White House press briefing with Attorney General Todd Blanche

[0:07] All right. Good afternoon, everybody. So before taking questions, I thought it made sense to, [0:16] since it is me here, the Attorney General, to just spend a few minutes talking about [0:21] the work that we're doing at the Department of Justice. The first thing I'm going to talk about [0:26] is terrorism. Since President Trump returned to office, FBI data shows 4,260 arrests related to [0:36] FTOs, including 1,039 individuals prevented from carrying out alleged terrorist attacks. [0:44] That's 38% increase from the last administration. I want to talk about some recent cases, [0:52] an ISIS Butler County Pennsylvania terrorism arrest that just took place this morning [0:59] out of our Pittsburgh office. A 21-year-old man, Jonathan Kramer, was charged and arrested for [1:06] receiving a firearm and ammunition with intent to commit terrorism on behalf of ISIS. He was [1:12] arrested. The investigation is ongoing, and there'll be more from that in the future. Just [1:18] today, in the Southern District of New York, an indictment was returned that's charging multiple [1:24] Russian individuals, that since 2024, these individuals who worked for the services of the [1:32] Russian intelligence community. We're charged with financing terrorism and conspiring to commit [1:38] murder for hire around the world, including efforts to murder a Russian dissident who they believe was [1:46] located in the Washington, D.C. area. I want to talk next about the great work that we're doing, [1:53] and President Trump talks about it all the time, but it's never too much in reducing crime in this country. [2:00] Under President Trump's leadership, crime is the lowest it has been in modern history. In 2025, [2:08] murder rates were down nearly 20 percent. Violent crime was down nearly 10 percent. [2:15] DOJ, as federal law partners, our state and local partners, were working together and coordinating [2:21] as never seen before, and that's why you see the results that you're seeing to make America safe. [2:28] Another point to talk about is the work that we've done in Memphis. Today is the one-year anniversary [2:36] of us signing the Memorandum of Understanding with Memphis to do the great work that we've done over [2:41] the past year. Nearly 13,000 arrests in the Memphis area, more than 2,000 illegal firearms seized, and nearly [2:49] 1,500 known gang members arrested over the past year. We also located more than 200 missing children. [2:58] St. Louis, over the past four weeks, our HSTF platform has been extraordinarily successful arresting [3:07] over 250 violent criminals, many with outstanding warrants and extensive criminal history, and they've [3:14] taken over 100 illegal firearms off the streets. That's just in the past four weeks. And today, you may [3:21] have heard Director Patel announce that the FBI has arrested 10 out of 10 of the criminals on the [3:28] FBI's 10 most wanted list in the first 18 months of the administration. We've talked a lot about fraud. [3:34] Yesterday, I was in Missouri with the vice president talking about a COVID fraud takedown that we've been [3:44] working on in Missouri and the neighboring states. This surge resulted in fraud enforcement actions [3:50] spanning over 160 criminal defendants and involved approximately $245 million in intended loss. And again, [4:00] this was an effort just between June, mid-June and September 1st of this year. We worked with the [4:07] Small Business Administration and their Office of Inspector General, the FBI, our federal prosecutors, [4:12] and 40 U.S. Attorney's offices to obtain these charges. Between newly charged defendants, [4:19] approximately 43 defendants have already pleaded guilty to SBA-related COVID fraud with nearly $50 million [4:27] in intended loss. And one more highlight on fraud. This is just today. Our great U.S. Attorney in the [4:36] Southern District of California, Adam Gordon, just held a press conference and announced just about [4:41] an hour ago that there were 12 daycare fraudsters who were arrested this morning for funneling more [4:47] than $10 million intended to help low-income families pay for childcare to what were really just [4:53] completely bogus daycare facilities. Now, all 12 of these individuals were naturalized citizens from [5:00] Syria, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, and Somalia. When it comes to unlawful voting, which I expect there may be [5:09] a question about in a moment, the DOJ and DHS are working together to prioritize unlawful voting in our [5:16] elections. Election integrity should not be a partisan issue. Those who are not legally allowed to vote [5:23] shouldn't. And if you no only break the law, you will be held accountable. In just the past 10 days, [5:29] the Department of Justice has announced charges against 11 individuals for illegally voting in 2024 [5:36] and 2022 or fraudulently registering to vote. What we are seeing is illegal