# Transcribed Interview of Kashyap Pramod Patel, (December 9, 2021)/3:20pm

Layout 2
​[3:20 p.m.]
    BY :
Q How did you become aware of your own potential appointment to the CIA?
A Which—what are you specifically referring to when you say my "appointment"?
Q Were you ever aware of any potential appointment to the position of Deputy Director at CIA in the time period from November 10th till January 20th?
A Yes. In that time period, I do recall that happening.
Q Can you tell us who told you that?
A I believe it was a representative of PPO and that it was a possibility and a representative—
Q Let me stop you there. Who was the representative from PPO?
A Without having seen any of the emails we probably would've had going back and forth on such a matter, I'm guessing it would've been Mr. McEntee, who's the head of PPO, and probably, as the way the White House works on Presidential personnel decisions is no personnel decisions can be made that aren't done in conjunction with PPO and their chief of staff's office—which would've been Chief of Staff Meadows. So I probably would've talked to either Chief of Staff Meadows or some representative in his office about that.
That's what I remember.
Q Meaning Mr. McEntee or somebody other than Mr. McEntee?
A Yeah, I'm saying I believe it was Mr. McEntee.
Q Okay.
A I'm not limiting it to him because PPO is an enormous office. It has over 50 employees. And then there was also the chief of staff's office, which is also quite large.
​Q And you also said possibly Mr. Meadows. Is that right?
A Yeah, yeah. Right.
Q Did you have any discussion with President Trump about your potential appointment to the CIA?
A My potential appointment—well, yeah. The question appears to implicate core executive privilege concerns. I'm prepared to answer it, but I want the record to reflect my serious concerns about congressional overreaching.
What I recall is, it was discussed amongst the people we already stated about the Deputy Director position at the White House.
Did I have a separate discussion with the President, I believe is what you're asking, about that role? I think it came up in one of our conversations. I don't know if it was before the election or after. I'm just not sure.
Q So, before your appointment to DOD, you could have had that conversation with the President?
A Maybe. Yeah, I just don't have any timeline in front of me to remember the date of that conversation.
Q Understood, but that's a pretty big deal, right? That would've been a huge position, as the Assistant Director at the CIA.
A To be Deputy Director—
Q Deputy.
A —would've been a great promotion. I think it would've been an honor to serve in that capacity. With my intel background, I would have, of course, considered it.
Q So what happened, from what you were aware of? If you had the discussion with Mr.—
A I was never made the Deputy Director of the CIA. It did not happen, as we ​all know.
Q Were you told why?
A Was I told why—
Q Correct.
A —that I wasn't given—
Q Correct. If you have a discussion with Johnny McEntee and possibly Mark Meadows and the President himself that this could happen—
A Yeah. They said this could happen, and we'll let you know. You know, I'm using loose terms here, you know, generalizing their statements. And it did not happen.
I don't think I—you know, we were doing a ton of stuff at DOD. I was not concerned with why appointments did or did not happen. I said, "I serve at the pleasure of, you know, the President. Let me know. Until then, I'm going back to work."
Q What about the Deputy Director for the FBI? Did you have a conversation with Johnny McEntee or Mark Meadows or the President about that position?
A I think we—yeah. We had a conversation—again, I'm not sure of the exact date—about, similarly, about the Deputy Director role at the FBI. But, again, I don't know the exact timeframe on that one.
Q You had the conversation with the same three people? Was it the same conversation? Was it just a conversation of, "Hey, Kash, we're thinking about moving you here, we're thinking about moving you there"?
A It could've been two separate conversations, or it could've been both at once. Are you interested? As how government operates, especially before or around an election, people are trying to plan ahead. There was a lot of work that the PPO office was doing to, if President Trump had won, place their selectees across government, and so—that was their job—they asked if I was interested in doing either of those jobs. I ​said, "I would be interested. Let me know."
Q But it appears that some of these conversations occurred after President Trump had lost the election. Did that impact you in any way in terms of your timeline?
A In terms of my timeline? What do you mean?
Q Well, if the job was ending on January 20th.
A No. As I said—I think I said it before. If I didn't, I'll say it now. I was happy to serve in whatever capacity the White House wanted me to serve in until they said, "Your time is done here." That's the mission.
Q Was there ever a discussion that that Deputy Director position would then turn into the Director of the CIA, had President Trump fired Gina Haspel?
A I'm not—so somebody's going to have to go do the legal gymnastics on that. I don't even think that's possible. But I'm not sure, because I don't know that—I believe the Director of the CIA, it's a PAS, a President-appointed, Senate-confirmed position. So I haven't looked at the—
Q Well, there were many non-Senate-confirmed positions that were appointed during that time, right?
A Yeah. I mean—you're right. You're asking me to speculate. I'm not really sure what would've happened if Ms. Haspel was terminated and I was given the Deputy Director role.
Q No. My question was, was there a discussion that it could lead to a Director position with President Trump? Did you have that discussion?
Mr. Glabe. I'm sorry. What was the question?
    BY :
Q Did you have a discussion with President Trump that if you were appointed to—go ahead.
​[Discussion off the record.]
The Witness. So I don't know if that's even technically possible, but I don't remember a separate conversation with President Trump on me becoming whatever form of director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
    BY :
Q You don't remember, or it didn't happen?
