Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz testified on Wednesday before the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government and faced questions regarding the presence of confidential human sources, or informants, among the crowd during the Capitol unrest of Jan. 6, 2021.

Horowitz was questioned about -- and seemed to acknowledge -- the possible involvement of federal informants during the Jan. 6 demonstrations over which Donald Trump has received immense criticism, but he refrained from disclosing precise numbers, stating that the investigation was still in progress, as Fox News reports.

During his testimony, Horowitz confirmed that his office had resumed a review of the Justice Department's actions surrounding the Capitol riot after a temporary pause due to ongoing criminal investigations. The review, which began in 2021, is part of an effort to assess the federal government's response to the events on that day. Horowitz indicated that a draft report is currently under classification review and is expected to be made public within the coming months.

Massie Presses on Confidential Human Sources

One of the key moments of the hearing occurred when Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) directly asked Horowitz about the number of confidential human sources present at the Capitol during the protests. Massie inquired whether there were more than 100 informants involved in the event, pressing for clarity on the role these federal assets may have played. Horowitz did not deny that informants were present, though he refrained from providing a specific figure.

“I’m not in a position to say that, both because it is in draft form, and we have not gone through the classification review,” Horowitz responded when asked if he had concrete numbers. He reassured the committee that the final report would include detailed information on this matter, but until the review is complete, he could not offer further specifics.

Report Expected for Release in 2025

Horowitz shared that the ongoing review had resumed last year, and while he hoped the report would be finalized soon, he expressed doubts about its completion before Election Day in November 2024. However, he did voice optimism that the report would be ready before the next presidential inauguration on Jan. 20, 2025.

"The goal is certainly to have it done before then," Horowitz remarked, but he made no promises about the exact timeline.

Massie also questioned whether any federal sources were reimbursed for their travel expenses to Washington, D.C., during the Jan. 6 events. Horowitz responded that he could not recall the exact number of reimbursements, but assured the committee that any such information would be part of the final report.

Hearing Highlights FBI Actions

In addition to the focus on Jan. 6, the hearing covered a broader range of topics related to the FBI’s conduct. Lawmakers questioned Horowitz about allegations that the FBI has used security clearance adjudication processes to target conservative employees and whistleblowers. Alongside Horowitz, an FBI whistleblower and Tristan Leavitt, the president of Empower Oversight, testified, bringing attention to these claims.

The subcommittee, chaired by Republicans, has been investigating alleged bias within federal agencies, particularly the FBI and DOJ. Wednesday's hearing was a continuation of these efforts, with the events of Jan. 6 taking center stage.

Federal Informants at the Capitol

The possibility of federal informants being present at the Capitol during the Jan. 6 unrest has been a point of contention in numerous political discussions. The idea that confidential human sources may have been embedded in the crowd has raised questions about the federal government's involvement, or lack thereof, in managing the situation.

Horowitz’s refusal to deny the existence of these sources adds another layer to the ongoing debate about the role of federal agencies in the events that transpired that day. His comments reinforced that while the presence of federal assets is likely, specific details will not be revealed until his office concludes its review.

Whistleblower Testimony Adds Context

The testimony from the FBI whistleblower and Tristan Leavitt also provided important context regarding how federal agencies have handled whistleblowers and internal dissent. Allegations of retaliation against conservative employees were brought up, though much of the focus remained on the events of January 6 and the potential involvement of federal informants.

Horowitz has been involved in numerous oversight efforts, and his office's reviews have become a focal point in debates over federal accountability. The upcoming report on the January 6 events is expected to address these questions in detail and provide clarity on the federal response during the riot.

Ongoing Investigation Continues

Horowitz’s office has conducted multiple investigations into various aspects of the DOJ and FBI's operations. The January 6 review is one of the most high-profile cases his office has handled. Although the investigation was delayed by overlapping criminal probes, its resumption signals a renewed focus on understanding what occurred that day and the role federal agencies may have played.

In his testimony, Horowitz emphasized that the review was still in draft form and undergoing classification review. His office is working through the complexities of ensuring that sensitive information is properly handled before the report is made public.

Final Report Expected to Answer Key Questions

The final report is expected to shed light on many of the lingering questions surrounding Jan. 6, including the extent of the federal government's knowledge of potential threats and how its agents were deployed during the breach. Horowitz’s testimony has heightened anticipation for the report, which many hope will provide a clearer understanding of the events and actions taken by federal authorities.

As Horowitz noted, the report is unlikely to be released before the 2024 election, but it will almost certainly play a significant role in shaping the public narrative surrounding Jan. 6 once it is published.