Return to Transcripts main page
Connect the World
U.S. House Hearing on Trump Shooting; Israeli Prime Minister to Address U.S. Congress; FBI Director Christopher Wray Testifies on Trump Shooting; Drone Recovered from Trump Shooter's Vehicle; Former IDF Soldier Speaks about Israel's War in Gaza. Aired 10-11a ET
Aired July 24, 2024 - 10:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[10:00:00]
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): All right, welcome everyone to the second hour of CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Zain Asher. It's
10:00 am here in New York and Washington, D.C.
And it's gearing up to certainly be a historic day set to begin any moment now. A hearing on the FBI's investigation into the assassination attempt of
former president Donald Trump.
In a few hours time on Capitol Hill, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is going to be delivering a controversial address to Congress,
trying to shore up support for the war in Gaza as he faces a lot of pressure both in the United States and back home in Israel as well.
And tonight, we're going to be hearing from U.S. President Joe Biden for the first time since this weekend, when he announced that he was dropping
out of the U.S. Presidential race.
As I mentioned, gearing up on Capitol Hill this hour, U.S. House lawmakers are holding a hearing on the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. It is
the third straight day of hearings in Washington on the botched security that allowed a sniper to get so dangerously close to the former president.
Any moment now, FBI director Christopher Wray is set to testify about the latest in the bureau's investigation into that shooting. He's expected to
be grilled on new details about the gunman's possible motive.
We have team coverage on this story. We've got CNN's U.S. national security reporter, Zachary Cohen, standing by for us in Washington, D.C. We've also
got CNN senior national security analyst Juliette Kayyem. She's also a former Homeland Security official under the Obama administration.
Thank you both for being with us.
Zachary, let me just start with you. Just talk to us a bit more about what we can actually expect Christopher Wray to say and to talk about and what
he's going to be grilled on specific during today's hearing.
ZACHARY COHEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes.
Lawmakers going to want details and specifics and they're going to want more details than they got during a briefing a few days ago from
Christopher Wray and other law enforcement officials about this ongoing investigation into the attempted assassination of former president Donald
Trump.
And look, we've seen in previous hearings, just in the last few days, especially the hearing that involved testimony from U.S. Secret Service
director or former U.S. Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, that lawmakers were frustrated when Cheatle did not directly answer their
questions.
Even some basic questions about the timeline and the security lapses that led up to and allowed the assassination attempt of Donald Trump to happen.
Wray is going to have to provide some answers and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are going to push him hard on that.
And one issue that the FBI has been working on specifically since it took the lead in this investigation, is trying to build a profile of the shooter
himself. That's been all in an attempt to try to establish some sort of a motive.
Why did this 20-year-old do what he did?
Why did he open fire on former president Donald Trump?
Wray specifically told lawmakers during that briefing a few days ago, the FBI not established any sort of motive or political ideology or political
reason why he would have done that. Lawmakers are going to want an update on that specific topic as well.
As we know, we now know what investigators found on the shooter's phone and on his search history, including details about his search history that
revealed he looked up the specifics about Donald Trump's rally in Pennsylvania and Donald Trump himself.
But also other political figures, including Democrats and Republicans and others in between. So they're going to want Christopher Wray to explain
where the FBI is in terms of establishing a motive. That'll be a key priority for lawmakers today.
ASHER: Thank you. Zachary.
And Juliette, let me bring you in because Zach was just talking about there the investigation is going to be a key priority here for lawmakers. Just
sum up what we know so far in terms of the investigation.
Does it surprise you at all that we still do not have a motive at this point in time?
JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes. I think it is surprising only because you would assume that an assassination against a
key political figure in the United States, former president and the nominee, Donald Trump, would have a clear political motive.
But that's not proving to be true. We know that the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan actually had no political motive. It had to do with Jodie
Foster and the assassin trying to impress her.
In this instance, it looks like we have what we call, in the counterterrorism field, is sort of lonely boys. I'm not defending him. It's
just someone who was isolated from society, maybe got energized by things online, had access to weapons.
[10:05:00]
Is confused by his motivation that he one day wants to attack Biden; the next day, Trump and that the event with Trump ended up being an
assassination by opportunity. In other words, it was close to his home and because of the security issues that we are well aware were not
satisfactory.
He was able, not as a professional assassin, not as someone who was sponsored by a foreign nation, he was able to almost kill Donald Trump. So
I think that that narrative is one that's hard for us to get our head around.
But the one that the information, at least so far, is pointing to, there is no manifesto, there's no strong social media information. And this may be
one in which we are going to wonder for a long time.
ASHER: All right, Juliette Kayyem, Zachary Cohen live for us there.
And just to quickly mention to our audience that these are live pictures of the hearing taking place on Capitol Hill. There's Christopher Wray, the FBI
director. The hearing is just getting started. We will monitor it.
We'll bring you any news that comes out of it as Juliette was just saying there, he is going to be grilled on the investigation and also on whether
or not the FBI has uncovered any possible motive in terms of Thomas Crooks' assassination attempt of former president Donald Trump.
All right. We have lots more to talk about now, just especially in terms of Netanyahu visiting Congress and giving a speech in Congress today. I want
to bring in CNN's Jeremy Diamond, who's joining us live now from Tel Aviv.
Do we have Jeremy?
