Three FBI whistleblowers spoke to a congressional committee on Thursday. They described punishments such as revoked clearances and terminations that they suffered after speaking out against their supervisors.

After hearing FBI whistleblowers, Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) said: “To put it bluntly, the leadership of both the FBI and DOJ are corrupt.”

“I’ll name names.” Hageman stated that “[FBI Director] Christopher Wray, and [Attorney-General] Merrick Garland were corrupt.” They know it. We know. “And the American people knows it.”

The whistleblowers who testified before the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Federal Government included former FBI Special Agent Steve Friend, and suspended FBI Staff Operation Specialist Marcus Allen.

Rep. Rep.

The Democrats quickly jumped in, claiming that the men weren’t whistleblowers.

“I want to tell all of you, be ready,” said Jordan. He is the chairman of both the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee for Government Weaponization.

Jordan told his Democrat co-workers, “These guys will come after you.” “Last time we held a hearing, we had two Democrats sitting right next to you. Two Democrat journalists sat where you did. These guys [subcommittee Democrats] were trying to get them (the journalists) to reveal their sources. Someone should explain to them the First Amendment.

In the previous hearing of the subcommittee, Matt Taibbi stated that Internal Revenue Service agents had come to his house after his report on the or so-called Twitter Files.

Jordan told three FBI whistleblowers, “I know that you are up to this task because you have come forward.”

Tristan Leavitt was also present, the president of Empower Oversight, and a former U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board.

Before the hearing on Thursday, the subcommittee published an 80-page report detailing FBI reprisals against whistleblowers.

Four highlights of the hearing by the Select Subcommittee

1. Questioned Official Narrative

Allen informed supervisors after Wray, FBI director, was unclear aboutwhether FBI confidential informants did not mingle with rioters when they breached the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Allen stated, “I wasn’t in Washington, D.C., I didn’t take part in any criminal activity on January 6, and I condemn the crimes that took place.” “Instead, I believe I was targeted because I sent information to my superiors which questioned the official narrative about the events on Jan. 6. In response, I was accused by some of spreading conspiratorial ideas and unreliable data.”

Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), read aloud a Twitter handle, and then asked Allen if it was his account on the social media giant. Allen responded that it was not his Twitter account.

Sanchez paused before continuing: “An account with the name Marcus Allen has retweeted –.”

Allen said again: “That’s not my story, ma’am.”

Jordan joked about the possibility that the account might belong to a pro footballer with the same name.

Sanchez replied: “You didn’t allow me to finish my question. “The time is mine.”

The California Democrat asked: “On December 5, 2022, an account with the name Marcus Allen retweeted a Tweet that stated, quote, ‘Nancy Pelosi staged a Jan. 6th protest. Retweet it if you agree. Do you agree?

Allen, looking perplexed at her question, shook the head and replied: “No ma’am. This is not my story at all. I don’t know –.”

Sanchez then interrupted Allen to ask the question in a new way.

Do you think Nancy Pelosi planned the Jan. 6 protests?

Allen appeared to be saying “No” as he leans into his microphone.

Jordan told Sanchez that she had run out of time. She became agitated, saying: “I need him to answer that question.”

Jordan replied: “He will answer, just informing [you] that your time is over.”

Sanchez asks the same question as before: “Are you in agreement with this tweet that Nancy Pelosi made on Jan. 6?”

Allen answered the same question a third time.

He shook his head and said “I don’t.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) expressed his anger at Sanchez’s questioning of Allen’s loyalty after he served two tours as a Marine in Iraq and was named 2019 employee of year by the FBI field office in Charlotte North Carolina.

Gaetz asked: “Do you believe that you have been retaliated because you sent an email in which you questioned the honesty of FBI Director Christopher Wray?”

Allen: “Yes, sir.”

Gaetz: “And based on the information provided to United States Seante, you believe that he was not truthful.” “Is that correct?”

Allen: “Yes, sir.”

Gaetz then referred back to Wray’s testimony in the Senate.

You believe Christopher Wray stated that no FBI assets or confidential informants were present in the Capitol on January 6 [during] this part of violent riot. Gaetz asked, “Isn’t this right?”

Allen replied, “Yes, sir.”

2. “Frustrated and angry”

Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.), questioned Friend about the truthfulness of both Garland and Wray.

Steube stated, “I have been here for five years and during that time Director Wray and AG Garland both sat at desks like this and testified that they would not retaliate towards whistleblowers. I believe that Mr. You have to go through the FBI’s regulations to tell your supervisors about your concerns. That’s correct, isn’t it?

