that president obama every week has two cardio days and two weightlifting days. you see i don't have to exercise as i have health insurance. [laughter] i live in massachusetts now, where we have universal health care, then we elected scott brown. talk about mixed messages. [laughter] i think there was a movie about him. it is called kill bill. [laughter] i am honored to meet vice president joe biden here tonight i actually read your autobiography. today i see you. i think the book is much better.

[laughter] [applause] they should have had red pit or angelina jolie. [laughter] so to be honest i was honored to be here tonight and i have prepared for months for tonight show. i showed my wife -- matt the white house by jokes about obama and that is why he decided not to come. take that stephen colbert. president obama has always been accused of being too soft, but he was conducting two wars and they still gave him the nobel peace prize. and he accepted it.

[laughter] you can't be more bad than that. [applause] actually, i am thinking the only way you can be more bad than that is if you take the nobel peace prize money and give it to the military. [laughter] one of the many distinguished journal is here tonight journalist here tonight who i consider as my peers -- matt. [laughter] because i used to write for the campus newspaper. i think journalism is the last refuge for puns. only in the newspaper can you say things like, i was born in the year of the horse and that

is why i am-- my point exactly. [laughter] tonight is my first time on c-span, which is a channel i obviously always watch. the sensationalism and demagoguery of pbs and qvc. [applause] if i can still fall asleep after watching c-span, there is c-span2 and c-span3. [applause] thank you very much. so i became a u.s. citizen in 2008, which i am really happy about. thank you very much. [applause]

america is number one. that is true. because we won the world series every year. [laughter] after becoming a u.s. citizen, i immediately registered to vote for obama and biden. you are welcome. [laughter] you had me at guess we can. [laughter] that was their slogan. so, after getting obama and biden elected, i felt this power trip. and i started to think, maybe i should run for president myself. i have to take a step back and

explain a little bit, because i had always been a pessimistic guy. i felt that life is kind of like being into the snow on a dark winter night. you probably made a difference but it is really hard to tell. [laughter] now we have a president who is half black, half white. it just gives me a lot of hope because i am half not lack in half not white. [laughter] two negatives make a positive. you may be saying hey, what would be your campaign slogan? you see, i spent 10 years in the past decade. [laughter]

u2? okay. i understand the american people are suffering, so my campaign slogan will be, who cares? [laughter] if elected i will make same-sex marriage not only legal but required. [laughter] that will get me the youth vote. you see i am married now but i used to be really scared about marriage. i was like wow, 50% of all marriages end up lasting forever. [laughter] and i will eliminate unemployment in this country by

reducing the productivity of the american workforce. so, to people will have to do the work of one, just like the president and the vice president. [laughter] or the olsen twins. [laughter] and despite our disease of cancer, most americans die of natural causes, so if elected, i will find a cure for natural causes. [laughter] you seemed to like that one. but you won't be covered by health insurance though. because of preexisting conditions. and i have a quick solution for global warming. i will switch from fahrenheit to

celsius. [laughter] it was 100 degrees and now it is 40. [laughter] you are very welcome. and, i agree with foreign policy because i am from china and i can see russia from my backyard. [applause] i believe that unilateralism is too expensive, and open dialogue is too slow, so if elected, i will go with text messaging. i will text our allies just to say hi. [laughter] and text our enemies when they are driving. [laughter]

you are building a nuclear weapon? but you were doing it wrong, lol i just want to thanked you for having me here tonight in this is the first time -- matt thank you so much and have a very good night. thank you very much. [applause] >> joe wong. [applause] >> thank you so much, joe.

thank you esther vice president for being with us this evening. please remain seated while the vice president departs the building. you are not leaving? no, sit. said down. [laughter] whatever. [applause] tonight's program was made possible by the generous support of our sponsor new start, company who breaks worlds technologies together, connecting people anytime, anywhere on any device. i thanked them for their help in making this event possible. our dinner would also not be possible without the tireless efforts of a dedicated dinner team. this evening is the culmination of their phenomenal work.

so on behalf of the executive committee i want to applaud yvette-- event planner for her commitment, to our association by making tonight a reality. a special thank you to the washington convention center, and occasions catering for their gracious hospitality. also, to dcm improv and cross allison jaffe for her work navigating the world of hollywood entertainment. i hope you have enjoyed the outstanding sounds tonight at the right touch, who will continue to play for a while after dinner. i am winging it now. a sincere thank you to all my friends and family for their support for this past year, to my mom, virginia who gave me all the tools, my beloved sisters, my cousins who are here tonight, doug, maryland, barbara and my

niece and her husband, to annie chan who talked me off the ledge more than once. a special hello to my friends marine and cynthia, best audio technicians in the world. jam and his lovely wife roberta and my friends back from japan, here from scotland, members of the folk group average white band, alan gori and-- thank you for being here. get your tickets while you still can. and last but not least, a special thank you to one of my personal heroes, jim layer and my pbs family, who always are in my corner. get those pledges end, folks. most of all, as i conclude my term as chairman, i want to thank you, our members for the

opportunity to advocate and work on your behalf. it has been truly annexed aryans i will never forget. now, i would like to turn the gavel over to my dear friend and colleague, and a person who will serve as service your chairman next year, peter slen at c-span. [applause] 's been now the c-span video library has 160,002 hours worth of video on line. let's consider this deemed an and pass. thank you are a much and we will see you next year. [applause] ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ it is a guidebook, it is a travelogue if you well but it is also kind of a mini-history, a work of iraq are free of each of these presidents and let's face it you can tell a lot about people at the end of their lives. >> a resource guide to every presidential gravesites.

