te -- mechanism on the white house door, and the person was picked up by police in virginia back in july and they found a small arsenal in his car. take a listen. >> i hate to even imagine what could have happened if gonzales had been carrying a gun instead of a knife when he burst inside the white house. that possibility is extremely unsettling. >> lisa stark you are a veteran of all things washington. one of the things that came out of the hearing today was that the front door on the white house during this assault was not locked. >> exactly. the head of the secret service julia pierson testified there is a glass-type storm door and then the historic wood door. she said the other door wasn't

locked, and the other door was in the process of being locked when omar gonzales burst through the door. she said that there are now automatic locks on those doors. that was not in place in september earlier this month when he came through the door and made it all the way to the east room. >> lisa stark for us in washington. we are going to take a short break. that is julia pierson testifying at this hour. we're going to take a short break and we will be right back. zarif and he then said, really? >> that's right for him the israel's enemies or nemesis in the region they are not to be reformed they are not to be changed they are not to be

♪ i'm del walters in new york. you are listening to our continuing coverage of the house site and reform committee. this is julia pierson who is being asked about why housekeepers found damage to the white house that the secret service didn't find. >> you have officers taking cover because they believe shots were fired. you have officers at the white house drawing their weapons because they believe shots were fired. now give me all of any evidence to support a vehicle backfiring. >> representative, i'm sure you are familiar with law enforcement in downtown areas there is sound attenuation -- >> i have never heard a car backfire six to eight times.

have you? >> i have heard cars backfire -- >> six to eight times. >> it is disputed that there were witnesses who heard shots being fired. >> but it is always undisputed that a housekeeping found the evidence and your agency did not. and i'm going to give you credit because you didn't bring it up. they are brought up by a colleague. i have colleagues who are obsessed with sequestration. but you are not going to tell us that sequestration is the reason your agency did not find evidence of the shooting, are you? >> no, i am not. >> okay. and i give you credit for that. and i was stunned but one of my colleagues would try to conflate to use the attorney general's word, in sequestration with the fact that a law enforcement agency waited four or five days to find evidence of a shooting that a housekeeper found.

so give me all of the evidence to back the vehicle backfiring narrative. give me all of the evidence that made your department so sure that it was a vehicle backfiring that you didn't even search the white house. >> the secret service was actively engaged with the united states park police in an effort to determine where and in what direction the shots were fired on constitution avenue. >> madam director, you reached the conclusion that it was a vehicle backfiring as opposed to shots firing. this is the third time i have asked. give me all of the evidence to support that conclusion that it was not shots fired despite all of the claims that it was. give me all of the evidence to support the theory that it was a vehicle backfiring, and then tell me why not invest the very minimal resources required to exhaustively search the white

house. >> representative, oftentimes in these cases there are a number of different people that make different statements. what i can tell you is that uniformed division officers on constitution avenue heard gunfire and reported gunfire. >> can you speak to why a housekeeper found it and your department did not? >> housekeepers routinely work in the private residence of the president and first family. >> so even when there is overwhelming -- let's just say suspicion that shots were fired. we would say overwhelming evidence. overwhelming suspicion of shots fired, and you don't no through every inch of that residence. i want you to present that the prosecutor is in front of a jury, and you explain to the

jury why a housekeeper found evidence of the shooting, and your agency did not. >> representative, again, this case has been prosecuted in federal court, and those explanations were made before a federal prosecutor -- >> thank the lord the explanations were sufficient for a jury, now make them sufficient for congress. >> the initial shooting occurred at 9:30 at night. it's difficult to see at night. >> how about hear -- >> officers heard the shots. officers reacted. picked up security positions. swept the area looking for any type of injury or intruder. it was not known until days later that these shots had actually struck the upper level, the third floor level of the white house. >> i'm going to end because i'm out of town, with the same question i began with, why not