A I'm saying I don't remember a conversation about that.
Q How about as Director of the FBI?
A No, I don't believe a conversation about that was had.
Q So the answer to the Director of FBI is "no," but the answer—
A No. I said I don't believe—
Q Okay.
A —a conversation about that was had.
Q But the answer about the Director of CIA was "I don't remember." I just want to make sure I'm clear on both your answers.
A Yeah. I don't recall the CIA one. I recall not having, to the best of my recollection, a conversation with the President about being the Director of the FBI.
Q But wouldn't it be something significant to remember, if you had a conversation with President Trump about becoming the Director of the CIA?
A And, again, I know you guys try to think this is improbable, but I was in one of those positions for a 2-year period of time, approximately, where I had many conversations with the President impacting things that I would only read about or watch in movies. So, after a certain period of time, they tend to stack up and you just do the mission. And that's what I was focused on.
So, if you have something to show me, I'm happy to look at it, but—
​Q Nothing to show you.
A —I've answered as best as my memory allows.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Do you have anything on that?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yeah.
    BY :
Q Was he dissatisfied with the people that were in those positions at the time? I'm talking about the deputy positions at CIA or FBI.
A Was "he," the President?
Q Yeah. Did you, either from him or from any other source, get the sense that he was displeased with those—
A I don't believe I can answer that question, because I don't believe I know what he, the President, was or was not about that.
Q Okay. I'm asking you whether you have any personal knowledge from any source that he may have been displeased with those people which prompted him to consider you or others as replacements.
A Well, caveat, when you say "any source"—
Q Any source.
A —there's media reporting that said that. I don't know what that media reporting was in reference to. That—I'm trying to be open with you. I've read that media reporting. So I want to say that that media reporting, I have read it, and it speaks to that.
Q Beyond the media reporting, no discussions with Mr. McEntee, with the President, with anyone in the White House, about the President being displeased with the people at CIA or FBI?
A Which positions?
​Q Any positions.
A Yes. There was conversations about—similarly like I had conversations with the President about his displeasure about Dr. Esper—
Q Yeah.
A —there was conversations in general about specific, again, operations that we had undertaken under President Trump, which are classified, to accomplish those goals. We had some conversations about the displeasure of not accomplishing those national security goals.
Q I see. So that's helpful. So there was discussion that you recall—correct me if I'm wrong—about the President being displeased with the CIA or the FBI's role in accomplishing policy goals.
A I think maybe, generally speaking, I would characterize it as operational versus policy, but I don't know that I can get—
Q Well, just tell me what you remember. What was the source of the displeasure?
A Well, I can't get into those details, because those operational goals and decisions were and, as I remember, are classified.
Q So all of it, all of the displeasure of which you're aware, has to do with classified information?
A Well, when you're talking about the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, yeah, they live in the classified space, as I did for most of my career—or all of it, I think, at the White House.
So I'm telling you we had conversations about it, and I'm telling you it was specific to operations. But I'm telling you I'm not going to disclose—and you've asked me not to—
​Q We don't want you to.
A —classified information.
Q Okay.
So, if somebody talked to me about a job and I didn't get it, I'd be curious about why. Did you ever have conversations with anyone about why you were not ultimately, if given, offered either of those jobs in those two agencies?
A I think I spoke to Mr. McEntee about it, like—
Q What did he say?
A —in passing, like, he said the President just decided not to do it or something like that.
Q Did he say why?
A We never got into the details that I can remember.
Q And you just never asked?
A No, because, as I said before, we were busy. I wasn't going to spend time, when I had to execute the mission of the Department of Defense, worrying about the job. I knew I could worry about all of it on January 21st—
Q Okay.
A —because I knew I'd no longer be there. So it might be hard for you to believe, but I put the mission first and made sure that mission was accomplished.
Q Okay. So, to be clear, you never had any conversation with anyone about why that didn't work out for you, other than Mr. McEntee saying it's not going to work out.
A That I can recall. Other than Mr. McEntee, maybe a representative in PPO under him? Maybe? But I just—I don't know.
Q Was it your sense that Mr. McEntee generally was tasked with sort of ​identifying people across the executive branch that were or were not acting in a way that was consistent with the policies of the administration?
A I can't guess to that. I can tell you what the role of PPO is.
Q No, I don't need the role of PPO. Very familiar with that. And I don't want you to guess.
A I'm asking whether you had conversations with anyone, had any knowledge about Mr. McEntee essentially evaluating the loyalty of people across the executive branch, loyalty to the President and the administration.
Mr. Glabe. Can we take a break?
[Discussion off the record.]
The Witness. So I've heard—or, excuse me, I've read media reportings that speak to that.
    BY :
Q Beyond the media reporting, do you have any other information, heard from any source, about Mr. McEntee, again, as sort of evaluating the loyalty of various executive branch officials?
A Not beyond the media reporting that I can recall.
Q No conversations with anyone that you recall? Just the media reporting? That's it?
A Well, that's pretty much it, because the role of political appointees wasn't in my wheelhouse—
Q Okay.
A —as chief of staff of Department of Defense. That was in PPO.
Q I understand, Mr. Patel. We keep coming back to this. We're just trying to get a sense as to whether or not you had general knowledge about stuff that, again, ​seems to us to be significant—
A Okay.