the story of their final moments and insights about their lives. who is buried in grant's tomb, now available at your favorite accelerant or get a 25% discount at the publisher's web site, public affairs talks.com. type in grant's tomb at checkout >> at vi director robert mueller testified before a house subcommittee this afternoon on the guise budget. timbers took the opportunity to ask the director about fbi procedures and detaining terrorism suspects and about gang violence on the us-mexico border among other topics. this is just over two hours. >> the senate will come to order. good afternoon. the subcommittee would like to welcome robert mueller director of the federal bureau of investigation to discuss the guise 2011 budget request and

related issues. we are pleased to have you here, director mueller and thank you for your appearance. the fbi's budget request for 2011 totals nearly $8.2 billion. within such a large totals there are clearly many programmatic and policy issues to cover, too many in fact for anyone here to cover exhaustively. but i do hope we can use this opportunity to focus on at least a few important areas and make sure we touch on those which we consider of high-priority. the first of these areas for me is white-collar crime. our economy has suffered billions of dollars in losses due to the illegal and immoral behavior of individuals who capitalize on weaknesses in the regulatory and enforcement system to profit at the expense of shareholders, investors, homeowners workers and taxpayers. while many firms on wall street have recovered and are in fact making substantial profits

again, there are millions of regular americans who are still hurting and have yet to see any real justice for the economic violence that was perpetrated on them. i am glad to see that this administration has recognized the error of past practices and is now proposing to invest in your fraud enforcement programs rather than raiding those resources year after year to pay for other rarities mr. director. this is the priority now. what remains to be determined is whether the size of this investment is sufficient to the size of the problem your you are budget request proposes to add 62 new agents for white-collar crime, but compared to the thousands of active cases in billions of dollars of losses, the question is, does that seem small and i am anxious to explore this during your testimony. the second area of concern is law enforcement in indian

country. this subcommittee has heard many times and from many different people have desperate the law enforcement situation is really in indian country. unfortunately it is not obvious exactly how to solve this problem while clarifications to the jurisdictional construct help, wilmore agents or more prosecutors are better evidence processing capabilities, will that do the trick? do we need to focus on building community trust between the tribes and federal law enforcement entities were on significant substance abuse programs among tribal populations? i am sure that these are all elements of the solution and the key is to find the right mix of those elements. you are budget contains some resources to address one part of this may extend that request is certainly welcome. for too long the fbi has failed to rick west the resources necessary to improve its presence in indian country or to follow up aggressively on the execution of existing funds to

make sure that the resources you have are actually reaching the native american communities for which they are intended. ..

to naim recent examples where dozens of others apprehended during the previous administration. i'd like to think that much of the current criticisms and misrepresentations are the result of misunderstandings about what's taking place in this case. the fact of the matter is the fbi has made it clear that it's experienced knowledgeable agents to question abdulmatallab. on this case i believe there are also fundamental misunderstanding some of the overreaching legal framework in which you operate when someone is apprehended within our borders for committing or attempting to commit a terrorist act. what can that person legally be held without charge or without

provision of constitutional rights whether he is a u.s. citizen or not once in custody what are the provisions with regard to his advice on rights and to remain silent, his right to remain council and the government's right to use statements against him. these are all questions i am sure will be explored. the fbi cannot simply take a suspect apprehended domestically and just packed him off to guantanamo bay. you can't turn him over which does not have authority to operate domestically. you can't decide to get him to the military where by the way he would still be entitled to constitutional rights. i understand that there are differences of opinion and we look forward to exploring them in the context of the reality and the constitution which we

find ourself. i intend to propose to pursue the topics in more detail during our round of questioning the and i also hope to address newly emerging problems with the development of the sentinel case management system. this is a critical effort and one that absolutely must succeed in order for the fbi to fully bring its investigative technology into the new century. before we go into these issues i would like to recognize the ranking member mr. wolf for any comment he may have. >> thank you mr. chairman. director mueller i join the chairman welcoming you this morning to testify before the committee and pleased we are holding the hearing today for 2011 you are seeking an incorporation of 8.3 increasing three and 66 million or 4.6. we look forward to your testimony and increases you are seeking as well as the fbi's continued transformation activities to fulfill its role as the key domestic counterterrorism and intelligence agency.