All right.
Jeremy, talk to us a bit more about what we can expect in terms of what Netanyahu is going to say to Congress when he addresses Congress, because
we know that there are a lot of Democratic lawmakers who are not going to be in attendance. He's going to speak mostly to a GOP audience.
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's right. And look, the Israeli prime minister is going to have a few different goals during
this speech. I mean, he has said that he wants to try and strike up more bipartisan support for Israel in this speech.
We've been told that this speech will not be as politically charged and controversial as the last time he addressed Congress.
But that being said, the Israeli prime minister is also going to have a lot of domestic political goals for himself. And while this will be -- there
are a good number of Democrats who plan to effectively boycott the speech, there still will be of sizable number of Democrats lawmakers in attendance.
The overwhelming majority of Republican lawmakers. And there could be some moments in this speech where the Israeli prime minister gets a standing
ovation, a bipartisan standing ovation.
And that's going to go along way for him in Israel, to be able to show that, despite the kind of rocky relationship that he has had with the White
House, that he still is able to effectively lobby for Israel in the United States, that he still has a strong amount of backing, strong amount of
support in the United States.
And that he's able to capitalize on that as prime minister of Israel. He's also going to be talking about the hostages, talking about support for
Israel in the face of Hamas trying to rise up, support in the United States for what he views as the goals of the war, which he has said are to defeat
Hamas but also to get back the hostages.
But as all of this is happening, as the Israeli prime minister will be speaking, we are still on the cusp of potentially a very critical moment in
those ongoing negotiations.
After the Israeli prime minister meets with President Joe Biden tomorrow, I'm told that an Israeli delegation is going to travel very shortly
thereafter to deliver the official Israeli response to the latest round of negotiations, send that to the mediators, who will then share that with
Hamas.
And that response could make or break whether or not there is a deal. And even whether or not there is a deal, perhaps even in just the next week,
because one Israeli source familiar with the talks told me that, if Hamas accepts this latest proposal from Israel then there will be a deal, a
ceasefire could even go into place in a matter of days.
But that is a big if because the Israeli prime minister has been throwing in some 11th hour demands into that Israeli proposal. Those he is expected
to discuss and lay out to President Joe Biden tomorrow during their anticipated Oval Office meeting.
And so ultimately there is a big question here of whether the Israeli prime minister actually wants a deal. And as he is in the United States, we are
hearing more and more from the families of hostages, from Israelis who are taking to the streets here in Tel Aviv, calling on the Israeli prime
minister to move forward with this agreement.
Despite the political consequences that he may face within his own right- wing governing coalition.
[10:10:00]
But certainly there is still a big question mark about the Israeli prime minister's commitment to this deal, commitment to those negotiations. And
there's no doubt that, beyond the speech to Congress, when he meets with President Joe Biden tomorrow, when he meets with other top U.S. officials,
he is going to get an earful.
And he's going to get a lot of pressure, a lot of prodding, a lot of nudging to move forward with this deal.
ASHER: Worth noting that Nancy Pelosi is not going to be in attendance; neither will Kamala Harris. She is on the campaign trail. We do know that
Vice President Harris is going to be meeting with Netanyahu separately tomorrow after Netanyahu is meeting with President Joe Biden.
Jeremy Diamond live for us there. Thank you so much.
I want to go back now to Capitol Hill where, as I mentioned earlier, the director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, is testifying to lawmakers about the
bureau's investigation into the assassination attempt against Donald Trump. Congressman Jim Jordan is speaking now, let's listen in.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): -- fair, honest, open and transparent investigation. And that skepticism is based on what they have witnessed
over the past several years.
The American people have seen a Biden-Harris Justice Department, they can't tell us who planted the pipe bombs on January 6. They can't tell us who
leaked the Dobbs opinion and they can't tell us who put cocaine at the White House.
The Biden-Harris Justice Department who raided Trump's home, the Biden- Harris Justice Department who worked with social media companies to censor Americans, the Biden-Harris Justice Department let the country believe that
the Hunter Biden laptop was misinformation when they knew at the time it was authentic.
And maybe most importantly, the Biden-Harris Justice Department who retaliated against whistleblowers who came to this committee and spoke to
us about these issues.
Last week, we sent you 12 questions about what occurred on July 13th. We expect you to answer those questions and the others I have just outlined.
Again, we thank you for being here today and appreciate your willingness to answer the questions that the committee will have.
With that, I yield to the ranking member for an opening statement.
REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY), RANKING MEMBER, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, two weeks ago, our country witnessed a shocking assassination attempt on a presidential candidate. I disagree with Donald Trump on almost
every policy area imaginable and am frequently shocked and outraged at the plans he has for our country and the words that come out of his mouth.
I have dedicated much of the last eight years to fighting his agenda. Regardless of my strong feelings about Donald Trump's behavior, I
unequivocally and unabashedly condemn, with every fiber of my being, the attempt against his life.
This is not just an attack on a man but an attack on democracy. Political violence erodes the very foundations of our nation. The concepts of freedom
of speech, of peaceful transitions of power, the democratic government at its core, these cannot exist if political violence is allowed to fester and
to go unchecked.
And if you think that this one assassin's bullet was a bolt out of the blue and not part of a wave of violence that has threatened this nation for
years, then you have missed the point of what my Democratic colleagues and I have been imploring you to hear for some time.