search every inch of the white house. i went on your website, and i saw you have training for psychology, and training for survival skills. all of which i don't minimize. this is just processing a crime scene, director. you don't need 18 weeks of training to be able to do that. you just need to walk around. so why wasn't it done? >> it is my understanding that a perimeter sweep was done. was it as thorough as it needed to be obviously not. >> evidently not. >> we'll now recognize mr. tierney for seven minutes. >> thank you. director i'm going to talk about preventions. if we look back in july when the perimeter was breached and mr. gonzales went into the white house, it was our information he

was stopped by the police and in his car they found at least 11 weapons and a map with a line drawn directly to the white house. is that your understanding? >> it was a regional map with a line drawn to the white house and the other historic mon y you -- monuments. >> and then the police referred the matter to the secret service presumably because of that line. is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> the secret service has an interview with mr. gonzales at that time; is that also correct? >> yes, the case was later referred to the secret service for an interview of mr. gonzales. >> how thorough would that interview have been according to your protocols? how deep would they have gone into mr. gonzales and his history? >> they had a very thorough

interview with mr. gonzales, and initiated interviews with his family members, and obtained his mental health history. he acknowledged he had a mental health history as a veteran suffering from ptsd. >> and do you obtain his records or is that not something you can do? >> if an individual consents we do that. and in this case mr. gonzales consented to release. >> you had all of his medical records. i assume your agents did review them. >> we did obtain them, and they have been reviewed. >> and despite all of that, what happened? you didn't take any action? you didn't have him arrested? or continue to be under investigation did you? >> representative it's a very

difficult thing with people dealing with mental illness when they don't exhibit any interest in our protectees. mr. gonzales denied any interest to harm anyone. he indicated that his information relative to the map in his car was given to him by another individual who had recommended places in washington, d.c. to site see and that he intended to go to didn't on camping trips and wanted to go to the valley forge pennsylvania area. >> was the individual whom you said gave him that map ever questioned? >> not to my knowledge. >> how does that comport with your protocols and procedures? the >> i know our investigators are as thorough as they can possibly be to make sure we have a good understanding of mr mrmr. gonzales -- >> so the individual wasn't available for some reason? >> i don't know the answer to that. i can get back to you.

>> notwithstanding that there was a second incident before the perimeter was breached when he was found walking in front of the white house with a hackett in his belt, is that correct? >> mr. gonzales was observed on august 25th on the south fence line. >> and he was interviewed again by secret service agents? >> he was interviewed by yuuni m uniformed officers of the secret service and special agents of the secret service. >> and his name was run against a database? >> yes. >> and the database basically indicated the earlier incident, right? >> yes, the database provided information of the original contact with mr. gonzales. >> so at that time, they knew he had been arrested in virginia, had a map pointing towards the area of the white house, had ammunition in his car, was walking outside of the white

house with a hatchet, his records has been reviewed. what happened then? >> officers and agents made contact with mr. gonzales. asked him about the hatchet he was carrying. he indicated he had been camping. the agents and officers had asked him for a consent search of his vehicle. he agreed and was going to return the hatchet to the vehicle. they went back and looked through the vehicle. mr. gonzales was extremely cooperative, and dispelled any concerns the officers had. he appeared to be living out of his car, and camped gear in his car. >> and so they let him go? >> he had not violated any laws, and he had to be released. >> did they have any follow-up? did anybody talk to any oversees in the washington area about observing this individual or making sure somebody knew what his behavior was like after this

incident. >> that information was passed into our analysis desk so it could be evaluated. our first contact with mr. gonzales in july. >> what happened at the end of that evaluation? >> he had not committed any violations. nothing -- he was under mental health violations by both the military va and no further action could be taken by the secret service other than to continue to monitor his behavior through his family. >> was that the only way they could monitor his behavior? >> he was currently on bond pending the charges from the state police and the incident that brought him to our attention. so there was some criminal conduct on the state level that was still being addressed and he was returning to that area. the case was still under evaluation as to what mr. gonzales's mes -- mental

history was. >> and the secret service did nothing else in regard to monitoring this individual's behavior. >> it's very difficult for the secret service when these individuals come to our attention. as many as 300 a year -- or a day are being evaluated by our office for protective intelligence. >> do those 300 all have a history of twice being picked up with weapons in a situation that put them in the proximity of the white house? >> no, but many are brought to our attention for making a thread to our trustees. some of are more cooperative than others, but in the specific case of mr. gonzales, he was being very cooperative. his family had been contacted by investigators. the family members indicated he was cooperative. he did not have a violent past.