aliens voting, [5:44] non-citizens who are not eligible to vote voting, or those fraudulently registering to voters who are not [5:50] eligible to vote. So just to put a finer point on this, in under two years, this administration has [5:56] charged nearly four times as many non-citizen voting cases as the last administration brought in four [6:03] years. And we're currently investigating hundreds of cases across the country. And our great U.S. Attorney, [6:12] Ryan Raybould in the Northern District of Texas, will be announcing a big development on this topic [6:17] in about an hour, so shortly after this briefing. So with that, I will take questions if there are any. [6:28] And I know it's a different environment than before. I notice you guys are sweating, [6:32] which is nice. I'd love to see that. We'll start out with Caroline Downey from the National Review. [6:41] They give you a list, guys. Everybody calm down. Caroline Downey from the National Review. [6:47] Sorry? Does the Supreme Court's ruling on the mail-in ballot executive order present an [6:56] obstacle to future ballot fraud prosecution, in your view? And as we look to 2028, [7:00] do you foresee a future legal battle for the Postal Service when it comes to preventing non-citizens [7:06] from voting? The Supreme Court's decision today, or yesterday, doesn't affect ongoing criminal [7:12] investigations into illegal voting, no. I mean, look, I think the – we – President Trump, [7:18] there's nothing – there should be nothing surprising about what we're trying to do when it comes to [7:22] mail-in voting, which is we want to make sure that there is safe voting and that there is integrity, [7:29] free and fair elections, and that there is one person placing one vote and that that person's [7:34] eligible to vote. And so we're – you saw part of the decision was the timing and that we ran out of [7:42] time because of the litigation, in part. And so our efforts to – and President Trump's efforts to [7:48] make sure that we have free and fair elections are not going to stop just in November or after [7:53] or thereafter. So I expect you're going to see that work continue. Mary Margaret? [7:59] Hello. Thank you, sir. I had two questions for you, if that's okay. The first, Tom Holman said on [8:11] Sunday that Homeland Security Investigations is actively investigating Ilhan Omar. If she's found [8:16] a committed immigration fraud, would the Trump administration deport her? And then the second [8:21] question is, there's concern among the MAGA base that there's a lot of ideological actors in the FBI [8:28] and DOJ still that are waiting out President Donald Trump and the next possible Republican [8:33] administration to get back to doing what they were before. Are you concerned about that? And what [8:37] are you doing about that? So on the – I'm not talking about ongoing criminal investigations, [8:43] and so I'm not – I don't have anything to say about your first question or anybody that's – or [8:47] public reporting about what others have said about ongoing investigations. Ideological – any ideology [8:55] that any federal employee has, whether it's a federal agent or somebody at the Department of [8:59] Justice or any other agency that works in this administration and the executive is never a good [9:06] thing, whether it's Republican or Democrat. And so I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to, [9:11] except for just generally. But one of the things that Director Patel has been doing, [9:14] and that I've been doing, and other Cabinet secretaries have been doing, [9:18] is making sure that everybody that works in this administration, whether you're a career or a [9:23] political, are doing work that's consistent with the President's agenda. And that's what you have [9:28] to do if you're going to work in the executive. That's what Article 2 says. And so I don't – it's [9:34] not something that I, quote, worry about, unquote, but when we and if we learn about that happening, [9:40] we'll do whatever we can to stop it. Sorry, you have to use microphones. It gives me a chance to catch [9:48] my breath. No worries. It's pretty good. No worries. Thank you for joining us. Two things I want to [9:53] clarify. You said prosecutions of potential election fraud are going to continue despite the [9:59] court ruling. But does the Justice Department plan to suspend the attempts to establish federal mail [10:06] ballot standards for the 2026 cycle? Will that end for now? And then I'm curious what you make, [10:14] whether you agree with the President and what he said about his three Supreme Court nominees, [10:19] that they, quote, are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court. [10:23] They are merely a shell of their original selves. So we're – of course we're going to comply with [10:30] the Supreme Court's decision, as we always do. That doesn't mean that we're not going to do [10:35] everything in this administration that we can to make sure that there