in addition i'm interested to hear more of the fbi effort to establish a new interagency capability for the interrogation of high-value terrorist suspects pursuant to the recommendations of interrogations task force set up last year by its second quarter and yesterday i asked the attorney general and i did a letter donner to the administration asking that the hague be relocated at the counterterrorism center. the whole purpose of establishing a counterterrorism center was to bring people of different backgrounds and agencies together and rather than having it in a separate building away i would like to get your comments with regard to that. this function is critical to the intelligence gathering has christmas day bombing revealed there is an unacceptable level of confusion about how such interrogations' should be handled. last, i would like you to pass on to your people our appreciation for their hard work, the work of your agents,

analysts and support staff to protect the nation from terrorism and crime is perhaps the most important activity that we support in this subcommittee. i recognize the tireless efforts that has required to carry out responsibilities and door people should be commended and quite frankly speaking for myself negative you should be commended. i think that you have had a great service to the country. i am personally -- your wife and i would probably defer. i am not looking forward to the day that you leave because i think that it is a difficult job and you've done outstanding. your people have done a good job but you have to back and i want to go on the record with that. with that i yield back to the chairman for questions. >> as you well know, you're written statement will be made part of the record and i would like to proceed with your testimony. thank you. >> thank you.

[inaudible] appreciate the opportunity to appear today -- [inaudible] to discuss the budget for 2011. thank you. the fbi is requesting $8.3 billion to fund more than 33,000 fbi agents and staff and build and maintain our infrastructure. this funding is critical to continue our progress and transforming the fbi into an intelligence driven, threat based agency and carry out our mission of protecting the nation from the ever changing national security and criminal threats. let me start by discussing a few of the most significant threats. fighting terrorism remains our highest priority of the fbi. over the past year the threat of

terrorist attack has proven to be both persistent and global. al qaeda and its affiliates are still committed to striking us in the united states. we saw this with the plot by an al qaeda operative to detonate explosives in new york subways and attempted airline bombing plot on christmas day to which mr. chairman you have delude. both incidents involved explosive devices and underscore the importance of our continued to develop explosives intelligence to support and guide terrorism related investigations. home grown and lone wolf extremists oppose an equally serious threat. we saw this with the fort hood shootings and the to the bombings of the office tower in dallas and federal building in springfield illinois. we've also seen u.s.-born extremists plotting to commit terrorist acts overseas as was the case with the heavily armed conspiracy in north carolina and david hensley's and voltmann in

the mumbai attacks from his home base in chicago illinois. these terrorist threats are diverse, far reaching and ever-changing. combating these threats requires fbi to continue improving intelligence and our investigative programs and continue engaging with our intelligence and law enforcement partners both domestically and overseas. accordingly for fiscal year 2011 we are requesting funds for national security positions and $25 million to enhance the national security efforts. next let me spend a moment discussing the cyber threat. cyber attacks come from a wide range of individuals and groups many with different skills motives and target's. terrorist increasingly use the internet to communicate to recruit, to plan and raise money. foreign nations continue to launch attacks on u.s. government computers and private industry. hoping to steal our most sensitive secrets or benefit

from economic espionage. a criminal hackers pose a dangerous threat as well as they use the anonymity of the internet is to the identities and money comes to the across the country and around the world. these attacks undermine our national security and pose a growing threat to our economy. we are seeking 100 skill six deacons 63 positions and 46 million for the cyber programs to strengthen the ability to defend against cyberattack. let me turn a moment to white collar crime. mortgage fraud is the most significant in efforts to combat financial fraud. mortgage fraud investigations have grown fivefold since 2003 and more than two-thirds of these cases involve losses of more than $1 million each. the trend is continue to receive more than 75,000 regarding mortgage fraud this year alone. securities fraud is also on the bias. 33% more security case is open today than we had five years

ago. the economic downturn has exposed a series of historical the large ponzi schemes and other investment fraud. and of course health care fraud remains a priority for the fbi given the estimates of the millions lost to fraud each year in health care programs. investigating and bringing to justice those who commit fraud is critical to restore confidence to the nation's mortgage, financial securities and health care industries. we are requesting funds for 367 new positions and 75 million for white collar crime program. fiscal year 2011 budget also requests new funding for the threats from crimes in indian country and international organized crime. we are also seeking additional funds for the infrastructure to address these national security threats and crime problems including funding for training facilities, information technology, for in six services and as you point out, mr. chairman my written

statement submitted discusses these requests in far greater detail. i will say over the past several years we worked to better integrate strategic direction with a five-year budget approach and with a more focused human-resources management. the fbi siskel management has been recognized by the inspector general to the congenital as the top performer in the department of justice and we are in pace, on pace to achieve high earing and staff goals this year. chairman mollohan, ranking member will, i would like to conclude by thanking you and the other members of the committee for your support and particularly supported the men and women of the fbi and i am happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, director mueller. i would like to begin by revisiting the abdulmutallab case and attempting to clarify some issues that have been subject to a lot of conflict to the city both in the press and the public and on the hill.