Q —seems to us to be unusual, and things that would logically prompt discussion and questions. And we've sort of had four or five of those exchanges.
A Let me outline it this way.
Q Yeah, please.
A So, generally, did I have—these were conversations that were happening before and after the election, but—
Q Yes.
A —generally, the PPO office was contacting people, that I'm aware, and looking for who would serve if President Trump, you know, were to win the election, who would serve in the next administration.
So people were having those conversations—
Q Yeah.
A —sure. Do I have any in-depth or even detailed knowledge about how that political-appointed process worked within PPO and Mr. McEntee? No, I don't believe so, and—outside of what we've talked about in the roles, you know, we've discussed.
Q Uh-huh.
A But I have, as I said, read a bunch of media reporting on what—
Q Yeah.
A —you're talking about.
Q So have we. I'm not interested in you recounting media reporting or your general—
A I don't want to.
Q —your general description of PPO. I'm asking you whether you had any ​personal knowledge about the criteria that informed the consideration of various people—
A Oh.
Q —for jobs.
A Yeah, when you're talking about criteria, something like that, no, I don't recall that.
Q Criteria specifically being loyalty to—perceived loyalty to—
A Right. I don't recall having those conversations for jobs, as you said.
Q At all?
A I don't recall that.
Q Okay.
    BY
Q Mr. Patel, do you know who Mike Lindell is?
A The TV guy?
Q Yes, the My Pillow guy.
A Yeah, I mean, I don't know Mike Lindell. I've never talked to Mike Lindell. We've never emailed or chatted. But, I mean—
[Discussion off the record.]
The Witness. My lawyers are reminding me, the question appears to be outside the scope of H. Res. 503, to investigate the events of Jan. 6, falls outside of the scope of your legislative purpose. I'm concerned about it—the improper line of questioning and inquiry in an apparent fishing expedition. But I will, nevertheless, do the best to answer this question.
Q Thank you.
So, on January 15th, Mike Lindell was photographed by The Washington Post ​coming out of the White House with your name in the CIA post.
A You'd have to ask Mike Lindell. We've never spoke.
Q You've never met him? You've never had a discussion with him?
A No.
If he was on White House grounds—I just want to be clear, because I know this happened to similar people when they were testifying in the past, especially coming out of Congress. Was he on the compound at the same time I was at the compound? Probably, you know. But I've never spoken to Mike Lindell.
Q Okay. And that—
A That I recall.
Q And that was on January 15th when that photograph occurred, so—
A Well—
Q —my question is, do you remember speaking to the President around that time about a position at the CIA, which would've been 5 days before the end of his term?
A Not that I recall.
Mr. Sofer. Can we take our last quick break?
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. If we're going to go past 4 o'clock, yeah.
Mr. Sofer. Sure. Can you give us an idea of how much time you're going to need so I can decide how quickly I have to go to the bathroom?
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I mean, probably, like, a half an hour more at the best.
Mr. Sofer. Altogether?
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I hope so, but I can't promise.
Mr. Sofer. Well, can we take a 2-minute break for me to go to the bathroom?
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Sure.
Mr. Sofer. And then we'll come right back.
​[Recess.]
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. And we're back on.
    BY :
Q Mr. Patel, I wanted to talk briefly about some of the actions that President Trump and his allies took to investigate their claims of election fraud.
A Okay.
Q Did you have any conversations with anyone at the White House about these efforts?
Mr. Glabe. Could you define—
The Witness. Yeah, I—
Mr. Glabe. —a little more what you're asking?
    BY :
Q Specifically, are you familiar with the theory about two men in Italy that had confessed to rigging the U.S. election and they were currently in jail?
A I don't recall—two men in Italy doing what? Sorry.
Q That they had confessed to rigging the U.S. Presidential election and they had confessed to it. It's known as Italygate.
A Is there, like, an article or something on that?
Q There might be, but other witnesses have testified about this theory.
A Yeah, I—I recall hearing about that. Do I recall any instructions from President Trump about that? No, I don't recall that.
Q Did you take any action—
A From President Trump?
Q No, you, independently of President Trump or from President Trump—well, from President Trump first.
​A Are you—
Q Did you have any discussion with President Trump about taking action to investigate the claims of these two men in Italy?
A Sorry.
[Discussion off the record.]
The Witness. I don't remember having anything to do with that.
    BY :
Q With what? Anything with any—do you remember anything having to do with the claim of two men in Italy rigging the U.S. election and taking any steps to investigate such a matter?
A I'm telling you I don't recall that, based on your description.
Q Do you have any memory of talking to Mark Meadows about such a theory?
A I don't recall that.
Q You don't remember Mark Meadows asking you to investigate?
A I don't recall that.
Q Do you remember calling Richard Donoghue, the Assistant Attorney—Deputy Attorney General at DOJ, about the two men in Italy?
Mr. Glabe. Sorry, do you mean the Acting Deputy Attorney General?
    BY :
Q Sure. Acting.
A We called the Department on lots of matters. I think we started talking to Mr. Donoghue when he came online, but I'm not sure what date that was. And—
    BY :
Q I'm not asking for a date. Did you ever talk to Mr. Donoghue about asking DOJ to investigate two claims—the two men in Italy?
​A I don't recall that.
Q Okay.
Mr. Patel, did you make a request of Lieutenant General Scott Berrier to investigate the theory of two men in Italy?