are free and fair elections. And [10:40] again, there's this – there's this constant pressure and this – this effort by the media and by [10:46] mostly by Democrats that somehow doing that is a bad thing. Everybody should want that. The [10:51] Republicans and Democrats should want free and fair elections. So while the Supreme Court did what it [10:57] did, we're not going to stop the work that we're doing. But we are, of course, going to follow the [11:02] orders of the court. As far as President Trump's truth about the justices, he is very frustrated. [11:10] And I wasn't at the interviews that he was – that he participated in during the last administration [11:16] when he selected these folks to be on the Supreme Court. He has every right, and indeed he should [11:24] communicate his concerns with the Supreme Court whenever he has them. This isn't the first time [11:29] that he's done it, and it won't be the last. He's also publicly very appreciative of the Supreme Court [11:33] when there's decisions that he very much agrees with. That's what a democracy is about. A democracy [11:39] is about three branches of government. And President Trump being critical of folks on the Supreme Court, [11:45] we very much disagree with the Supreme Court's decision. And that should be obvious from our [11:49] papers and from our – what we've said publicly about the case. And so I am also upset about the [11:57] Supreme Court decision. But the idea that President Trump shouldn't be allowed to communicate to the [12:01] American people his frustration. I don't share that. Just next to you. See, there's a microphone, [12:08] so I can't hear you. Don't you love that? Next question. [12:10] Did you ask for Joe DeGeneva's resignation? And did he tell you that he felt there wasn't [12:17] enough evidence to move forward with the grand conspiracy investigation? [12:20] So I don't want to talk about communication I have with prosecutors. It's not fair to them. [12:24] It's not fair to the process. He resigned last week. He came out of retirement to help the [12:32] president and to help us. And we're very appreciative of the work that he did. [12:36] Beyond that, there's been a few news stories about – he said some different things to different [12:41] outlets, which is fine. I'm just going to leave it. I very much appreciate the work that he did for us [12:47] and for the administration. Any investigations that he's working on, of course, continue, [12:52] like they do – like any investigation does when somebody leaves. And we're not going to slow down [12:57] just because somebody leaves. Jared Halpern? Jared Halpern? [13:09] Thank you, Mr. Attorney General. Two questions for you. First, from a law enforcement perspective, [13:14] what are your concerns about artificial intelligence? What regulations are needed? Do you think there should [13:19] be a slowdown in that technology, especially with how it's being used increasingly in law enforcement [13:26] operations? And then secondly, more broadly, what role should Americans expect the Justice Department [13:31] to take in the upcoming midterm elections? So I'll answer the first question – the second [13:39] question first. The federal government is always involved in elections. That's not new to this [13:43] administration. It's not new to the Biden administration. And so our role is going to be [13:47] the same role that federal governments play in elections under the law, as we're required to [13:54] do and as we should do. So we're going to continue to do that in this election, just like the Biden [13:59] administration did it during the elections when Biden was president. And so as far as AI is concerned, [14:05] we have a lot of – there's a lot of criminal laws. And so if anybody associated with AI violates [14:11] criminal law, we'll investigate that. We already have. There's plenty of cases involving AI that we've [14:16] charged individuals. I do not think it's the job of the Department of Justice to regulate. We're [14:20] prosecutors, not regulators. So we're not going to try to regulate AI. AI is extraordinarily beneficial [14:27] to our society. There's a lot of great work that AI does. And it's also something that conveniently has [14:34] become a flashpoint this week. And the president spoke about that, and I very much agree with him. [14:38] The second row, Stephen Nelson. Oh, it's my favorite paper, The New York Post. Amazing. [14:48] MR. Thank you very much, Mr. Attorney General. [14:49] MR. I actually didn't know that when I called on him, I promise. [14:51] MR. I'd like to ask you about the Iran War and about Anthony Fauci. On the Iran War, [14:57] Congressman Thomas Massey today introduced articles of impeachment against Secretary Hegseth. [15:01] MR. Who did? [15:02] MR. Thomas Massey. [15:03] MR. Oh, okay. [15:03] MR. For allegedly violating the War Powers Resolution by conducting the war without congressional [15:08] authorization. What's your current legal assessment of how long the