Election workers, many of them working for free, face near constant threats of violence. In one recent instance, an Indiana man pleaded guilty to
threatening to kill an election worker, who said that there were no irregularities in the recent election.
That man said, quote, "Ten million plus patriots will surround you when you least expect it and we will "expletive" kill you, close quote.
That is political violence. In another instance, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi's husband was bludgeoned over the head with a hammer by an intruder
in his home, who was in there to capture Ms. Pelosi, interrogate her and possibly, quote, "break her kneecaps" because of her liberal views. That is
political violence.
The desperate (ph) surge against Vice President Harris, former President Obama, his wife, Michelle, and Governor DeSantis as well as many others,
including videos online of individuals holding guns and making assassination threats, that is political violence.
Plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer and overthrow parts of the state government, that is political violence.
The brutal, deadly attack three years ago against this very building, with rioters breaking through police barriers to run through these halls,
chanting, "Kill Nancy" and "Hang Mike Pence" and even hanging a noose outside the building.
These rioters battering Capitol Police officers and forcing members of Congress and their staffs to go into hiding, (INAUDIBLE) spaces under desks
or in closets, that is political violence.
This assassination attempt, as horrific as it is, should surprise no one. And you would think the political party that almost lost their presidential
candidate through an act of political violence would have something to say about the way their leaders keep talking about the next election.
Donald Trump has warned there will be a, quote, "bloodbath" if he loses. Republican Ohio state senator George Lang said just last week at a rally
for J.D. Vance that he is, quote, "afraid a civil war might be necessary if Republicans lose the November election."
[10:15:08]
The president of the right-wing think tank and Project 2025 leader, Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts, said on Steve Bannon's podcast, quote,
"During the process of the second American revolution, which will remain bloodless if the Left allows it to be," close quote.
Republican former Alaska governor Sarah Palin said in August of last year of Trump's indictment, "You want us to be in civil war?
"Because that is what is going to happen. We are not going to keep putting up with this. We do need to rise up and take our country back," close
quote.
I could go on but it is more and more of the same. And I hear nothing from the other side of the aisle in this room about these statements.
Do you support a bloodbath if you don't get the election outcome you want?
Do you justify violence if the Left does not agree with you?
And what exactly has preoccupied this Republican majority while their allies threaten violence to their political enemies, real and imagined?
We have chased down baseless conspiracy theories designed solely to influence the 2024 election in favor of Donald Trump.
We have spent millions of dollars, thousands of hours of staff time and more than 1,000 transcribed interviews directing (ph) false accusations
against President Biden, supporting an impeachment effort that seemed designed to fail and hunting for a smoking gun that simply does not exist.
And instead of admitting that these investigations found no corruption, coercion or unethical behavior by the Biden administration, Republicans
chose to just dig deeper and spend more money.
Imagine what could have happened if we had spent these thousands of hours of staff time and those millions of taxpayer dollars addressing even one
aspect of the political violence that now threatens our country.
Perhaps, if this Republican majority lifted a finger to help the nation that is awash in guns, the assassin in Butler would not have such easy
access to the weapon he used to fire on that crowd.
Director Wray, your agency is responsible for addressing some of the most serious issues of our time. The bureau fights gun violence, which claims
the lives of 40,000 Americans every year.
It protects election security from growing threats from the lone (ph) foreign actors who are working tirelessly to influence our elections. It
protects against domestic terrorists, the violent extremists ,who have been a growing threat in recent years and have carried out horrific mass
shootings and deadly events around the country.
And, so, so much more. I apologize to you, Director, that instead of supporting you in these missions in the 118th Congress, some of my
colleagues have instead hindered your work, maligned your agents and called to abolish and defund your agency all for political gain.
It is despicable, especially from the party that claims to, quote, "back the Blue."
And I know that you and your many agencies and employees have paid the price for these baseless attacks. I know you have faced a barrage of
threats, distress and vitriol from the public as a result of these wild politically driven conspiracies.
I know it has become even more dangerous and difficult for you to come to work each day. I may not agree with you on everything but I sincerely thank
you and every employee in your agency who continues to protect our country.
The FBI is vital to keeping America safe and pray that today we can focus on the real, substantive work in the agency. It is the least we owe our
country in these times. I yield back.
JORDAN: The gentleman yields back. Without objection, all other opening statements will be included in the record. We will now introduce today's
witness.
The Honorable Christopher Wray has been the director of the FBI since 2017, previously served as the assistant attorney general for the criminal
division of the Department of Justice, the principal associate deputy attorney general and associate deputy attorney general and as assistant
U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia.
Again, Director Wray, you've been here many times. We appreciate you being here today and look forward to your testimony in answering our questions.
We will begin by swearing you in.
Would you please rise and raise your right hand?
Do you swear and affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge,
information and belief, so help you God?
Let the record affirm -- let the record reflect that the witness has answered in the affirmative. Thank you and please be seated.
We have votes coming in about 10 minutes but we definitely want to get through your opening statement as far as we can. And this is going to be an
interesting day on Capitol Hill with the prime minister of Israel here as well.
So Director Wray, you are recognized for your opening statement.