A I don't—I don't think I know who Scott Berrier is, unless you can help me remember him.
Q The Defense Intelligence Agency.
A Without more information, I'm afraid I don't have independent recollection of who Mr. Berrier is.
Q Okay. But just, before we move on from this, you have no memory of asking—of any investigation regarding men in Italy rigging this election?
Mr. Glabe. Do you have anything that could refresh his recollection? Because—
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I don't have anything.
Mr. Glabe. Because, on Afghanistan, we went around for 20 minutes and then there was a transcript, so—
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I don't intend to—
Mr. Glabe. —is there anything you can show us that might trigger his recollection?
The Witness. I'm just saying I don't recall.
    BY :
Q Okay.
So, as you know, we've talked to other witnesses, and—
A Okay.
Q —it was stated by Mr. Donoghue that you, Mr. Patel, reached out to him and ​asked him, "What is the situation with the guy in Italy?"
A Okay. Didn't my counsel just ask if you have something you could provide us?
Q This is a transcript.
A And you can't provide it to us?
Mr. Glabe. So, if there's any transcripts that would—
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. We can't—
Mr. Glabe. —refresh his recollection, would you provide that?
The Witness. And you said you would provide us with everything you would ask questions about today. That was the agreement between you and counsel.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Mr. Patel, as a former House staffer, you know we cannot provide you the transcripts of other witnesses.
The Witness. Okay. Well, fair enough. If you can't—
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I am attempting to refresh—
The Witness. If you—
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. —your recollection with the statement from another witness.
The Witness. Yeah. And if all you're going—and if I can't see a transcript, but hear you read a piece of a quote, I'm telling you, I'm not saying it did not happen, I'm saying I don't recall.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. And I'm attempting to refresh your recollection.
The Witness. Based on a statement of seven words? I don't recall.
Mr. Glabe. And I just want to state that your record—your statement, as we understood it, was categorical, that you would provide us ahead of time any documents that you would reference.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. As you know, Mr. Glabe, we cannot provide you transcripts that ​are committee confidential to outside witnesses. You know that. You've had this talk before.
The Witness. We don't need all the transcript. You could have provided what you wanted to use.
    BY :
Q I'm going to read it to you. If your memory's not jogged, it's not jogged. Then that's what the record will reflect.
A Okay.
Q "Did you have"—Mr. Rich Donoghue: "Did you have any conversations with the chief of staff for Mr. Miller, Kash Patel, at that time or any time?"
"I don't know if he was on this call. I did have conversations with Kash Patel separately, in part in relation to that Italy allegation that we discussed a few hours ago."
"Was Mr. Patel at DOD at that time, end of December?
"I believe he was, because I think that the chief of staff brought that up first in his office on December 29th, and, as part of the conversation, he referred it to us. He said, 'Check it out.' I think at some point he said, you know, 'Maybe you could have FBI agents go over there and just interview this guy,' and we said, 'No, it doesn't work that way.' And, as you know, we cannot put FBI agents on a plane, send them to a foreign country, and have them interview people. You have to go through the MLAT procedure. It'll take months. And someone said, 'Well, DOD's got people on the ground. Maybe they could do it.' And we didn't weigh in on that. It was like, that's a DOD issue. If you want to talk to them, so be it. And then I ended up on the phone with Kash Patel a couple days later, maybe January 1st. He called me and said, "What is the situation with the guy in Italy?" And I told him what I knew, and he said, 'Okay, thanks,' and we hung up, and that was it. I've never met him in person. I think that was the only ​conversation we had on the phone."
Do you have a memory of that conversation asking the number-two at DOJ to investigate the claims of the men in Italy?
A I do not recall that.
Q "And Kash Patel called me and said, 'I heard you were given some information by the chief of staff about this Italy thing. Can you tell me what this is all about?' And I relayed to him what I knew at that point."
A Which was?
Are you going to keep reading—
Q "The chief of staff told us this"—
A —pieces of this thing, or are you going to try to refresh my memory by reading the entire—
Q If your memory's not refreshed from something as unique as you calling the number-two at DOJ to investigate election fraud claims by two men in Italy in jail, I don't know what will.
A Okay. Well, then you've answered your own question, so we can move on.
Q Did you have any—going back to your potential appointments to the CIA or FBI, did you have any belief that General Milley prevented those appointments?
A I don't believe so.
Q I want to go back to exhibit—
Mr. Sofer. One second, please.
[Discussion off the record.]
The Witness. Okay. Thanks.
Mr. Sofer. Sorry. Go ahead.
    BY :
​Q I just want to make sure you have no memory about this either.
"Saturday, January 2nd, Miller and Patel together called the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lieutenant General Scott Berrier, and made the same request Patel had made to Mr. Cohen."
Did you ask Ezra Cohen to take any investigative steps about these two men in Italy?
A Based on what you're reading me, my memory is not refreshed and I don't recall doing this.
Q You have no memory of asking Ezra Cohen to assist you—
A As I sit here today, based on your reading of piecemeal statements, I do not have an independent recollection of this matter.
Q How about without my reading of piecemeal statements, you have no memory as well?
A I believe I've answered that previously.
Q I just want to go back to exhibits 7 and 9. You have an email with Marc Short. Did you have a relationship with Mr. Short prior to coming to DOD?