work continued [15:12] without specific congressional authorization? And secondly, on Anthony Fauci, could you describe [15:17] the status of your review of his alleged contempt of Congress? Are we any closer to charges there? [15:24] And can you explain why your department didn't prosecute him for allegedly perjuring himself? [15:29] MR. So the first question is, Secretary Hegseth is doing a phenomenal job. And the Secretary of War [15:38] doesn't just go off and do things. So he follows the law. And so the DOJ plays a role in that. And [15:44] we play an active role in making sure the laws comply with. You called it a war. I disagree with [15:48] that characterization, as does most of Congress. And so there's been votes on whether it's a war and [15:55] what to do. And why votes through Congress, which has determined that he's not doing anything wrong and [16:01] the President's not doing anything wrong, should result in articles of impeachment. I guess you'll have [16:05] to talk to Massey about that. As far as Dr. Fauci, again, it's an ongoing investigation. I'm not [16:14] going to talk about it. So we take any time anybody lies to Congress or potential lies to Congress [16:19] seriously. But beyond that, I don't have a comment. John Decker. [16:22] JOHN DECKER. Thank you, Mr. Attorney General. I [16:29] wanted to follow up with your remarks regarding that decision by the Supreme Court regarding mail-in voting. [16:35] As you said, the President was not pleased by this ruling by the Supreme Court. And he put out a [16:40] lengthy social media post. He said, in part, the Supreme Court has really let our country down. [16:46] Certain justices are petrified of these crazed and depraved Democrats and are totally [16:53] unable to show the courage necessary to save our America. You used to be the President's personal [16:59] lawyer. You used to be in private practice. Would you ever encourage one of your clients [17:05] to disparage a court in the manner that the President has disparaged the Supreme Court? [17:13] I mean, so you can't talk about my background and then ask me what I would have done. He's the [17:19] President of the United States. So the real question is whether the President of the United States [17:24] is allowed to be critical of another branch of government? And the answer to that is absolutely. [17:29] Of course he is. And by the way, what he wrote about that is the same thing that he said publicly [17:35] repeatedly. It's the same thing that DOJ's briefs have said about the issue. We do think that this [17:40] decision is not the right decision. That is okay. That's the way democracy works. And so what I would [17:47] have advised the client or what I would have done when I was a prosecutor or when I was President Trump's [17:51] lawyer isn't in any way or shape relevant to what the President of the United States should be doing [17:57] in communicating to the American people. Are you guys sweating yet? Nice. I love that. [18:09] Are you? No, I'm comfortable. It's actually really nice. [18:13] I have water if anybody needs it. That's all right. I want to put a finer point on that last question, [18:18] and then I have another question related to it. On the comments from the President specifically that [18:22] these Supreme Court justices in this decision aren't the people he interviewed. Does that undermine [18:28] even the perception of the court's independence in your view? Not at all. No, I mean, he wants [18:35] another one. That's okay. He can have another one. No, I don't think it undermined. Like I think, [18:39] look, what happened after the Dobbs decision? Members of Congress, the administration came out [18:45] basically threatening judges for months on end. There's a full security force, okay, around every justice [18:52] because of the rhetoric after the Supreme Court issued that decision. And so the fact the President [18:57] issues a truth saying that the justices that interviewed in front of him, you know, six, [19:02] seven years ago, eight years ago, are not the justices he's seeing now, that that undermines the, [19:08] no, I don't think in any way, shape or form it does that. I think that that's just something that [19:13] the media wants to put on it. He has a, the President should be communicating to the American people [19:19] about, about cases that are extraordinarily important to him, which this one, which this one [19:23] is. And, and related to this whole discussion, after all this back and forth, are you concerned [19:30] at all that voters may be confused about what their options actually are now to vote by mail? And what, [19:34] if anything, will the DOJ do to kind of educate people on the fallout of this case now? [19:39] I'm, I'm not sure that the American people follow this as closely as, as the folks in this, [19:47] in this beautiful Rose Garden do. Um, so no, I, I haven't seen any suggestion or any information [19:52] or heard from secretaries of state that, that that's an issue. That's