simply another effort to whitewash what happened on january 6. one of the members of the committee convicted of crimes hostages while their aua now under captivity of a terrorist organization we are supposed to equate the people sitting in jail who rioted and

attacked this capitol we are supposed to equate them with the hostages mr. chairman you continually say it used to be both the parties agreed with the first amendment. it did not used to be, it is it remains the case we all agreed the first amendments. but the p is the first amendment is not absolute. it does not protect any single thing anyone says there are limits and that is important what this committee has been trying to do for the last year end a half is to chill theoing n social media and otherwise out there so misinformation and and elon musk social platformt and every other social platform so they it, the republicans can benefit from it in

election. that is why this committee exists. we have gotten no evidence to support any of these allegations are quick to chair it recognize south carolina. yield to the cht such time. >> i appreciate that. i think the gentleman from new york said we are trying to chill the federal government? i don't know of its ever been said that weights the government trying to chill americans rights. i have never seen anything. you know who was supposed to have the fbi and the bank of america did this thing when they asked for this information june ■wh it? three fbi agents the guys on the case george hill, steven jensen, d to the committee it was wrong guess who will said it was wrong, chris wray said this, we ral this information to avoid even the appearance of any overreach that even the fbi who systematically violated americans to save yourremist if

you are a parent going to school board many guard terrors. even the fbi says this is ridiculous and they pullerfd ba. three agents testified. and somehow -- the government chills american speech when they pressured big tech to that his chilling speech we have seen it first doctor peterson seen in his own country and now it's coming here, tha what we are concerned about i yield back to the gentleman thank you for yielding. >> thank you chairman i would echo that. i'm glad thomas massie started o that's really why we are here while the other side wants to relitigate j6 the title of the hearing is about surveilf american citizens this is deeply troubling if you are a catholic occurs by your child's education you are a prime suspect under some sort of weird rubric in the operation. surveillance

i think the supreme court and looking at this on a concurring opinion financial transactions can reveal much about person's activities associated and beliefs. but overnment intrusion it's acute without the judicial process. here? and at what point or how to get the point were big banks and freely hand over the information to the federal government? >> the biggest concern from our perspective is a systemic risk within the banking industry. that's really a product of oversight and pervasive regulatory authority bank supervisors have over banks pretty think of the top five

banks you see there's a concenat power in the banking industry a few banks heavily regulated. it's around bank supervision the reason why people are in the bank is a huge problem at censorship ship is real in the financial industry >> who would you think are the biggest victims of the surveillance operation? >> it's american citizens and it is a biparn issue. even some of the democrats on this chamber sent letters to the big bang talk but do you risking were talking of the same thing. arab americans of muslim americans including who the religious donations and donations tties a bipartisan issue we should all be concerned about it and try to work together for solutions roberson one 100% agree with you. what you now to the

bsa under the current structure, what is the remedy for americans? there is none. judicial review.i americans cannot protest a bank who is an arm of the government disclosure of their financial transactions to the federal government there's no mechanism for that is there? obviously don't have any knowledge their data was collected to begin with, do they? what some of the scariest things i heard at this hearing was what bank has a debt of the government has the data. >> can you hire private security firm to search someone's house without a warrant? >> don't think so nobody has to have a warrant so what is the difference here? >> it is a big to be fixed. quick she would articulate let me ask the panel this do you think under the current or other laws that it would be given

where we are from a technological standpoint do you think you will be wise to revisit the bsa or other laws to provide that protection for america's privacy, sir? >> there are some concerns expressed earlier about what hap on let's say trump's election with regards to political belief. anything that collusion between government and giant corporation and enables that kind of information gathering will absolutely be is in that way. that is why wes a bipartisan issue. once this capability exists when it's been it magnified it will people at risk will be politically active vocal americans assignment once will remain relatively safe. >> brieflyoshould examine. >> you should absolutely examine it. yes definitely.

>> yes. >> of judgments time is expired. the gently from fortis recognize >> mr. chair have a point of order atou you said steve jensen of the fbi oppose the collection of this information for banks. that is a misrepresentation of his testimony. >> point of order. then gentle lady. [inaudible] >> to release the transcript so we could hear exactly. >> not an appropr that but continues. >> same way you do. same way you interjects i don't think i've raised one point a lm fortis recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman i continue to be stunned by the big government advocas come across and the ones that serve in this very chamber. they're not even hiding it anymore this in the quiet part cy, the control the total disregard for the constitution and the oath many of my colleagues actually all of my colleagues have taken and

violated. it is so disturbing to me. many people know probably evidenced by what is the space of my ipad i detested big government and i detested big tech the two combined are a lethal combination when and fre. because quite frankly we know with big government is to a road innovate america's constitutional rights we are here today because of a blatant fourth amendment violation we're big banks collude with big government to turn overat belono target americans innocent americans because in this country it is still a fact you are innocent until proven guilty despite what everyone is trying to do and flip that around. doctor peterson, it is good to see you again. i could not help but notice your reaction will my c amendment not being absolute once given the opportunity to weigh in in response to that. i cannot help but notice your

reaction. but before i do i'm really glad you have been talking about cial chinese communist party utilizes. i am literally around the corner in a classified briefing right tech and how it is targeting american citizens in fact this very morning i've been inundated in my office with phone calls from tiktok users who have been denied access to the app because they live in my congressional■ó district. until they call my office and demand that i do not take adverse action against the app they cannot use it. talk about big tech directing behavior. i think we are on a very daou time to lay out in the most distinct way possible the dangerous nexus of big tech, bi and financial

institutions that seek to weaponize that information against americans. i know you're more than capable of doing that in two minutes and 30 seconds. >> i don't think people understand the degree to which they are profiled online and to which their virtual representation is known iconic representation of them. nor do they understand they have no r whatsoever to that representation. so for example let's say we turn our information about purchasing habits over the bank will be open a bank account for 30 years ago that was not a big. with ai systems it is a problem so big you cannot imagine it.m d the data online to absolute predictor voting patterns. with 95% accuracy you have nonts were living behind you. they're almost no protections for that. he also asked about the first

amendments. we have weak free-speech protection in canada i can tell you that is not going well. and so the combination of my country the combination of that and the invasive technology we are producing at a rate the imagination. produces a threat to the integrity of sovereign citizenship the likes of which experienced. that is what this committee should be concentrating on it's very interesting to watch it discussion of a particular events, series that that event was. no matter how serious that aut■y was it pales in comparison to the potential severity of the issue we are attempting to point to with regards to her these artificially intelligent systems can do things you can't imagine not only can link they are and they will

abetted by the collusion between large corporations and governments. it is certainly the case the the left especially with regards to what it isa skepticism of large corporations which is perfectly warranted should be utterly this. >> you did that in less time than i thought. >> i did it once t■9oday >> i appreciate that. you have seen it front and center certainly we watched in horror as a trucker's bank truct down, who protested the mandate people think that such a faway ve seen that here with people who been given ultimatums of job or job in the seen ways they have been targeted and ways that are un-american and unconstitutional thank you tour witnesses for being here today appreciate you guys weaponizatie seeing more and more every day

at mr. chairman without a yield took exception to to gentle it yields back this concludes today's hearing we think the witnesses were appearing before the suommi out to another thing. we really appreciate the discussion will brought in the analysis you brought to her that objeioslative adjustment additional written questions. the witnesses or additional materials for the record without objection the hearing is adjourned. [background noises] noises]

[inaudible conversations]