Friend replied “Yes.”

Steube asked: “You followed the FBI’s internal protocol by using the whistleblower law to bring your complaints to light?”

Friend said, “Yes,” and added that he had spoken to three supervisors levels about his concerns.

Steube: Steube, “the response to this was losing your clearance, shutting out, losing your employment, and taking your pay?”

Friend: “That’s correct.”

Steube himself said that he was “frustrated, angry and resentful.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) attacked Friend’s motives, and pointed out that he is about to publish a book, a remark to Friend’s “True Blue”:My journey from beat cop to suspended FBI whistleblower.

Wasserman Schultz said to Friend, “You’re self-promoting your upcoming book.” It’s a great coincidence that you are on TV, in Congress and about to start your book tour. It’s quite coincidental.”

Friend said early in the hearing: “This Committee should avoid the temptation of impugning the character and motivations the messengers seated here. I sacrificed my dream job in order to share this information. “I ask you all to do your job and to consider what I have said.”

During the hearing Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.) brought up a Tweet from Friend, and appeared a bit surprised by the former FBI Agent’s frank response.

“Mr. Garamendi asked, “Friend, have ever sent a tweet to defund, dissolve, dismantle and abolish the FBI?”

Friend: “I have.”

Garamendi : “And the FBI, is it not a police agency?”

Friend: “It is my opinion that they are an intelligence agency domestically with law enforcement capabilities.”

Garamendi says: “They’re a police force, thank you.” I guess consistency is the bane of small minds.”

3. ‘Regular Order’

A number of Democrats complained they hadn’t received transcripts from the Republican interview with the FBI whistleblowers.

Jordan pointed out that Democrats leaked selective portions of testimony in order to mischaracterize some witnesses. The Ohio Republican said that, under federal whistleblower laws, a whistleblower protected by law can decide whether a transcript of an interview is made public.

The hearing room was a raucous place at this point.

Wasserman Schultz stated, “I don’t know if you can withhold the information that we need to prepare.”

Jordan responded: “When it’s about whistleblowers you don’t [have the right to a transcript].

The members of the committee began to shout back and forth.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said, “I cannot hear five people simultaneously.” Can we have regular orders?

Jordan attempted to maintain order but failed.

“I’m inquiring,” Wasserman Schultz said.

I told you that you were not entitled to anything when it came to whistleblowers. “That’s up to Mr. Allen,” Jordan said, referring Marcus Allen.

Wasserman Schultz replied that the FBI did not consider the men as whistleblowers.

“Mr. Wasserman Schultz stated, “Mr. The agency has determined that they are not whistleblowers. “Are you deciding if they’re whistleblowers?”

Jordan then referred to the lawyer of the three men, saying “the law decides.” “Didn’t you listen to Mr. Leavitt? Did you not read your law? “The law decides.”

4. What Happens to Whistleblowers?

O’Boyle’s troubles began after an FBI agent questioned the prosecution process for the Jan. 6 case.

Gaetz asked O’Boyle if the FBI had tried to “get [you] to do something outside of the normal law enforcement activity?”

O’Boyle replied: “Yes, sir.”

Gaetz: What did the FBI’s Washington field office attempt to get you do that was against the law or regulations?

O’Boyle : “They attempted to get me serve a subpoena from a federal grand jury when there was no proper predicate for doing so.”

Gaetz: “The fact that there was no predicate was because it was based upon an anonymous tip is correct?”

O’Boyle: “That’s correct.”

Gaetz then asked if, “time after time,” the FBI Washington field office had pressured him to investigate cases without any corroboration.

O’Boyle: “Yes, sir.”

“Jan. Gaetz stated that Jan. 6 was a bad, violent day no one wants to repeat. “The violence on Jan. 6, does not justify arming the government against innocent people who did nothing wrong.”

O’Boyle had said earlier in his testimony that , the FBI had slandered him and reassigned. He said that after he and family moved, the FBI suspended his employment.

O’Boyle stated that “despite our oath of upholding the Constitution, many FBI agents are unwilling to make sacrifices for the righteous over the wrongeous,” he said. They see how whistleblowers are treated by the FBI, who destroys their career, suspends them on false pretenses and takes away their security clearance as well as their pay, with no recourse. This is deliberate. “It creates an Orwellian environment that silences any opposition or discussion.”