Has any Congressional committee published a transcript or statement referencing Sascha Riley’s testimony?

1. What the social-media record actually shows

Multiple threads and reposts describe listening to Sascha Riley’s recorded testimony and assert that he provided testimony “before the Oversight Committee,” with commenters expressing shock and linking to raw audio posted by a private journalist ^{[1] [3] [2]}; several posts explicitly say they have not seen an official transcript even after listening to the recordings ^[1], and one source reproduces a privately compiled PDF timeline taken “directly from his testimony” rather than from a committee document ^[3].

2. Where the claimed “committee connection” comes from

The linkage between Riley and Congress in the available reporting comes primarily from two kinds of claims: first, social-media posts that say he “testified before the Oversight Committee” ^{[1] [2]}; and second, the account of a private journalist who recorded interviews and who reports sharing materials with Senate and House offices, including the House Oversight Committee Democrats’ office and Senator Wyden’s staff, according to that journalist’s Substack post ^[4]. Those are assertions of submission or contact, not evidence that a committee published or acknowledged the testimony.

3. What is missing from the public record provided

None of the collected items in this packet contains an official committee press release, a committee transcript, a published statement from the House or Senate Oversight Committees, or a Congressional record entry that references Sascha Riley by name or quotes his testimony; the closest materials are raw audio posted by a private journalist and secondary timelines or thread summaries compiled by internet users from those recordings ^{[3] [4]}. Several posters explicitly note “I have not seen a transcript” even as they circulate summaries or emotional reactions to the audio ^[1].

4. Alternative explanations and implicit agendas in the sources

An alternative explanation consistent with these sources is that private interviews and raw audio were circulated online and shared with Congressional offices, but committees either have not released a public transcript or have not acknowledged it publicly; the private journalist’s claim of sending materials to committee offices ^[4] could reflect outreach rather than confirmation of committee action. Social posts also include strong emotional and political framing—some attribute broader conspiratorial links to public figures—which suggests an implicit agenda to amplify the recordings beyond what the official record shows ^{[2] [1]}.

5. Limitations of the available reporting and how to confirm further

The packet contains no committee documents and therefore cannot prove the existence of a formal Congressional transcript or statement; to confirm whether a committee published or formally referenced Riley’s testimony requires checking official committee websites, Congressional records, or press releases beyond these social posts and private Substack claims ^[4]. The reporting here documents raw audio and citizen summaries and notes outreach to Congressional staffers, but it stops short of showing a committee publication.

6. Bottom line for readers following the claim

Based on the materials provided, there is no documented committee-published transcript or formal committee statement referencing Sascha Riley’s testimony; what exists in this record are privately posted audio recordings, social-media reactions, and a private journalist’s account of sharing materials with Congressional staffers—none of which substitute for an official committee release ^{[1] [3] [4]}. The absence of an official document in this collection is not proof a committee never reviewed the material, only that no public committee publication is present among these sources.