A Sure. Mr. Short was the chief of staff to the Vice President of the United States, so we knew each other from our time—my time at the National Security Council and, you know, I knew Marc.
Q Did you talk to Marc Short at all during January 6th?
A I don't know.
Q Did you talk to anyone involved with the Vice President's detail?
A We talked to the Vice President.
Q On January 6th?
A Yes.
​Q And were those the evening calls, if you remember?
A I don't know what time of day it was. It was, in part and parcel, my best estimation, that we were trying to get the—what's it called?
Mr. Glabe. The certification?
The Witness. Yeah, the certification back on at the Capitol. And that, I think, is what we were talking to the Vice President about. I don't know what time of day it was.
    BY :
Q Exhibit 9, if you could turn to that one, this is a December 18th email from Monica Block, who I believe is at the White House.
A Uh-huh.
Q "Kash, I'm sorry to ping you again, but I was hoping you could help me with something."
A Yeah.
Q Can you explain what this request was? It appears that the White House was trying to, quote, "grow the DCNG footprint on campus."
And also on that email is Tony Ornato.
A Thank you for pointing it out. I'm reading the email and—
Mr. Glabe. Was the question what was this about?
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Correct.
The Witness. Well, yeah. I'm sure—
    BY :
Q Did you take any action as a result of this request?
A What I can see from my email is, "I'm adding my team. Thanks much." So, as was not an infrequent occurrence as chief of staff, people would ask lots of things, and I would try to be professional and at least have somebody on my team ​address it. I don't remember anything coming of this or what it was really about.
Q So you don't have any memory about what happened with an additional request for D.C. National Guard on December 18th for the White House campus?
A I don't have an independent memory, but I'm sure if there was a request, there's a document for a request for D.C. National Guard that would've been made by Secret Service for protection of the White House.
Q And it looks like you emailed to—that it would be with ExecSec?
A So there's these ExecSec, the Office of—well, the Office of the Secretary of Defense is "SD," as it says there, and other recipients in the administrative group. I don't—like, I can't see if that's—who's in that chain or not exactly.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I'm just checking through everything. Go ahead.
    BY :
Q Yeah, I just want to—you just, I think, Mr. Patel, said that you talked to the Vice President on January 6th?
A Well—sorry. I should've been—thank you for letting me clarify.
Me, personally, I was on the phone with the Chairman and the Secretary of the—the Acting Secretary of Defense in the Secretary of Defense's office when that call came in.
Q I see. It's a group call.
A It's a group call. Thank you.
Q Okay. Tell me more of what you remember from the call.
A The Vice President, just what I remember, was asking the status. We asked if the Vice President was secure. Being in the Presidential succession, it was one of our responsibilities. He said he was secure somewhere, I think in the Capitol, but I'm not sure.
​Q Okay.
A And then we said we were trying to meet the needs of the Representatives of Congress to restart the certification. I believe he asked for, do you have a ballpark timeline? That was a frequent question. We said, we're doing the best we can, and we think we'll have it back on, I believe at the time "within hours" was what we—
Q Okay.
A —informed him.
Q So, then, roughly, that took place in the evening of January 6th before Congress reconvened to—
A Well, yeah, it would've had to have taken place before.
Q And who else do you recall being on the call besides the Vice President? I think you said the Chairman and the Secretary—
A Yeah. I'm not sure who was on on his end.
Q Yeah.
A I'm not really even sure of the room or who was in it, but—
Q Okay.
A —I imagine there was other people there.
Q Yeah. How about on your end?
A Yeah, there was probably—you know, on that day, when we were—the Office of the Secretary of Defense is pretty huge, and, you know, we had people coming in and out, performing duties—the ExecSec, the senior military advisor, general counsel. So, you know, I don't have an accounting for that exact moment, but those people were rolling through.
Q Were you present for any other conversations with the Vice President on January 6th besides that group call?
​A I believe that's the only one I was present for. I don't know if there were others.
Q Yeah. Did you hear about others or anything conveyed to you about others with the Vice President specifically on—
A Not that I believe I was informed about.
Q Okay.
How about Mr. Short? Any conversations with him?
A I don't—I may have called Mr. Short. I just—
Q Don't recall.
A —don't know.
Q Okay.
Okay.
    BY :
Q Exhibit No. 40 is an inquiry from Eric Schmidt at The New York Times.
A Uh-huh.
Q "We're also hearing that on January 6th Rudy Giuliani called Kash Patel and requested a military escort for some of the protestors from the Ellipse to the Capitol."
A Thank you.
Q Do you—your email response is, "Go on the record for me if needed. 100 percent false. I have not spoken to him in nearly 1 year."
A And so—sorry. Do you have a question?
Q Nope. If you want to comment, go ahead.
A Do you have a question?
Q Yeah. The question is, was there any accuracy in the question itself concerning Rudy Giuliani's—
​A I don't believe so. And I'm not trying to make light of the situation, but this was, as the email chain shows—and I'll let the email chain speak for itself—that this was another example of totally false information being put out into the media. It was determined that the "Kash," quote/unquote, that Mr. Giuliani was talking about was a completely different Kash. And that was proven by the media in this tweet, which we're going to enter into the record.
And so I think that's what this chain is about. But, again—
Q Right.
A —around the time of this chain, I wanted to make sure that false information from the Department of Defense was not being leaked out and/or was being corrected when it was shown.