some of the controversies stem from confusion or misunderstanding perhaps about how you preceded on the day that abdulmutallab was arrested and whether the intelligence committee was consulted about the handling of the case. so, mr. director, can you walk us through the basics of what had occurred on christmas day and how you interact with the intelligence committee has almost a chronology? >> yes. starting around noon -- and again i moss pacific to the acoustics not specific on the times but around noon or a little afterwards we received word an individual on a plan in bound to detroit from amsterdam apparently attempted to set off something. the initial reports indicated may have been firecrackers. when the plane landed first on

the scene were those of the airport principally customs, border patrol, i.c.e. agents. we were certainly their ourselves and learned the individual attempted to trigger an explosive device on the plane and had been over -- and had been stopped by one of the passengers. he was placed into the custody of i believe customs border patrol and because the device attempted to ignite it had burned him. he was taken in custody to the hospital. as we found out about that, we immediately attempted and did find out information about him, understood that he was nigerian background, have flown in from amsterdam and immediately e-mail traffic began from detroit to our national joint terrorism

task force here in washington and thereby various agencies, department of homeland security, and ctc and the intelligence community about what information we had, and that correspondence to read through the afternoon. approximately 2:00, a little bit before, a little afterwards, our agents went to the hospital and determined to try to interview abdulmutallab, with the specific objective of finding out whether there was any immediate threat of additional bombs on other planes or additional persons on that plan who might constitute a threat and spend up to an hour interviewing abdulmutallab. as has been pointed out, the determination was made not to provide miranda warning some the believe this was information necessary to determine public safety and so that interview was conducted along those lines.

we continued to obtain information from the various entities in the intelligence community throughout the afternoon and at 5:00 this evening there was a video teleconference and i was established by the john brennan at the national security council attended on that video teleconference where most of the members of the intelligence community through representatives of the department of justice, national nctc, security council and of course representatives of the fbi to review what had happened and what was going to happen thereafter. there was the ongoing assumption at that time that abdulmutallab, having been arrested on the united states soil, but proceed through the article 3 process. there was no debate at that time whether it was the issue of

whether or not to mirandize and raise the discussion that afternoon. later that night it was determined to try again to interview abdulmutallab, and that time it was determined both with department of justice and the fbi that we would follow the procedures and attempt to interview him and provide him his miranda warnings. when the agents went in the evening, he was less responsive to interviewing. he was not providing information basic booking information. he was read his miranda rights and discontinued any conversation afterwards. he remained in custody in the hospital that night and was brought before the magistrate the following day and was prevented before the magistrate as was required under rule five the federal rules of criminal procedure. later on the following day. that brief overview is what happened on that day and it was consistent with the practices we have utilized generally

throughout any arrests we do in the united states. >> was the intelligence community communication how this was handled, with their cooperation among the law enforcement agencies and during this process? >> there was continuous coordination and on obtaining of information to the extent we could pull it for various archives that afternoon of christmas. and the communication was on between persons not at the highest level in other words the odni wouldn't have been in that speed conversation or the janet napolitano or the attorney general, but the discussions throughout the afternoon there was a colloquy between various elements of the intelligence community and law enforcement community. as the defense unfolded. >> were his arrests in the process that you just described handled any differently than any

other terrorist suspect may or may not be handled any differently, in the other suspect arrested in the united states either before or after 9/11? >> the only distinction i would say is we made the determination early on mount two mirandize in the early on in the interview. we knew he had a very short window of time to conduct the interview and believed that in that window of time we had to focus on immediate information relating to public security. >> you indicated that the next day the suspect was taken before the magistrate? >> yes, required under the rules to present the individual in custody before the magistrate generally required to dewitt within a 24-hour period. >> is there a mirandize

requirement? >> that happens when you're presented to the magistrate the magistrate will review your rights for you and it was done on that occasion. at least that is my understanding. spriggs of the court itself would advise the defendant of the miranda rights that time. so, really there's a requirement i mean, listening to your testimony that except for the public safety aspect of this, a suspect arrested in the united states would be subject to mirandize under the law. >> yes, once that person has been presented in the initial appearance. >> there's been considerable discussion about miranda warnings and how it may or may not impact suspects from cooperating with investigators. the reflected just explore that a little bit with you.

given a suspect is going to be advised of his rights by court within hours after his or her arrest, the fbi is it correct generally provides money in the warnings itself so that you can take full what vantage of anything he might say in the intervening period and preserve it for an article 3 court coming. many people have contended however that the moment is suspect is provided miranda warnings, he will immediately cease cooperating with you and so i'm asking in your experience is the case that suspects the come on cooperative and invoke their right to remain silent after being read miranda rights and does that attitude persist? adjust your experience. >> let me divide up into parts if i could. the first part with regard to the policy we need hundreds of artists today across the country. state and local law enforcement make thousands of arrests across

the country on a daily basis. it is generally the protocol for ourselves and steve and mobile law enforcement that you provide maria del warning thank you interrogating somebody who is in custody to maximize the opportunity for utilizing what is said by that individual and the case against them in court. turning the second part of that in terms of what one can anticipate it really depends on the case. i think prosecutors and agents and police officers would say that on many occasions persons who were miranded agreed to cooperate afterwards and reached some understanding whereby they would have to truthfully cooperate and in terms of in order to get some consideration in terms of sentence. there are others who will never cooperate. richard reid is an example of an

individual, the eshoo bomber arrested in 2002 never cooperated to this day even given miranda warnings. there are probably others out there who might have cooperated had they not been given a warning so it really depends on the circumstances of the case. >> there's been a lot of discussion about whether abdulmutallab was willing to talk and whether the provision of the miranda warnings prevented you from achieving some form of cooperation from him so let me ask you when the agents spoke to him following his medical procedure was he on cooperative? >> my understanding is he did not display the same willingness to respond to questions that he had displayed earlier in the day when we first interviewed. >> what about now? is he cooperating with you some time after that post hospitalization or post

