MUST WATCH: Chrissy Houlihan Directly Confronts John Ratcliffe, Tulsi Gabbard Over Use Of Signal

Thank you for the time. And I struggle, and if you look at my notes, I've changed my mind about a million times what I'd like to talk about. I'd like to first start with Director Radcliffe. I find it offensive for you to accuse me, as a Democrat, of not caring about national threats. I very much wanted to talk about those, in fact had prepared questions in advance of this hearing about those threats, specifically about biosecurity and bioterrorism, but I don't have time to ask those questions, because the threat is in the House. The threat is across the dais, and I need to ask these questions. It's my job to ask these questions of you. Because when I served in the military, and I served in classified environments, had this happened to me, I would have walked my resignation in immediately. This is not okay. Communicating these sorts of things in signal is not okay. Targets, times, those kinds of things are absolutely classified, and we all know it. I know it. These people know it. You all know it. And the fact that we're having to have these conversations now means that I can't ask the questions that I need to ask about things like bioterrorism and biosecurity. And so I'd like to put you in check as well, sir, because you can't assume who I am any more than I can assume who you are, sir. I would like to move my questions, however, over to Director Gabbard, because you are the DNI. You do have an obligation and a responsibility. I'm going to speak to you specifically about the fact that you have spent much of your 40 days talking about the importance of making sure that we don't reveal classified information, making sure that we don't leak information. You're a former battalion commander in the Army. I don't think that you would have necessarily appreciated the kind of leaking of information that I believe absolutely did happen in this signal channel and is worthy of a further investigation. In fact, this committee established something called 50 U.S.C. 3235A, and this committee on a bipartisan, apartisan basis requires you, the DNI, to swiftly notify Congress and the Intelligence Committee if you're aware of any sort of significant unauthorized disclosure or compromise of classified information, which I would argue this has all of the markings of being that. And so if you, as the DNI, see such a thing anywhere within your organization's purview, you have the obligation to begin an investigation to report back to us on that. Would this seem to qualify to you as something worthy of that investigation? Thank you for your question, Congresswoman. In this situation, Secretary Hegseth has the classification and declassification authority over DOD information. This chat did not have the auspice of being a DOD chat. There's no such thing as labeling it as DOD. This was a chat amongst a great variety of people, and you, according to our law that we passed here bipartisanally, have an obligation, when you think there has been a tangible significant leak of information to instigate an investigation, do you not think it's important to do such a thing? The National Security Council is investigating this inadvertent leak. And again, I point to Secretary Hegseth as having the classification and declassification I would argue that Secretary Hegseth, if he had the dignity that he needs to have, should be walking his resignation in, because I believe that his probably is heading toward being relieved of his duty based on what I think are significant and illegal leaks, most likely. I would like it if you would please commit to this organization that you will follow the law. And I would like it if you would also investigate what is likely to be more than just this chat. Because if there's one, there's more than one. If there's smoke, there's fire. Will you please obligate yourself and your organization to that investigation? Yeah. Congresswoman, yes, I will follow the law. Thank you. I appreciate that. And Director Patel, I learned just recently that you only heard about this yesterday, which blows my mind, since I heard about it two days ago, and I'm just a low on the dais, you know, junior chipmunk here. Did you really only hear about this yesterday? The exact timeline, I'm not aware of, but yeah, I think it was yesterday or the night And now that another day has passed, do you believe... Well, actually, it was the night before the hearing. Now that another day has passed, do you believe that it's now time potentially for the FBI to open an investigation into this? I'm not going to comment on that. Because you're the director of the FBI, you don't believe it's appropriate to comment on that? Because there's a process in place. There's an ongoing litigation, and the National Security Council is reviewing this matter. And I'm not going to discuss any open or closed investigation. That ongoing investigation, literally, the lawsuit happened today or yesterday afternoon. And the idea that you don't have an opinion on this at this point is frustrating to me. No, it's not. I'm not going to prejudge any matters. And the men and women of the FBI will call the balls and strikes. Reclaiming my time, sir. Not you. Gentlemen's recognized. You have four seconds remaining. No, I have more than that. Two seconds remaining. Gentlemen's time has expired. Mr. Stubbe.