CHRISTOPHER WRAY, FBI DIRECTOR: Good morning Chairman Jordan, Ranking Member Nadler and members of the committee, I want to begin by offering my
condolences on the passing of Representative Jackson Lee who served the people of Texas and this body and on this committee for so long.
[10:20:00]
Thank you, all, for your support of our efforts to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution. I am proud to be here today
representing the 38,000 special agents, intelligence analysts and professional staff who make up the FBI.
Men and women, who, every day, work relentlessly to counter the most complex threat environment I have seen in my tenure as FBI director, maybe
in my entire career in law enforcement.
Before I go any further, I also want to acknowledge and offer my deepest condolences to the victims of the horrific assassination attempt in Butler
County.
To the friends and family of Corey Comperatore, who, by all accounts, lost his life protecting others from danger, to the other victims, two of whom
were critically wounded and, of course, of course to President Trump, former president Trump and his family.
As I've said from the beginning, the attempted assassination of the former president was an attack on our democracy and our democratic process and we
will not and do not tolerate political violence of any kind, especially a despicable account of this magnitude.
And I want to assure you and the American people that the men and women of the FBI will continue to work tirelessly to get to the bottom of what
happened. We are bringing all the resources of the FBI to bear, both criminal and national security.
That is a whole lot of work underway and still a lot of work to do in our understanding of what happened and why will continue to involve where we
are going to leave no stone unturned.
The shooter may be deceased but the FBI's investigation is very much ongoing. To that point, I also want to acknowledge that I recognize both
the congressional and the public interest in this case and the importance of this investigation to the American people.
And I understand there are a lot of open questions. So while the investigation is very much ongoing and our assessments of the shooter and
his actions continue to evolve, my hope here today is to do my best to provide you with all the information I can, given where we are at this
point.
I have been saying for some time now that we are living in an elevated threat environment and, tragically, the Butler County assassination attempt
is another example, a particularly heinous and very public one, of what I have been talking about.
But it also reinforces our need at the FBI and our ongoing commitment to stay focused on the threats, on the mission and on the people we do the
work with and people we do the work for.
Every day, all across this country and indeed around the world, the men and women of the FBI are doing just that, working around the clock to counter
the threats we face.
Just in the last year, for example, in California, the FBI and our partners targeted an organized crime syndicate responsible for trafficking fentanyl,
meth and cocaine all across North America.
We charged the Mexican based suppliers who brought the drugs into the United States, a network of Canada-based truck drivers who delivered the
drugs and the distributors in the United States who spread the poison into our communities.
Staying on threats emanating from the border, I have warned for some time now about the threat that foreign terrorists may seek to exploit our
southwest border or some other port of entry to advance a plot against Americans.
Just last month, for instance, the bureau and our Joint Terrorism Task Force has worked with ICE in multiple cities across the country as several
individuals with suspected international terrorist ties were arrested using ISIS immigration authorities.
Leading up to those arrests, hundreds of FBI employees dedicated countless hours to understand the threat and identify additional individuals of
concern.
Now the physical security of the border is, of course, not in the FBI's lane. But as the threat has escalated, we are working with our partners in
law enforcement and the Intelligence Committee to find and stop foreign terrorists who would harm Americans and our interests.
As concerning as the known or suspected terrorists encountered at the border are, perhaps even more concerning are those we do not yet know
about.
[10:25:00]
Because they provided fake documents or because we did not have information connecting them to terrorism at the time they arrived in the United States.
Staying ahead of today's threats demands that we work together. And for the FBI, that means doubling down on our partnerships, especially with state
and local law enforcement.
Whether it is working through our hundreds of joint terrorism task forces to build out source networks, to identify those who slip through the cracks
or targeting the worst of the worst responsible for the violence that still plagues far too many communities.
Through our Safe Streets task forces we are taking the fight to the cartels responsible for trafficking the dangerous drugs like fentanyl pouring into
our country and claiming countless American lives.
Staying ahead of the threat also means continuing to disrupt the cybercriminals ravaging businesses, large and small, and confronting nation
states like China targeting our innovation and our critical infrastructure.
At the bureau, we are proud to work side-by-side with our brothers and sisters in federal, state and local law enforcement, our partners in the
Intelligence Committee and others around the world to fulfill our commitment to keep Americans safe.
On Friday, the FBI will celebrate its 116th anniversary, 116 years of protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution, 116 years of
working with our partners to safeguard the communities we serve, 116 years of innovating to stay ahead of the complex, evolving and very real threats
out there.
I am proud of the legacy the men and women that the FBI have built and all they have accomplished for the American people.
So if I may, as we approach this week's anniversary, I would just like to say to all those who are part of the FBI family, from our current employees
to our formers and to our partners across law enforcement and the intelligence community, thank you.
Thank you for dedicating your lives to this country and to its people. It is both humbling and an honor to serve alongside you. And I look forward to
the work we are going to continue to do together.
And with that, thank you again for having me and I look forward to our discussion.
JORDAN: Thank you, Director Wray.
We will now proceed under the five minute rule. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for five minutes.
REP. DAN BISHOP (R-NC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Director Wray, I am way down here. And I appreciate the chairman giving me this because I've got to leave. But let me ask this question.
Why doesn't the FBI disclose to the American people all of the investigative details and evidence that you are gathering as it is
gathered?