operation following that now after having advised his trade to remain silent and counsel. is he cooperating now? >> he has been providing information congests. >> he has been? >> yes. >> i don't know if you can answer this but what causes his cooperation now? >> it may have been a combination of factors, and i can generally say that i think his family had some role in that. the fact that he faced substantial would be life imprisonment to play some role in that. there may be a number of other factors. >> there is no clear lawful authority to move a defendant out of the civilian system. i would like to -- is that correct? >> when we say no clear

authority i do believe that this issue has been litigated and has come up with different results and different circuits to the extent the question is is there any certain authority on that i don't believe there is. >> we have heard in the media and elsewhere that the military should have taken custody of abdulmutallab. that's the contention of there with the implication being that the government would have gotten more out of him if the military had been allowed to handle his case. not since 1911 has the fbi arrested a suspected terrorist inside the united states and immediately turned the person over to the military? and the past administration and this administration that's true? >> we have not done that. let me put it this way the

president has the authority to direct that we have not been directed to do that ourselves. >> have you ever turned such person over to the military leader in the process of such as after the first appearance in court? >> the fbi has not. there's been other occasions where the marshall service upon the direction of the president has i believe turned at least two individuals in the military. >> to you know who those individuals were? >> both of them are directed in military custody for a period of time and return to the article to record for disposition of other cases. >> and who had the custody of those individuals? >> at the outset we probably did the arrests on both because they went into the article 3 court system and marshal service in cases where the wing through the courts were then transferred to

the military for a period of time and then transferred back to the custody of the marshall service. sprick you didn't think the decision? >> no that's the president's dishes in. -- president bush made a decision to transfer those individuals over to the military? for disposition. are those defendants still in military custody? >> one went to trial before an article precourt i believe in florida and was convicted and serving a sentence in the u.s. prison system. >> said that the then and why is to me that they came back from military custody in to the civilian form. -- yes, sir both of those cases they came back to civilian -- >> how did that happen? >> i believe collection by the president they'd be returned to the custody of the attorney

general and that was exercised through the marshall service. i believe he was sentenced, he may still be in jail or be released. i have to check on that. >> was there not an intervening challenge by the defendant's to the military system and the judiciary issued a decision that the transfers about whether the issue contradictory decisions with the transfers are legal and both of the defendants were moved back into the custody and my question is did the court's direct that they be sent back or did the administration, bush administration send them back before the court determination was made with the where he illegally detained in the military system? >> i have not reviewed the cases recently but i do believe that

one circuit ruled against the transfer of the individual into the military system whereas the other circuit upheld the transfer and neither of the cases reached supreme court and both were resolved and articles records before would go to the supreme court. >> faced with that conflicting decision in different circuits the administration pulled them out of military custody and put them back over into the civilian? >> i was not involved in the decision making process but i can say they did come back -- >> and one civilian was determined the transfer to another tree custody was all full so there was a contradictory -- >> excuse me -- [inaudible conversations] that's right.

that's right, sir. i just wanted to make sure i was on solid ground there. >> so there is no clear legal authority to transfer terrorism suspects arrested inside the united states to the military? >> you would have to go to -- constitutional scholars other than myself. >> based on court decisions we have a conflict in the court decisions. >> i think there is a conflict -- but in the cases may have been somewhat different. all i can say is that i'm probably not the person to opine on what extent it still remains unsettled. >> do you know -- and i probably should know what do you know whether that is that the district court or circuit court level of this case? >> both went to circuit courts. >> so we have a difference of opinion into different circuits.

being in the civilian system does not mean an interrogation won't be useful and that is sort of the point of these next lines of questioning i have. so we've established for this purpose that there really aren't any constitutional alternatives the fbi handling these cases directly. let's turn them to the contention that your interrogation of abdulmutallab wasn't necessarily effective. that's an accusation position taken. some critics have charged that he could have achieved a more effective interrogation if there were better interrogators available. as i say that i have not seen a shred of evidence to substantiate that for my position but just to explore

this contention do you believe you have the right mix of agents on the ground for the initial interviews of abdulmutallab? >> if you put this in context in the middle of the day there is an attempt by an individual to blow up the jet as it was coming into detroit. he could have anticipated that and it could have gone to any city in the united states. i believe the special agent in charge and agents on the ground did an admirable job in identifying persons available to conduct the initial interview. they chose an agent had a substantial turner was experience who served overseas and not certain whether it was iraq or afghanistan and was thoroughly familiar with terrorism issues and they also -- >> both domestically and internationally then.

>> yes. and an individual who may not have been a certified bombing technician bup was expert when it comes to explosives because necessity of identifying what explosives were on the plane and what we are dealing with. they did an admirable job pulling the right person to conduct interviews on that day. down the road -- >> excuse me -- no, keep that thought it right there before we get down the road, these individuals who conducted these interrogations' am i accurate in saying that they were members of the fbi's detroit joint terrorism task force? >> i would have to check on that. it may have been one was but it may have been the bomb technician are and not have been a member of the joint terrorism task force but had the type of expertise they believed was necessary. sprick you may want to clarify that for the record. excuse me, down the road.