the response. I mean, [19:57] listen, ballots are confusing in every election, the way they're distributed, the way they're talked [20:02] about. That's something that, that's, that, that the state and locals handle very well every single [20:08] election cycle for one reason or another. So no, that doesn't, that doesn't concern me. Go ahead. [20:12] Thank you so much. And just, uh, acknowledging that you're standing in front of the Oval Office [20:24] and the president might be watching here. So if at any point he wants to come out, [20:27] I don't think, and take our questions. He's always watching. I don't think the [20:30] mere fact that I'm standing here. We would love to see him. Uh, A.G. Blanche. [20:33] No offense. I'm standing right here. Okay. You're doing a great job. Two questions here. Um, [20:38] the first, you know, you go after crooks and criminals and thieves. Uh, the government has made [20:43] it very clear that China has been stealing from our AI companies. So is it time to go after China [20:52] and particularly president Xi, who will be here in Washington next week, is it time for the president [20:58] to talk to him about how China has been stealing from us? Well, so when you say China, you're talking [21:04] to about an entire country. And so, um, the president has the, those two presidents have a great [21:09] relationship and they're, they're, they get along, they make deals together. But does that, [21:14] is, are there separate issues with actors in China and companies in China and bad actors? [21:19] That has existed long before this administration and will exist for the next several years. And, [21:24] and the department of justice and, and other agencies in, in the executive, of course, [21:28] we're doing everything we can to combat that and to go after that in the, in the right, [21:31] in the right way. But I don't think it's fair to just label China as a country. There's bad actors [21:36] in China that are doing it, which we're, we're definitely going to go after. All right, [21:39] somebody in the back. Um, yeah, the guy pointing to his own head. That's pretty good. [21:44] See, it's a microphone thing. I can't hear you. Sorry. I can't hear you. Hey, hey there. Thank you. [21:54] Uh, Willie Nelson with SRN. Mr. Attorney General, reports say actress Hayden Pantier may have died [22:00] after taking a pill laced with fentanyl. The DEA is looking at her alleged dealer. What is the Justice [22:06] Department going to, uh, doing to go after the people that sell these fake pills? And my second [22:12] question is, uh, is the AI doomsday talk a real national security issue or is it a way to put the [22:19] government in charge of the internet? So when it comes to fentanyl, they're not fake pills, [22:24] they're death pills, right? So they're pills that kill people. And there's a federal statute [22:29] that allows us to go after it. Assuming we can, we can prove who the dealer is to go after them [22:35] and put them in prison for murder. And we do it in every district in this country. And, [22:40] and it's a big, it's a big emphasis of, of, of DEA, Minister Cole and our prosecutors around the [22:46] country. So when we can prove, and sometimes if somebody is an addict, it's difficult to prove [22:51] who they actually got the pill from. But in the cases where we, where we know who the dealer was, [22:56] and we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that, that the person sold the, the death pill to the, [23:02] to the victim who, who then dies, that's a, that's a federal crime. And that's something [23:06] that we will readily prosecute, um, as often as we can, as far as the AI question, I answered it [23:12] earlier, but I mean, there's no, I mean, I, this should not be breaking news that this AI, um, issue [23:18] that suddenly come up two months before an election is being done. The president calls it a hoax that [23:24] the way this has come around today and not three months ago. I mean, I was watching the news today, [23:30] every Democrat senator suddenly races to a microphone to talk about AI after being eerily [23:34] silent for months and months and months. So to talk about the timing of this as being nothing but an [23:39] effort to, to influence the midterms, I shouldn't have to say that out loud. Of course that what it [23:44] is, that's, that's what it is. And that shouldn't be what drives the, the, the decisions that we're [23:50] making around AI. We can't lose the AI race to China, right? President Trump says that, [23:55] everybody says that, but they say it because it's true. Go second row. Yes. Liz Landers with PBS [24:04] NewsHour. Um, the FBI conducted a raid at Fulton County, Georgia back in January of this year, [24:10] and they alleged that there was impropriety with the 2020 election there. Has the Department of [24:15] Justice found any evidence from the FBI of that? Why is it taking so long? If you all think that there [24:21] was election fraud in 2020, why