WRAY: Well, we have tried to be transparent with both Congress and the American people as we are going along in the investigation, frankly usually
so for an ongoing investigation, given the sheer nature of it.
We have provided a lot of information and I expect to continue providing information. I expect you all to provide some additional information here
today in response to your questions and your colleagues.
But part of the issue is that, as -- like in any investigation, as we proceed, facts evolve; our understanding of what somebody said turns out to
have more context than we didn't have before.
We have additional leads out there. So part of our goal is not just to respect the ongoing investigation process but also to make sure that we
don't prematurely provide information that then, two days later, turns out to be different than what we told people. Because that's very much kind of
a natural part of any investigation.
BISHOP: Did Crooks fire eight shots?
WRAY: We have recovered eight cartridges on the roof.
BISHOP: Why was Crooks allowed to get off eight shots?
WRAY: Well, that, I think, is something we are still digging into. Again, maybe this is a good place for me to make clear the different
investigations that are going on.
So certainly I understand --
(CROSSTALK)
BISHOP: Well, and I -- and given that I have only got three minutes left - - I know the members -- I'm really interested because I appreciate your invitation. You said you are prepared to disclose things as questions are
asked. So I don't want to waste time.
So I just want to get to the questions that might -- because the many members at hand ask questions you will answer. I would be glad for you to
go on soliloquy frankly and tell us what you know. I think the American people want to know.
Why was president Trump not kept off the stage?
WRAY: We don't know the answer to that but I want to be clear. And this is important because I think it goes to questions that I can and cannot
answer. Our investigation, the FBI's mandate, is focused on the shooter and all things related to his attack.
[10:30:04]
Now obviously, I understand very much the intense interest and focus on the Secret Service's performance, actions, decision-making, et cetera. There
are two separate after-action reviews that the DHS inspector general and the outside independent panel continue to focus on that.
Now our --
(CROSSTALK)
BISHOP: Everybody understands that -- no, I understand that --
(CROSSTALK)
BISHOP: Here is the problem. We are out 13 days and you say we have been disclosing -- you know, we had the director or the colonel from the PS --
the Pennsylvania State Police in front of Homeland yesterday. He was quite candid.
He disclosed to us that Butler Emergency Services unit personnel were posted into the windows on the second floor of the AGR building, that they
left there to go pursue the person that they spotted Crooks.
That they texted a photo of Crooks to the PSP representative in the command center. That information was relayed to the United States Secret Service.
They ask that it be texted to someone else. That was many minutes before president Trump took the stand.
What we don't know was why did he not -- why did he -- why were they not keeping him off the stand?
And to the extent -- you know, I know we always hear when there is a criminal investigation you got to wait for that to develop.
But the -- do you have any reasons to -- are you -- do you have any other target of your criminal investigation, other than Crooks, who is dead?
WRAY: We are investigating the shooter both to determine his motive and his preparations and activities before the shooting but also to make sure
whether or not there are any co-conspirators, accomplices --
(CROSSTALK)
BISHOP: At this point, have you developed any evidence to so suggest that there are any accomplices or cooperators or assisters?
WRAY: Not at this time --
(CROSSTALK)
WRAY: -- the investigation is ongoing.
BISHOP: So here is the thing. While we wait, maybe for months -- and I have to say this because I am not trying to take a potshot -- but the
country went for years with the understanding that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation as offered by respected former intel officials.
And the whole time the FBI had the laptop. And then they let that happen in public until finally offering testimony in the case.
To the degree we wait to hear as a country and as a Congress what has happened in this event, because the FBI is conducting an investigation, it
provides quarter for the U.S. Secret Service not perhaps to reckon with the problems that are obvious to everyone.
So just get a couple in while -- I've got 13 more seconds. One more question, perhaps. Senator Grassley says that the records of the day show
that there was a counter unmanned aerial surveillance operator on site.
Was there?
And why did that person not prevent Crooks from being able to use a drone?
WRAY: So again, questions about the Secret Service's performance are better directed to those other reviews. What I can tell you, when it comes
to drones, is that Crooks himself had a drone. And I am prepared to answer questions here today about the shooter and his use of the drone, for
example.
BISHOP: My time has expired.
JORDAN: Gentleman yields back. The ranking member is recognized for five minutes.
NADLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I said in my opening statement, political violence is a scourge and entirely unacceptable, no matter the source or the target.
Last October, far right conspiracy theorists broke into Nancy Pelosi's home and bludgeoned her husband. Prominent Republicans mocked the attack and
promoted conspiracy theories about it.
Last August, an armed Utah man threatened to kill President Biden and was killed as FBI agents attempted to serve a warrant on him hours before
President Biden landed in his state.
Some on the Right claimed that the man was simply, quote, "a Second Amendment enthusiast."
In recent weeks and months, those on the Right have repeatedly called for a, quote, "civil war." It was an Ohio state senator saying that Republicans
would lose the election, quote, "It's going to take a civil war to save the country and it will be saved."
The president of the Heritage Foundation likewise said that, quote, "We are in the process of the second American revolution, which will remain
bloodless if the Left allows it to be," close quote.
Director Wray, it is obviously important that we respect First Amendment predictions. But there was clearly a point at which some violent rhetoric
crosses over into threats of violence or lead statute of violence (ph).
Could you describe how the FBI looks at this relationship between rhetoric and action with what you are seeing around the country?