>> to think one of the benefits of the programs, the high-value interrogation is that you want to pull together persons with a variety of capabilities. you want a strong interrogator and subject matter expert. you want a person knowledgeable of the individual. you may need language experts and thereafter as the process went on increased our numbers of persons with various degrees of expertise that can contribute to that interrogation but we were dealing with on that day necessity to respond very few among us to get the information we felt was essential and so we could have brought in and half afterwards brought in a greater number of subject matter experts that they were not readily available on the ground at that

time. >> the administration established high-value interrogation of the group to interrogate individuals of significant interests to the government overseas is my understanding. why wasn't it deployed to interrogate mr. abdulmutallab instead of your the joint task terrorism agents and do you believe that the agent was effective without the hagan involvement? >> by christmas it hadn't been set up but that did not mean that we wouldn't use the same concept prior to that time. we've recognized for a period of time and certainly our agents far more expert than i understand by the ability of having any number of areas of expertise to contribute to the success of a particular interrogation. we had five previous fall in

individual named david headley where we pulled various subject matter experts and to contribute to that interrogator on that particular day we would have been anticipating down the road we would need to flood into detroit to complement the individuals doing initial interrogation indeed that's what happened. islamic my understanding in your testimony substantiates the proposition that abdulmutallab was interviewed by anybody but absolutely expert experienced interrogators members of the detroit task force would be unfounded, they were not experienced and cade as i understand might be available for consultation and domestic and let me ask you primarily they are a deployment group for overseas interrogation; is that

correct? >> that's correct but that does not preclude them from being used in the united states and the expertise has been and will be used in the united states. 1. i do want to make because i have heard some criticism of the fact that interrogation by fbi agents in detroit. the fact of the matter is our agents are very expert, they go through new agents class. one of the key areas that is covered is interrogation and many agents have come in and spend a great deal of time as police officers. that's what you do day in and day out. i might also add that we have had some major success, some fairly run around. an individual by the name of george perrault was selected by the military to do the interrogation of saddam hussein so i do have the expertise on the ground that day to a very good job and it would only

augment what we do for a number of years. speegap the afghan risk i don't suppose you get on the joint terrorism task force without being seriously experienced. >> generally that is the case. we have a lot of experience on that task force. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my views are as followed. i do want to find out what have we learned? what have we learned to protect the american citizens so that the next time something happens we are safer. there's been effort by the administration trying to defend themselves and i want to make sure that i don't into any political questions with you and then there's been those on the other side who wanted to perhaps explain that. judge mukasey did a piece where he said he should have been held as an enemy combatant.

i don't know if you read this, it was in the "wall street journal." >> i read as pieces, yes. >> and i will submit that for the record. and general mukasey if i may recall was the judge in the '93 world trade center; is that correct? >> that's true. >> i think that it's forgotten more about this and more people will ever know. the point was and the purpose of the high value detainee group was to deal with the high-value detainee's, not criminal detainee's but negative all you as an intelligence point of view; is that correct? >> yes. so we are not saying the guy that drove the short straw that worked on christmas day was a bad person. he may have been a wonderful person. testiculate for the record they are wonderful people that maybe there were some others that could have also ended value to

that that were not there. one of the recommendations i want to make you may have already commented on is the the hagee located at the joint terrorism task force center for that very purpose because they were not involved in based on what he said they were not involved before the decision was made with regard to the miranda rights and so therefore when secretary napolitano testified she said she did not know. i believe admiral blair testified on the senate side. i can still see the hearing. i think the question was asked by maybe senator mccain. i think senator mccain and he said he did not know. and i think that mike plater said he did not know and i think that it's a great job. more people go to the counterterrorism center and see the number of pieces of information that come in every day and how they have to boil it

down. so i think those of us ordered me i'm not speaking for the other side, felt that perhaps if he could have been considered an enemy combatant like mukasey said and had more opportunity there may have been a chance to say did you see this gentleman when you were in yemen? did you ever talk to him? what building were you in? digit river see pictures of these people sent back? are there other american citizens in the class with you? there were a lot of things that could have been asked and so i think the question is what did we learn -- you can spend time going back either criticizing what took place on christmas day or go back and defend what took place. the administration announced the high-value interrogation unit, they announced it in august, correct? >> i'm not certain of when they first announced.