his mental health records as i have been briefed did not reveal that any of his contacts referred to him as being a danger to himself or others. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> thank the gentlemen. one follow up to that. it's my understanding that there were three different officers that had seen him, recognized him the day that the incident happened, but did not report it. is that true or not true? >> it is my understanding based on how i have been briefed that two of the officers recognized mr. gonzales in the area of the white house on -- on september 19th and observed him for sometime. they remembered him from the contact they had from him on august 25th when he was on the south fence line. they observed him for sometime. he was acting appropriately. and he did not violate any laws.

>> they did not approach him right? >> i think they noted that, but didn't approach him. >> and they didn't report it? >> not to my knowledge. >> now recognize the gentlemen from georgia. >> thank you mr. chairman. i think there are several concerns and one of the things that i agree wholeheartedly with the ranking member, is this is -- we're talking about the white house. it's not a national icon, it's a world icon. and one of the concerns i have -- and we have been mentioning many of the issues on different events that have gone on is -- the issue is not the protocols that have been put in place now, it's the issues of why are there seemingly so many instances on a foundational level. why there doesn't seem to be a willingness to report or a

willingness to exercise to say this is something i noticed, as the officer said she didn't feel she could report. if there are other incidents with the overseas issues. there seems to be things that we need to address. you made a statement just a moment ago, and you said we get 300 suspicious people a year and 300 a day in the same sentence. which is it. >> let me correct myself, talking to our protective intelligence division as of yesterday, they were directly overseaing 327 investigations. >> so in totally we're looking at 327 at this point. the question i have is you are still making a review, but it's our understanding, and it's also very visual, there has already been a new fence or a police

line perimeter put in front of the white house; is that correct? >> we have put up a temporary rack to provide us standoff area to the fence while this investigation is underway. >> ms. pierson i thank you to the long answer to yes, but i have several things that i think are important here. you made several comments that we're doing an investigation, how these protocols were breached, but you also said we don't want to rush to change things, but we have already started with putting a perimeter fence -- or at least a barrier fence back from the fence here. the problem doesn't seem to be the fence. the problem is someone jumped the fence, ran 70 yards, and ran into the white house with nobody stopping them. my father is in law enforcement, and you made analogy just a few

moments ago that i'm not sure is accurate. you talked about discretion and restraint. discretion and restraint is that police officers do this all the time. they do on the side of the road when they have made a stop. you are talking about when someone crosses an global icon. this is the nice cuddly secret service, you got on our property, let's move you back off. i'm having trouble how you correlate restraint and discretion in a traffic situation, to someone actually going after the president's home. >> representative, i have stated that they did not properly execute the security protocols that are appropriate to respond -- >> you believe that is because of the information or guidance that they have gotten from the top that they were not sure what

to do. have they been told to exercise restraint in these measures or have they been told to exercise protection. >> those officers have the authority to take legal law enforcement action as individuals. i am conducting an investigation to find out what were the decisions that were made, what are the facts, the totally of the circumstances that those officers saw. >> i want to give ms. pierson a break, because this issue of putting a police barrier in front, in looking at this area, i think, again, we're trying to make ourselves appear better as we're working on it. as hard as that is to say, this president and his family deserve to be protected. it is very concerning to me they were not even told about the shooting until many days after the shooting, especially when their daughter was in the

residence that night. i do have a question. explain to me -- is putting the fence -- is this the only fix here. help me out here. is there a better way to go about this. >> sir, from my perspective protecting u.s. embassies around the world, it's a concentric layer of security. typically fences are meant to keep good people out. so you can't simply rely on a fence to be your last resort. >> all right. i think the issue that has come is the protection of this world icon, in the threatened environment that we're in, it's very concerning that we get half truths to start with, then more truths, when there is a group that truly wants to say what is the issue here and why are we not doing it in the right way.