WRAY: So I appreciate the question. And this is an issue that I have been talking about for some time. You know, in our view, there is a right way
and a wrong way, under the First Amendment, to express your views, no matter how passionate or even angry you are.
And violence and threats of violence is not the right way. And we don't care what you are upset about or who you are upset with. When from the
FBI's perspective, when it turns to violence and threats of violence, that is when we have to draw the line. That is when we get engaged.
[10:35:00]
And there is an alarming phenomenon we have seen over the last several years of that kind of passion and heated rhetoric turning into actual
violence and threats of violence. We have seen it against public officials of all sorts. We have seen it among law enforcement.
The number of officers shot and killed in the line of duty in this country is frankly outrageous and alarming.
And I know that, because every time an officer is shot and killed anytime in this country, since the day I started as FBI director, I personally
called the chief or the sheriff to express my condolences and to talk to them about the victim's family.
And the number of those shootings that are ambush related -- meaning somebody is targeting law enforcement because they are law enforcement --
is particularly alarming. I have made around 400 of those phone calls. It is almost every five days that a law enforcement officer is killed in the
line of duty.
And that is an example of the kind of ways in which passions and heated rhetoric can bubble over into violence.
NADLER: Thank you.
Members of Congress and their families and staffs have witnessed an alarming rise in threats against them. I appreciate the work your agency
has done to investigate and address these threats. But I'm concerned that you're not -- seem to be stemming the tide.
What is the FBI doing to ensure that members of Congress, their families and their staffs are safe?
WRAY: So we have a very close relationship with the Capitol Police and we have members of the Capitol Police, for example, who are on some of our
task forces.
We share intelligence, information about things that we're seeing, trends that we're seeing with Capitol Police and others in law enforcement.
Obviously we have specific information about an effort to target a member of Congress.
Then we're getting with Capitol Police in a much more specific way. But those are some of the things that we're doing.
NADLER: Thank you. Now, Director, your office is leading the investigation into the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. Republicans in Congress,
including members of this committee, have repeatedly called for defunding the FBI.
What impact would defunding or even just limiting your funding have on the FBI's ability to conduct this and other investigations?
WRAY: So I understand that there are heated views, opinions about us, just like there are about every institution in today's America. But cutting our
funding is incredibly shortsighted. And the people it really hurts are state and local law enforcement and the American people we are all sworn to
protect.
NADLER: Thank you. During my remaining time, I want to turn to a different matter. In recent days, Republicans have attacked presumptive Democratic
presidential nominee Kamala Harris as a, quote, "DEI candidate," which presumably is code for women and person of color.
It is not a new theme for them. In May, Chairman Jordan wrote that you came here because of DEI initiatives. The FBI is no longer hiring, quote, "the
best and brightest candidates to fill the position of special agent."
With the remaining time, with my remaining time, Director, can you please answer the following questions?
Is it true that hiring women and people of color means that the FBI is no longer hiring the best and the brightest to serve as law enforcement
officers?
Is there any evidence that women and people of color are less effective in law enforcement roles?
And what message does it send to prospective applicants when their leaders demean them and make judgments about them based solely on their race and
gender?
JORDAN: The witness may respond.
WRAY: So any notion that we have lowered our standards, our hiring standards is just not accurate. In fact, our standards are as competitive
and selective as ever. We have tens of thousands of people applying. And our selection (ph) rate is about 3.1 percent, which is more selective than
just about any university in the country.
And most of our applicants, I think something like 50 percent of them, are coming from military or law enforcement backgrounds. About 50 percent of
them also have advanced degrees.
The average age is around 31, which means they are bringing a wealth of personal and professional experience when they arrive.
And to suggest that those people, because of efforts related to diversity or anything like that, are less qualified, frankly, is not at all
consistent with what I see, having visited all of our field offices and seeing these young people in action I think it an insult to those
hardworking men and women who have signed up to dedicate their lives to this country.
NADLER: Thank you, Director.
I yield back.
JORDAN: Gentleman yields back.
Director, let me go back to where Mr. Bishop was. Tell me about the drone. You act like you wanted to fill us in on that. Fill us in.
WRAY: So we have recovered a drone that the shooter appears to have used. It is being explored and analyzed by the FBI lab. The drone was recovered
in his vehicle. So at the time of the shooting, the drone was in his vehicle with the controller. In addition, our investigation has uncovered -
-
[10:40:00]
(CROSSTALK)
JORDAN: Do you know what time of day he flew it, if he flew it on the day -- ?
(CROSSTALK)
WRAY: -- so in addition, it appears that, around 3:50 pm, 4 o'clock, in that window, on the day of the shooting, that the shooter was flying the
drone around the area --
(CROSSTALK)
WRAY: -- I want to be clear, when I say the area, not over the stage and that part of the area itself. But I would say about 200 yards, give or
take, away from that. We think but we do not know -- so again, this is one of these things that is qualified because of our ongoing review -- that he
was livestreaming and viewing the footage from that.
Again, about 11 minutes and around the 3:50-4:00 o'clock pm range.
JORDAN: Two hours before he's flying a drone in the vicinity of the --
WRAY: About 200 yards away.
(CROSSTALK)
JORDAN: OK. That's important information.
What about the bombs that we have heard about in the shooter's car?