Q Uh-huh.
Mr. Sofer. And the tweet and the correction is found in K. Patel Exhibit No. 7, which we'll ask to be added into the record.
The Witness. Thank you. Could you just read the guy's name? I think it was Kash Kelly.
Mr. Sofer. It was a different Kash. Kash Lee Kelly.
    BY :
Q Did you have any contact with Mr. Giuliani in the days before January 6th?
A No. I don't think so.
Q How about with Mr.—with Steve Bannon? Did you have any interaction or conversations with Steve Bannon?
A Not that I recall.
Mr. Glabe. Sorry. During what time period?
The Witness. Same period?
    BY :
Q The same period, prior to January 6th.
A No. Sorry.
Q The end of December, going into January 6th.
A Not that I recall, no.
Q I know we had mentioned the phone records or the phone requests your counsel Mr. Jensen mentioned. I just want to make sure that we'll be able to get those phone numbers from you?
Mr. Sofer. To the extent that he remembers them and we can figure that all out now—because a lot of those phones are gone—I don't see why not.
The Witness. I had many DOD—
Mr. Sofer. We'll have to discuss it internally.
The Witness. —and many DOD lines.
Mr. Sofer. We'll have to discuss it internally, but I—
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Well, the issue is, we have to ask the question and put it on the record, unless we have a commitment that we'll get that information from you. That doesn't have to, then, go on the transcript. We just want the information.
Mr. Sofer. Understood.
Mr. Glabe. I'm sorry? What's the question?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Phone numbers used by Mr. Patel.
Mr. Glabe. But what's the question about?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. We want them, the actual numbers.
Mr. Sofer. From what period of time to what period of time?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. The period of time from, what, November through January, November 20th through January—the end of his time as an executive branch—
​# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. So it would be November 10th to January—
Mr. Sofer. So you're talking about his work—
Mr. Glabe. His personal numbers?
Mr. Sofer. —his work telephone numbers, correct?
. Personal cell phone and any numbers—again, I don't want the classified stuff. If there's anything that's classified, I don't want it. But numbers that Mr. Patel used.
Mr. Sofer. I don't think we'll commit to providing his personal telephone number. He's already had a number of threats. The committee's already outed him, in some ways. I don't think we commit to that. I'm not saying we wouldn't do it. We'd have to talk about it. So I won't commit to it now.
His work telephone numbers, absolutely. I don't see a problem with us providing those. Those seem to me to be available through DOD anyway. In fact, I would assume that those phones were surrendered at the time of his—
The Witness. They were, yeah.
Mr. Sofer. —of his leaving government service. And the phones themselves are probably available as well.
Personal cell phone or cell phone numbers, we're going to have to discuss, given the security threats he's faced.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. I understand. Don't want to exacerbate any security threats.
    BY :
Q Mr. Patel, let me just ask you, did you use your personal phone in any way to conduct official business?
A I tried to make it a habit of not doing that. Did I ever do it? Possibly. I just don't—
​Q Yeah.
A Over the course of the years, I don't remember.
Q I carry two phones for that reason—one is official and one is personal—but sometimes official stuff happens on my personal phone.
A Sometimes your phone doesn't work.
Q Exactly. And I'm just—
A And I'm telling you, it could've happened. I just, my habit was—I had, like, six phones.
Q Yeah.
A I used the work ones for the appropriate medium to use them in.
Q Yeah. Totally appreciate that. And the only reason I'm asking about the personal phone is to the extent that there were communications that were official—
A I'll talk to counsel.
Q Okay.
I just want to ask you about a number, . Is that a number that you have ever used?
A Have I ever used it?
Q Yes.
A I used to live in Miami for 8 years. is a Miami area code, so—
Q Yeah. Do you recall that specific—
A I don't recall it specifically.
Q Okay. Okay. Well, we'll follow up with you. I completely appreciate the security issue and don't want to exacerbate that.
A Are you saying that's one of mine or—
Q Just wondering if it is.
​A Where did you get it from?
Q I can't tell you where we got it from. I can—
A Well, it's hard for us to track down.
Q Well, I just want your recollection as to whether or not—
A Okay.
Q —it was a number that you used.
A Fair enough.
Mr. Sofer. Could we just repeat the number again?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Sure.
Mr. Sofer. And, again—oh, you have it? Okay.
So, to the extent, again, that that might be his number—
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. We'll take it off.
Mr. Sofer. —we would want it out of the public record here.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Understood.
The Witness. Yeah, I just don't—I don't remember.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Okay.
Ms. Lomax. Could I ask the last four digits really quick, just to be make sure?
Ms. Lomax. Thanks.
Mr. Sofer. I mean, again, as you can appreciate all the publicity connected to this and the threats we have described, we're sensitive to these kinds of things.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. I understand, and, as I keep saying, we don't want to exacerbate it. We just want to know the numbers used so that we can do our work as well.
Mr. Sofer. Understood.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I'm wrapping up.
​The Witness. Sure.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — — I just have one more question.
    BY :
I know in the binder there was an email exchange between you and Mr. Ken Cuccinelli. That's exhibit 43.
How do you—and I'm not asking about the email itself.
A Oh.
Q How do you know Mr. Cuccinelli?
A From my time in government. Mr. Cuccinelli and I have crossed paths and served together for some time.