>> this is one of the more significant issues the nation is facing because they are men and women serving in afghanistan and iraq serving as well and some of the people who have done a great job. let's find out what we have learned from that rather than defending or tearing it down. and i will stipulate as well as they vary in may well be they were not the best people we had in the nation at that time to have interrogated the christmas day bomber because they were on vacation. they were having celebrating the birth of christ jesus on christmas day they may have been at a church service. they may have been somewhere else and that's not bad. it's okay for people to take off and so the point i try to make over at that time because this is such an important issue because the number of people that have died in this country, the number of people that died at fort hood that were impacted, did he have any impact on the

major down in fort hood? yes, did he have impact on the army recruiter that was killed? yes. did he have an impact on john walker that may have been responsible for killing more involved in the killing of michael spawned the first cia people from my district? the answer is probably yes and you can go on and on and on. so i think it is what did we learn without being defensive for protective what did we learn to truly make sure the next time and unfortunately there may very well be in next time to make sure we do everything we possibly can. now i've talked to your people and they tell us and i think that you sort of acknowledged that the hague will be used domestically. it will only be international but that is accurate, it may well be used for this. so i think that's where i go and i read the interview and i read the stories of the phil roe hero. he's a great guy but how long did he have with saddam hussein?

>> months. months. >> but he understood the culture. he understood i can still remember the time former congressman and secretary richardson met with saddam hussein when he put his sold and saddam hussein got up and walked out, culturally that wasn't appropriate so to have someone who understood the culture of the language in the point is they were probably very good people but probably people that were better in the country and in order to make sure that america is safe and secure i think we should do everything we can to reduce bank could i respond if i could for a couple of aspects of that. first with regard to the military commissions and support of military commissions for the trials that judge mukasey argued for i believe the president has

the authority at the right to determine where a person is to be tried, whichever. but i do believe -- i believe the most important thing we need to get its intelligence to prevent additional attacks and we want the best possible people during the interrogation as soon as possible. one thing i do think is lost in some of this dialogue is one has to make decisions relatively quickly in order to maximize the opportunity to get that information and intelligence and often the time where the opportunity is greatest is after the rest and most police officers i think will tell you that is the time you have the greatest opportunity to obtain the information you need. i would have liked to have gotten out to detroit. the plane came around 12:00. abdulmutallab as a hospital, 2:00 and we have a small window of opportunity to interrogate him before he goes under surgical procedures. i could not get an expert on

nigeria radicalism to the point, i could not get somebody from our quantico who does this for a living at that point and the individuals they selected -- the selected individuals for the capabilities to those interviews and what is lost i think in the dialogue is the necessity to a certain extent relying on people in the field who were doing this and reacting to a number of stimuli that come through either what is happening at the scene, happening dramatically or right after the scene or the willingness of the person to talk at that particular time and what i think our people did and it cannot be lost in the future is to keep the opportunity open as long as you can to take advantage of those opportunities when they are presented. >> i agree and i think it is important not to browbeat and go after the people that are. that's not the point. the point is what did we learn

by that and i think the article -- i wish i still had it, we will submit it for the record. i think what judge mukasey was asking for that it not be tried in a military tribunal. i think that he felt -- and i could be corrected here -- that he be held as an enemy combatant free period of time that would have given an opportunity for your very best people to have interviewed him and then after that he could have gone to article 3 so i think it is an issue of timeliness and went time. and listen, i have great respect. the police men and the person at that moment you get these silk stocking lawyers from the big firms to make a value judgment of that man or woman on the street that time has to make a very tough choice and i respect that. what do you think about the idea -- and i sent a letter to the administration. i did not send it to you because on some of these titles and to the bureau because it's a

political judgment to a certain extent. but what i did is i talked to john brennan, and i sent a letter to the president's foreign intelligence advisory board to the secateurs, the former senator and also hague to look at the possibility of relocating or locating, not relocating, the hague and counterterrorism center so that they are there at that very moment when something is coming in, and also when you're out there at the center the breaking down of the barrier because they are in the same cafeteria together, they kind of know each other and relationships develop. what are your thoughts about locating their? >> well i think you are aware of the past discussions. i am a firm supporter of the counterterrorism center. early on we were one of the first occupants. i move to our counterterrorism

division from fbi headquarters out there so that we co located with the nctc and other allin elements of the intelligence. why would like to have the hague. we talked about getting space and my understanding from the response of those discussions as they are stuffed to the gills and we couldn't get the space for what we wanted to do. i can tell you we are operating out of their putting together the hague our people are there today but we needed additional space they could not accommodate. ideally it would have been nice but the space we do have which i think you're familiar with also gives as space to move with. so that was a consideration. i agree ideally i would like them there but they did not have the space. >> okay. they tell me they actually won't get in the current place until august 1st and -- >> i would love to have another

building. >> i'm going to continue to push this because i think it is a bigger issue and let me also say i want to go on the record having complimented you and your people i also want to complement michael and the group the counterterrorism center. if everyone who writes a critical argue and makes a comment can go out there and look at the number of things that come in every day and then boiled that down, and i felt there was maybe a political decision made that was wrong but the fault was not out there and if you begin to browbeat people out there you begin to get them so skittish they are going to make a mistake sometimes, so any way i'm going to continue to push to see if we can have it relocated. the administration has been unwilling to share with congress

any details about the nation's new interrogation policy and based on the christmas day bomber case, it looks like there is some confusion out there as to what is the policy, not generally like a newspaper story but what is the real policy? so has a charter or and i know you've been written for the establishment of the hague and if so could the committee see it? >> yes it's been modified to address the issue of use of the hague in the united states is being modified and i believe there's every intent to provide it to congress as it is finished. smacks of the modification -- de hague will be potentially used. sprick it could be. >> when it's available if you could just -- >> i believe there is the intent to provide it to you.