WRAY: So again, the FBI lab is exploiting those explosive devices. There were -- we have recovered three devices, two in his vehicle and one back in
his residence.
JORDAN: Are these what you would call sophisticated operations?
Or this is, what do we -- I mean -- I think -- not only -- that is what I have been told by the people who have some understanding in this area.
WRAY: Yes, I -- I think it's -- we have seen more sophisticated and less. I would say these are relatively -- again, keyword "relatively" -- crude
devices themselves. But they did have the ability to be detonated remotely.
And so to that point, in addition to the two devices that we recovered out of his vehicle, there were receivers for those two explosive devices with
the devices. And then on the shooter himself, when he was killed by law enforcement, he had a transmitter with him.
Now I do want to add one important point here because, at the moment, it looks to us -- again, ongoing review. And I can't say that too many times -
- at a moment, it looks like, because of the on-off position on the receivers, that, if he had tried to detonate those devices from the roof,
it would not have worked.
But that does not mean that the explosives were not dangerous.
JORDAN: I'm sure we're going to get all these subjects a little bit later as well. Tell us what you can about the encrypted platforms we have heard
about.
WRAY: So one of the things we are drilling into hard with the shooter, in an effort to try to learn more about his state of mind, his motive, his
ideology, his context and everything else, is to look at all of his devices; any social media accounts he had, et cetera.
And one of the things we have learned in finally getting into his phone, which was also a significant technical challenge from an encryption
perspective. But in addition, once we got on the phone, it turned out he was using some encrypted messaging applications.
JORDAN: And again, the same question relative to the bombs, is this -- was this a pretty sophisticated?
Or is this the kind of norm you see with bombs like -- you know, similar situation?
Or how --
WRAY: On this -- on this subject, I would say this is unfortunately now become very commonplace and it is a real challenge for not just the FBI but
state and local law enforcement --
JORDAN: Tell me exactly the scope of -- does the scope of your investigation, including what I call that critical five minutes from when
the -- 6:09, when this (INAUDIBLE) on information you've given to Congress, 6:09 when the shooter was identified on the roof and 6:14, when president
Trump is ultimately escorted off.
And all that happened is the shots that take place in between there.
Do you have access to the communications that were going on at the time in that critical five minutes?
WRAY: So our investigation, when we say scope, our investigation includes that timeframe, although focused, again, on the shooter himself --
JORDAN: Understand --
(CROSSTALK)
JORDAN: He is obviously involved in that timeframe.
WRAY: Correct. And as part of that, as part of our focus, our investigation of the shooter and the attack, of course, we are interviewing
law enforcement from the scene because those are some of the most significant witnesses.
And we are obviously getting access to their materials and that kind of thing. And the Secret Service --
JORDAN: You're getting access to --
WRAY: -- cooperative.
JORDAN: You have access to the communications that exist there?
WRAY: That exact question, I don't -- as I sit here, at the moment, I don't know the exact answer to that question. But I know the Secret Service
has been cooperative with us.
JORDAN: The Congress would like access to those communications as well. I mean, not just that five minutes, although I think that's the critical
timeframe. Lots of communications we would love to have access as well.
I see my time is up and they have called votes on the floor. I think there are about six minutes left for votes. So the committee will stand in recess
until approximately 10 minutes after votes conclude on the House floor.
ASHER: All right. You've been watching part of the testimony from FBI director Christopher Wray. Just in that last exchange between congressman
Jim Jordan and Christopher Wray.
[10:45:03]
They talked about the fact the FBI had indeed recovered the drone that the shooter flew over the area in Butler, Pennsylvania, two hours before the
shooting. Does sort of simply survey the site. They talked about the fact that they had recovered explosive devices that were found in his car and
they were reviewing that as well.
Also important to note, the shooter did have a transmitter on him when he was shot by Secret Service agents. And the FBI is also poring through his
devices as well. And the fact that that was no small feat, sort of getting into his devices because he used encrypted messaging apps as well.
Christopher Wray did also touch on the fact that the FBI has been cooperating with the Secret Service in this investigation. I want to bring
in CNN senior national security analyst Juliette Kayyem, who is back with us now.
Juliette, one of the things I thought was quite interesting was when Congressman Bishop spoke at the very start of the hearing and he had a lot
of questioning. He really gave Christopher Wray quite a grilling, talking about the fact that there really does need to be much more transparency
from the FBI.
Also, this idea of why on Earth Crooks was allowed to fire a shot.
Why wasn't Donald Trump kept off the stage, especially given the fact that there was suspicious activity in the area?
Why on Earth he was able to survey the site using a drone?
I mean, when you think about those questions, I sort of wondered whether or not those questions were better suited to the Secret Service than the FBI.
Just give us your take on the grilling that Christopher Wray experienced just there.
KAYYEM: Yes.
Yes, there he's not the right subject. He's not the right witness for those kinds of questions. Those are clearly going to come from the Secret Service
because they were in charge of the security perimeter and of course, in protecting Donald Trump. So part of this is just to get that those
questions are still unanswered out. Wray handled it well.
He said basically, we are -- we are in communication with the Secret Service. We are trying to figure out that that -- what one congressman
said, that five minutes, right, when there's an identification.