and the foundation has to be laid, and the secret service has a foundational problem, and i think that is your bigger issue here. >> as we go to mr. lynch i just want to make sure one thing was clear. director, the failure to apprehend mr. gonzales before he got well into the white house, the change of further setback or fence, since you successfully stopped 16 jumpers in the last five years, you said that in your opening testimony, was there any reason you couldn't have stopped 17? in other words you are taking the american people's space with this additional fence and a proposal for a setback that would include pennsylvania and lafayette being restricted and yet you have made no case here today that you couldn't have 17 out of 17 preventions if not for

outright operational and procedural failures. >> the placing of the bike rack for the buffer zone is to allows time to make this analysis to ensure that our procedures will be effective with the time constraints that the individuals have to effect a tactical response to fence jumpers. >> i guess i get it that you are not up to snuff and until you ensure you are, you want extra time to get that. i get that. but that's a little concerning. mr. lynch. >> thank you mr. chairman and the thank the witnesses. madam director -- >> you are listening to our continuing coverage of the house government and oversight affairs committee. they are looking into security lapses at the white house, particularly at two incidents. the first happening in november of 2011, shots fired.

and there was damage to the white house, but it wasn't found until four days later by housekeeping. other happening on september 19th by a man named omar gonzales. we now know that agents went to the house, and later they saw him in front of the white house with a hatchet. but perhaps the most disturbing piece of information came from elijah cummings that said when we was arrested previously he had a, quote, small arsenal of weapons, including a sawed-off shotgun, and a map with a line drawn to the white house. how concerned are those who work at the secret service right now about their agency? what must be going through their minds? >> well, let me just say one thing about that incident you talk about.

director pierson tried to say we talked to him, we interviewed him. he said he was going to do site seeing in the area. as you say they saw him again in august with a hatchet near the white house. they interviewed him and checked out his car, and he said he was camping. so he was clearly on their radar screen, but she said he had given them no reason to arrest him. they were just watching him. he had done nothing illegal. there has been a lot of praise for the individuals. they know they have a tough job, but the concern is that moral is down; that they don't feel they can speak out if something has gone wrong, and clearly congress thinks something needs to be done to get this agency in order. >> and lisa it appears that congress is drawing a line in the sand and that being the perimeter of the white house itself saying beyond that deadly

force will be used in the future, because in the park across from the white house, there are a variety of people who would be deemed interesting, including a woman that believe there are people trying to invade her. so they always walk that tight rope. >> absolutely. and the director also mentioned that they currently are looking at over 300 people right now who may pose some harm. she has always said previously that many of the people who either jumped the fence or the people they deal with have mental health issues, and it's very difficult obviously to separate out who truly wants to do harm and who truly has some mental health risk and does not pose a danger to he president or

his family. so the secret service have to make these split-second decisions. that evening when omar gonzales jumped the fence and why no one stopped him before he got to the white house, clearly a breach of security protocol. hopefully they will come up with a solution to make sure it never happens again. lisa thank you very much. our continuing coverage of the house overcite and government reform committee, the hearing is taking place in washington right now. that is the head of the secret service. we're going to take a break and we will be right back. shamelessly accuse israel of genocide and ethnic cleansing. in the past, outrageous lies against the jews were the precursors to the wholesale slaughter of our people. but no more. today we the jewish people have

the power to defend ourselves.

>> this is -- this is -- the secret service against one individual with mental illness -- >> i'm del walters in new york, you are listening to our continuing coverage of the house oversight committee, the hearing going on now for the better part of two hours. this is julie pierson. she is the head of the secret service taking questions from both sides of the aisle democrats and republicans, both sides of the aisle have very, very heated questions. take a listen. >> the gentlemen's time is expired. if the gentle lady has answers to any of his questions, i would