Q And there was, I believe, exchanges about Secretary Ryan McCarthy and—
A Are you asking me about it, the document? Sorry.
Q Yes.
Mr. Sofer. Is that the exhibit you just referenced?
. Uh-huh, 43.
The Witness. What is the question?
    BY :
Q It looks like there was a press statement from therichmond.com about "The FBI fears 'insider attack.""
A Uh-huh.
Q And your response was, "Just Ryan doing too much media."
A Yeah.
Q What—and there was other emails, which I don't want to spend time getting into, about Secretary McCarthy leaking the DOD timeline.
Was there a concern about Secretary McCarthy that was shared by you and Ken ​Cuccinelli at that time?
[Discussion off the record.]
The Witness. Outside of what's in this email, I don't recall calling Mr. Cuccinelli on that day.
    BY :
Q Okay. My question was about Secretary McCarthy, though.
A Did I call Secretary McCarthy on this day?
No. That wasn't my question.
Q Was there—this email exchange, did you—did you know that it was Secretary McCarthy who was providing that information about the FBI insider attack?
A Just looking at this email alone, I don't think I can answer that. Maybe if I was provided other documents. But, on that day, I was probably looking at other stuff.
Q Okay.
There's— I believe it is exhibit 12. It's a proposed statement concerning the transition.
A Okay.
Q "Vice President Biden has repeatedly been provided false information by his staff about the DOD transition effort."
Mr. Sofer. Can you just point to the page, please?
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Sure. It's the first page.
The Witness. Okay. What about it? What's the question?
    BY :
Q Was this ever issued by DOD?
A I'm not sure. Possibly. But as I sit here just looking at this, I don't know.
Q Okay.
​# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. I think that covers everything.
Mr. Glabe. So I think we had a few closing matters.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Did you want to get them on the record, Greg, or—
Mr. Sofer. Yeah. We just wanted to—just 1 second, please.
[Discussion off the record.]
Mr. Glabe. Just for the record, we'll—reference was made to the date of GSA ascertainment, November 23rd. This isn't marked, but we'd like to include that in the record.
. Sure.
Mr. Glabe. This is a reference to—
Mr. Sofer. We're up to No. 8, to the extent that that matters.
I think we have mostly housekeeping questions that we want to make sure we understand.
Will we have an opportunity to supplement the record? Let's say Mr. Patel remembers something that he forgot while he was here or didn't recall when he was here and he wakes up in the middle of the night, calls us and says, hey, I remember something, he wants to clarify something. Do we have the ability to do that?
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Yes.
Mr. Sofer. And how would we go about doing that?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. You should let—
Mr. Sofer. Contact you?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yes.
Mr. Sofer. Okay.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. —let us know. And if it's something we can cover informally, we will. If there's a need to do another proceeding, then we can do that as well.
​Mr. Sofer. Okay.
Are we going to be afforded an opportunity to review the transcript of this? And how will that occur?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yes. The House rules provide that a draft transcript is generated. We will give it to you—or make it available to you. I don't believe that we're able to provide an electronic copy. It may be sort of an old-school, you have to review it and mark changes.
But before it's final, yes, Greg, you'll have an opportunity—
Mr. Sofer. Okay.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. —and Mr. Patel as well, to look at it.
Mr. Sofer. And approximately what kind of timeframe are we looking at?
. Shortly.
Mr. Sofer. Days? Weeks? Months?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yeah, we—days, I believe.
Mr. Sofer. Okay.
. It should be in the coming days, although we're generating a lot of work for the court reporters, and—
Mr. Sofer. Understood.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. —I don't want to commit for them.
But, bottom line, just to finish this, before the transcript is finalized, you will have had a chance to read it and make any edits, clarifications that you want.
Mr. Sofer. Okay.
Can we have your assurances that we won't be called back here?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. No, unfortunately, we can't give you that assurance. We are still waiting on document production that is tied up in litigation.
​Our hope is not. Let me just, from the start, say that our hope is that we will not. But it just sort of depends on whether or not some of that production or other information developed would prompt that.
Mr. Sofer. I just want the record to reflect that I don't believe we refused to answer a single question here today and that we didn't assert any kind of arguments about privilege. We've made our statements about them.
But I want the record to be clear that my client sat here for 4 hours, answered every single question to the best of his ability. And, to the extent that that's considered when deciding whether to bring us back, that we've distinguished ourselves from other folks who have been subpoenaed by the committee and came in here voluntarily to do what we said we were going to do.
So I hope that the committee will consider that before dragging us back here, which, obviously—and, again, if there are other questions and you want to communicate them to us, we're happy to do that. But we don't want to come back for another round of the deposition.
. Appreciate that.
Mr. Glabe. And let me ask the question a different way, which is: Understanding that none of us can predict the future or what the committee might potentially be interested in in the future, is it fair to say and are you able to represent that the terms of the subpoena issued on September 23rd have been satisfied?
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. The deposition needs to remain open.
I appreciate, Mr. Sofer, your statement about there has not been any privilege assertion that has prevented an answer.
That said, this is an ongoing—fast-moving and ongoing investigation. There may be additional documents or additional witnesses that provide information that prompt us ​to come back. It could be that we can come back to counsel and answer those questions without the need to have it an on-the-record proceeding. I just don't know.