And Donald Trump is not pulled from the stage, what the -- what Wray wants the committee to focus on, which they won't, is clearly the motive issue,
is what was he able to do and what why did he do what he did and what capacity did he have?
That's the discussion about the explosives and the drones and other things.
I will say, I mean, my overall picture so far, which I've been pondering since the assassination attempt and I think is the fundamental
contradiction of what happened that day, is that the -- a very unsophisticated person with very unsophisticated technology -- the drone
was described as unsophisticated.
The triggers were described as unsophisticated -- the access to a weapon, which is relatively easy in the United States; no clear agenda or motive --
was able to almost kill the former President of the United States.
Like the gap between his sophistication or lack thereof and the consequences is just something that no one's able to fill right now. And
that's the --
(CROSSTALK)
ASHER: This is an interesting point because some people would say that that is not often the case. You go back to 1981 and the attempted
assassination of Ronald Reagan. It is often sort of these unsophisticated people that are -- that sort of dare to do these things.
Isn't that often the case throughout American history, when you have attempted assassinations of presidents?
It's not sort of people that you would think would be capable of it.
KAYYEM: Yes, that's exactly right and -- but here's the two differences.
One is, since the attack on Ronald Reagan, the Secret Service has completely adapted its protectee efforts. So part of this is because of how
close John Hinckley came is we had always assumed that the Secret Service was much more -- much quicker, much, much more nimble in terms of the
threat environment.
The other thing is that, you know, I think that's what's inexplicable, is the amount of time that lots of people were thinking something weird and
they're -- and then ultimately dangerous was threatening Donald Trump from his -- the first accounts that he -- well, from his drones, right, to the
suspicious -- people go to find him as suspicious to people pointing at him, the people pointing at him on the roof.
That -- the Hinckley assassination or the Hinckley attempt on Ronald Reagan was a few seconds and Reagan's in the car. This unfolds in slow motion in a
way that, let's just be honest, no one has an answer for yet.
[10:50:00]
Except for it was a huge, huge mistake.
ASHER: You're absolutely right.
I mean, it was almost, I believe, just under two minutes from the time when he was first spotted on the roof to actually when he fired the first
bullet. So there's obviously a lot of gaps in terms of security failures.
Juliette Kayyem, we have to leave it there. Thank you so much.
All right. We're going to have much more news after this quick break. Don't go away.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
ASHER: All right.
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to address a joint session of U.S. Congress Wednesday afternoon. He is expected to face
protesters when he arrives ahead of the speech. Dozens of Democrats are also expected to skip his address too.
My next guest is in Washington, D.C, where he and his organization are among those who've been speaking out against the war in Gaza and protesting
against Israeli prime minister Netanyahu's speech to Congress. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NADAV WEIMAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, BREAKING THE SILENCE (from captions): We are here today with our friends, with Common Defense, calling for a
ceasefire. And we need a ceasefire because we need to release our hostages because we need to enter humanitarian aid inside, because we need to renew
support of UNRWA inside Gaza.
And we need to do that for the Palestinian people and for the Israeli people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ASHER: (INAUDIBLE) is Nadav Weiman, a former IDF soldier. He now runs Breaking the Silence.
Nadav, thank you so much for being with us. We just saw in that clip what you want. Your goal is obviously a ceasefire, among other things.
But if Netanyahu's address to Congress is simply more of the same -- and when I say more of the same, I'm talking about just sort of simply saying
that the war in Gaza is not going to stop until the last hostage comes home and also until Hamas is destroyed.
If that is Netanyahu's message today, what will your reaction to that be?
What other recourse do people, who have the same views as yourself, have?
WEIMAN: Well, first of all Bibi Netanyahu's speech, we need to think about it in the context. The context of the forecasts that are now happening in
Tel Aviv, in Israel. For the past nine months, Israelis by the tens of thousands are demonstrating all ceasefire and releasing our hostages.
Well, Bibi Netanyahu over here, doesn't really represent Israelis.
[10:55:00]
He represents his extreme right-wing government, that's for sure.
And us, his soldiers, we know how horrible it is, how the IDF conducts inside Gaza and stopping humanitarian aid inside. It harms our hostages
more than anything else. So Bibi Netanyahu, he wants to keep this war as a political war for him, so he can remain in power.
ASHER: And just quickly, in terms of your goal and what you're protesting against, is it simply the war in Gaza and wanting the war in Gaza to stop
and wanting there to be a ceasefire or was it against Netanyahu specifically?
Because obviously, as you point out and others have said, there are political motives to Netanyahu's mode of conduct here.
WEIMAN: First and foremost, I'm representing the organization of 1,500 soldiers that (INAUDIBLE) against the Israeli occupation. And we see this
war as a part of the Israeli occupation. It has a context, this war.
And we are here in Washington, D.C., with our partners from Common Defense, the biggest grassroots veterans organization in the U.S., with its veteran
soldiers from Israel and the U.S. fighting together to stop our forever war, the Israeli occupation.
So for us, it's a part of a bigger struggle that way.
ASHER: Nadav Weiman, I apologize. We do have to leave it there. I'm out of time. Thank you so, so much for being with us. I wish we could have spoken
for longer.
But that is it for CONNECT THE WORLD. I'm Zain Asher, "CNN NEWSROOM" is up next. You're watching CNN.
[11:00:00]
END