has that not come forward? Where is the evidence? Well, so it wasn't a, [24:28] the FBI conducted a raid. It's that a judge authorized a search warrant based upon probable [24:32] cause to allow us to search, um, and then collect those records. There are hundreds of thousands [24:37] of records and they are now many, many years old. And so I'm not sure what the question about timing is, [24:44] but, but when, when we have an answer, when the investigation is complete, you will know. I'm not, [24:50] you can't rush an investigation like that reviewing hundreds of thousands of ballots from many, [24:54] many years ago. There's, that's something, again, it's an ongoing criminal investigation, [24:58] so getting into the weeds of what we're doing and not doing isn't appropriate, but, [25:02] but it's also not appropriate to, to suggest that this is just the FBI or the DOJ going and seizing [25:08] records. It's a judge reviewing, it's a judge reviewing, um, reviewing an affidavit and finding [25:12] that there is probable cause. All right, somebody in the back. Yes, uh, you, sure. [25:16] Was the president aware that his son was accepting a gift from Russian oligarch when he decided not to [25:32] go to Bahamas to his wedding? What was his reaction when he learned about it? And, uh, to you as a public [25:41] official, uh, was it appropriate for the son of the president of the United States to accept [25:48] such a gift from a foreign businessman, from a friend of Putin? And are you going to investigate [25:55] if everything was, uh, appropriately reported, uh, as a gift? So I, the president's already talked [26:02] about it. So I, I wasn't with the president when he learned, so I, I can't give you a firsthand account, [26:06] but the president has talked about it. Other people have talked about it. The president doesn't [26:09] know who this person is. I think other members of the family don't know who this person is. Um, [26:13] the president's son has said that he's a very close friend and that he accepted a gift in the weekend [26:18] of his wedding. Um, I'm not, so, so I, I don't, I'm not sure what, when you say, am I investigating, [26:25] am I investigating what? And when you say this person is a friend of Putin, I don't even know if [26:30] that's true or not. So I, I like the, that it's, it's fun to talk about this issue and the, and the [26:35] rhetoric around it. But, but I think all the relevant people involved, the president and his, [26:40] his kids have already addressed it. I don't have any information. I don't know this person either. [26:45] So I don't have any information about it. Um, beyond that. Okay. We'll take just a couple more. [26:49] You, you, I was going to say the, the bald guy, but that's probably in trouble for that. [26:55] Oh, uh, Cara Castro from Lindell TV. Thank you so much for taking my question today. [27:00] And I have two questions that are deeply, I think important to our audience. One of them [27:04] is about the department of justice weaponization working group and what the status of that working [27:08] group is, uh, specifically under your leadership, will the DOJ finally investigate the treatment [27:13] of the January six political prisoners, uh, and the four deaths that occurred that day, [27:18] including the killing of two women by police and any federal agency involvement? And will you also [27:23] consider investigating whether there was any improper contact as, as it was reported by sources [27:28] between Merrick Garland's DOJ and activist DC judges? So on, so again, the, the same question [27:37] about ongoing investigations is not appropriate for me to talk about them and it never will be. [27:42] Um, when it comes to the weaponization working group, we've been putting out a work product almost [27:46] every month, the past several months, including in August, addressing, um, another one of the, [27:51] of the, of the issues that we were charged with looking into. So that work continues. [27:57] The, the, the, all the work that we're doing around the, um, around the anti weaponization, [28:02] uh, the, the fixing what we believe and what we know went wrong during the last administration [28:07] doesn't just happen overnight. It involves like any investigation, reviewing records and interviews [28:12] and having lawyers and agents in some cases do work. And so that work continues, but it's not fair [28:18] to the process, to the prosecutors or to anybody involved for me to give nuggets along the way of [28:24] what we're doing or not doing. So I'm not going to do that. Yes, you. [28:35] Thank you, Mr. Attorney General. Um, so on, OpenAI has said that they're working with Google and [28:40] Anthropic on security measures, uh, for their AI models. Do they need antitrust waivers? Do you see [28:47] that in the future? Plus, um, are you concerned about who controls the, the information that is [28:52] coming out of AI models? Well, whether, whether entities need an antitrust waiver is not