>> if they did when it is domestic as the decision has been made, does hague still adhere to the role of intelligence gathering taking over law enforcement? >> generally i would say yes i think every circumstance is a little bit different but one of the things the hague is to do is put together an interrogation plan that has and what not just from the bureau and others in the law enforcement community but also input from the intelligence community and so the plan would address that particular issue with input from the various communities. >> the one last question order the fbi requirements associated with the hague and how much are you allocating and fy tan and how much are you requesting an fy 11 and what does the fbi estimates a four year recurring cost of the hague once it is foley stood up? >> we were late in attempting to

obtain the funding in the 2011. it will be in the 2012 s to the particular figures i would have to get back to you on that. i will tell you the fbi is footing the bill for the space. we have to get contributions from others and the personnel will be contributions from contributing to the various associated agencies. >> will be that based on the number like this overhead and everything like embassies to abroad will that be a few people you will pay a certain percentage? >> i would like to split up as much as i could. i want to get as much input whether it be from people or funds from the other agencies but i did not want to hold up the process so i've got the people on the ground, the experts and we are well on our way with the building blocks my hope is i would have contributions from other contributing agencies and then my hope is we would have

something in the budget the what make this a budget item on the road. >> i have other questions but since we are on that issue i will end with that and go back to you. >> mr. reppersberger. >> director want to congratulate you. i know the minute that work for the fbi doing great job. our job in oversight we have to look at certain things on how we can do better. one of the issues i want to talk about is the national security branch. the intelligence is one of the best defenses against terrorism and we need to really focus on that. in the beginning when the national security branch stood up i was concerned it was more of the culture which is supposed to be the fbi investigate, arrest and convict that get when you're dealing with the intelligence of reena you need a certain type of culture and collecting and analyzing and issues like that and then there were problems with certain

people leaving the by understand the national security branch is coming together pretty well and could you explain where you are on that? >> yes. first of all i do think that because you are an fbi agent and well versed in law enforcement techniques that does not mean you can't utilize the skills to develop intelligence and i do believe early on our organization agents, analysts and professional support understood we had to prevent terrorist attacks and that as a result of good intelligence not necessarily putting people in jail. the caliber and quality of the intelligence analytical corporation has dramatically improved over the last several years. actually harvard law school was during a study that's looked at as under the microscope in terms of an organization going through change and we had a professor go out and visit offices he wanted to go to.

he visited two years apart and came back and basically said this is a completely different analytical court than i saw two years ago. i do believe the quality of our products, the ability of a special agent in charge of a division to look what is happening in his or her domain and understand the intelligence threats and than task persons to collect against the gaps we don't have has dramatically improved. the areas which we still need improvement is continue to grow our analytical corporation and the persons that can support that analytical corporation, data input. the tasks necessary to accumulate the data that can then be analyzed. on the other side of it is the the aggregation and search tools on the i.t. site so those are the areas we still need to drive forward in proving again our -- continuing to improve our

analysts capacity with additional personnel as well as additional debate in proved technology. sprick anyone in law enforcement understand sometimes there is turf battles with a federal state or local and one concerned about because i'm on another subcommittee of the appropriations homeland security is the issue of who is in charge and with respect to the fbi and homeland security if i were the president i would have fbi in charge by the way that there have been battles i've been aware of and whatever and these were years ago but i think it's important you and secretary napolitano focus on where we are and who is in charge of what and not only in the homeland but you're talking cybersecurity as an example. the president give a directive to homeland security they are supposedly involved in .com and

.gov. i don't know how they are going to accomplish all of them. there's 22 areas they have to deal with the time focusing more on the issue of terrorism and how you deal with them on that issue and secondly if you could address the cyberattack. we know it is a serious issue. it is a threat to the country and businesses indigent homeland security has a long way to go to develop the programs necessary to deal with this issue. i feel more secure that the nsa who has the military side has the technology to meet to know where it goes but i think homeland security has a way to go still working together on those issues how are you dealing with napolitano and do you have recommendations on who should be in charge of what or should have certain responsibilities? >> i don't disagree there have been some ambiguity let me say in terms of in certain areas when it comes to terrorism particularly in terms of

delivery of information in state and local law enforcement and in the past there have been confusion as to the relationship of the fusion centers which have been established in every state through generally through the governor and the joint terrorism task force is understanding that almost everyone i know defers to the joint terrorism task force is when it comes to action. >> can i stop you right there i think the joint terrorism task force is our best defense right now against terrorism because the strike force concept where in charge, you know you're in charge but you have discipline from every major agency in the united states there to fight terrorism so i think it is a great program. >> and i believe that is acknowledged. the issues we are working out with dhs and we are doing it jointly is the relationship of the fusion centers to the joint terrorism task forces. no to fusion centers are necessarily the same, they are

different. they've been established often for different purposes and different aspects of the local government and our effort is to contribute to the success of the fusion centers and also make certain that fusion center sorkin to be attributing to our success of the joint terrorism task force and we're doing it jointly with dhs. very briefly on the cyber side. our role is investigating