Mr. Sofer. Okay. Well, pursuant to our previous discussions, we'd request that you withdraw the subpoena. And, again, the idea was—and the reason, as I understood it, why you did not withdraw the subpoena was because of these privilege issues. We've not asserted the privilege. I think you can see that we've answered all of these questions.
So I'd request that the committee withdraw the subpoena now, the one that's already been issued, number one, and, number two, to the extent there are further questions, that they not be sought by a subpoena.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Okay. We can't withdraw it now. We may need to reconvene, and the compulsion is necessary for that. It is not our current intention to do that.
And all I can do is tell you that we are moving fast and do not want to belabor this. I appreciate the desire for completion. We share that. I just don't know what is in the archives production or with other—
The Witness. Can I just say—
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yes?
Mr. Glabe. Let me say one thing. And, hopefully, this is the last thing I have to say, at least on the record this afternoon.
I understand you're wanting to prepare for contingencies. It was also the case that, when we had a discussion, lengthy discussion, about our client's willingness and ability to appear voluntarily and withdraw the subpoena before the interview, Mr. Heaphy, you stated in a phone call on November 22nd that one of the reasons that you weren't able or willing to withdraw the subpoena is because it was unacceptable to the committee to have multiple proceedings, that you did not have the time for multiple ​interviews, and, therefore, you wanted to get everything done in one interview so that any privilege issues could be adjudicated in or immediately after that interview.
There were no privilege issues raised today, no questions that our client refused to answer, and so, therefore, I don't understand why we can't close out the September 23rd subpoena, particularly understanding that you said that it was your wish not to have two separate proceedings.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. It remains my wish not to have two separate proceedings. I just need to keep the option open to compel Mr. Patel's return if that becomes necessary. I hope it does not.
Mr. Glabe. And if you need to compel Mr. Patel to return, you could issue a subpoena.
. Yeah.
Mr. Glabe. But I think, in light of the participation that our client showed, it would be the respectful, appropriate, and professional thing to do to withdraw or otherwise represent that the September 23rd subpoena is closed out, completed, and satisfied.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yeah. I appreciate your perspective, but we just need to keep the subpoena in place and leave this open. Our hope is that it does not have any practical—
The Witness. Could you give us 1 second?
Mr. Sofer. Well, just for the record again, I don't think that's supported by our previous conversations. And, again, I don't want to repeat myself, but, as Mr. Glabe points out, the reasons that their subpoena wasn't withdrawn—you know, we had email traffic about that between us—those have been removed at this juncture.
And we are willing to provide information to the extent that we can, and I think we've shown ourselves to not in any way obfuscate the process. So all of the ​justification for keeping the subpoena in place is gone, in my judgment.
And I just don't think it's fair. It's not fair to keep Mr. Patel under the coercive power of potential of being subpoenaed and dragged back in here, given what he's done here. It's not good for the committee, not good for us. When you have a cooperative witness and you keep their thumb on their neck, it's not right.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. There's no thumb on anyone's neck.
Mr. Sofer. Well, the subpoena—you know, you know this as well as I do, that a subpoena, for anybody, is a—you know, you said this a couple times—a big deal.
. Yeah.
Mr. Sofer. It's a big deal. Particularly in this particular context, when the whole world is watching it, it's highly problematic. It doesn't make him feel good, it doesn't make us feel good, it probably doesn't make you feel good.
I'd just ask you to reconsider and think about it.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yeah.
Mr. Sofer. You don't have to answer the question now, but please think about the fact that we came in here in good faith, answered all these questions, did not assert a privilege, and are simply requesting that the subpoena be withdrawn or considered to be fulfilled.
If you find some need at some later date, as far as I know, there's nothing that stops you from issuing another subpoena.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Yeah. I completely understand. I don't—staff doesn't have the ability unilaterally to withdraw the subpoena. I will convey that request—
Mr. Sofer. I appreciate that.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. —to Chairman Thompson and the committee. But I can represent that it is certainly not their intention to keep anybody's—the ​thumb on anybody's neck, to belabor this. Our hope is that this is the one and only time that we ask Mr. Patel to honor the subpoena.
I will convey the request to withdraw it. It would, to some extent, not matter, because if we need—
Mr. Sofer. Withdraw it or officially consider it as having been satisfied.
Mr. Glabe. Or allow us to represent the—
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. I just need to check with the chairman on that, and will do so.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Let me just say one thing, not about the subpoena issue, but we have asked every witness, and I want to ask you also, as part of this—part of our mandate, prospectively, going forward, is offer recommendations, what Mr. Patel thinks as far as what could be—could've prevented January 6th from happening.
The Witness. I'll speak to counsel.
Mr. Sofer. Yeah, that's something, I think, that we could—would happily discuss and potentially submit to you, the committee, in writing.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Great.
The Witness. Can I have 1 second?
[Discussion off the record.]
The Witness. Thank you all for your time.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Great.
Mr. Sofer. Thanks. Appreciate it.
# # # # # # nmmm— — —. Okay. Thanks.
# # # # # # # # nmmmmm— — —. Thanks.
[Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the deposition was concluded.]
Certificate of Deponent/Interviewee
I have read the foregoing ___ pages, which contain the correct transcript of the answers made by me to the questions therein recorded.
———————————————————— Witness Name
———————————————————— Date