something I [28:59] can answer from the podium of the White House, there's dozens of factors that, that go into [29:03] that and, and there's an application process and there's, there's a kind of a, a, a process that [29:08] DOJ and others use to determine what's, I don't, I can't address that. I can say that, that to the [29:13] extent that, that, um, those companies are looking to regulate themselves or fix problems that they [29:19] have, that they should, they should do that, but, but working with us if, if, if necessary. So that's all I can [29:24] say about that. All right, one more. Go ahead. Sorry. All right, I'll give, I'll come to you next. [29:35] Questions? Earlier today, President Trump said that there was new evidence in the assassination [29:41] attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. He said it was a democratic plot. Moments later, Kash Patel [29:46] testified that the shooter wasn't speaking to anyone other than his parents. Can you please explain [29:53] both how this was a democratic plot and what this new evidence is? And a second question, which is in the [29:59] same post, he said that Christopher Ray should be punished for his lack or of oversight during [30:05] this investigation. Is the Justice Department considering bringing charges against Chris Ray? [30:09] So the, the Department of Justice doesn't punish, by the way. But, um, so I, look, I, I was with [30:16] President Trump during the time period before and after the attempted assassination attempt on his [30:21] life. And he was shot. He was a victim. There was an innocent man killed. There were other people who [30:26] were very seriously injured when that happened. Um, what President Trump said today about the new [30:32] information and this new information is information that, that we found, that the FBI found that, [30:36] that produced to, to the Senate, um, in response to inquiries that they had. It is new information [30:41] about the shooter and about, um, his background, about, um, his history and that stuff that we didn't [30:48] know before. So that's the new information. As far as the president's frustration with the FBI, [30:53] um, I was there with him. I lived it. I mean, you have a situation where, where it's not really [30:58] clear what the leadership of the FBI were doing in the weeks and months ahead of the, um, attempted [31:04] assassination to protect President Trump. That's the same organization that was simultaneously trying [31:09] to, um, put him in prison until he dies. So, so his frustration and concern about what the, the, [31:15] the former director was doing, um, is something that is not new. He said that for a very long time. [31:20] I was with him during the investigation and trying, you know, before he was elected president, [31:25] trying to understand what happened and why. And, and director Patel has, has undertaken a [31:31] Herculean effort to go through all the documents and understand, um, what was missed, if anything, [31:37] and, and to provide anything that hadn't come forward to the American people, to the American [31:41] people. And that, and that's what he's done. Okay. Last question for you. [31:45] Thank you very much, Attorney General. Mr. Curtis here. Two questions. What is your plan for ISIS [31:52] prisoners in Iraq and Syria, including those captured by the Peshmerga forces in fight against [32:00] ISIS and terrorism? This is very important issue. And second one, what are you doing to stop Iran-backed [32:07] militias in Iraq from using the U.S. financial system to fund their activities? [32:13] Well, the first one, working with Treasury Secretary Besant and, um, DHS, uh, we, we spend a tremendous [32:22] amount of resources and effort to keep our financial system clear of any terrorist financing. If we find [32:28] money that is linked to terrorism, to freeze that money and to seize it if we ultimately can, [32:33] that's something that we always do and will continue to do. As far as what, what we're going to do with, [32:37] with prisoners in, in those countries, it depends. I mean, if the prisoners are charged here with crimes, [32:42] we'll, we'll obviously, we want people we charge with crimes to come here and face justice, [32:46] but, um, it depends on, on the circumstances around that. Okay. Can I just say in, can I, no, I'm, [32:52] I'm done with questions. I stayed 10 minutes longer than I was supposed to. Um, I, uh, I will tell you the [32:59] fact that Caroline Levitt did this for as long as she did is incredible. Um, so thank you guys very much [33:05] for letting me, uh, join you all today. I'm very sorry that you're sweating. I'm not really sorry. [33:13] Um, but, but thank you very much. And, and I want to thank, uh, publicly thank Caroline Levitt for [33:18] doing this for a long time for president Trump. She's a, she's a very, she's a lot better than me. [33:23] And, uh, and so thank you guys very much. I appreciate it. Thank you for your team as well. [33:29] Thank you.