ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any other senators wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote? if not, the ayes are 59, the nays are 41. the motion to table the motion to concur in the house amendment to s. 627 is agreed to. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i move to concur in the house amendment to 627 with an amendment. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nevada, mr. reid, proposes an amendment numbered 589 to the house amendment to s. 627. mr. reid: i ask for the yeas and nays on my motion. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. mr. reid: i also, mr. president, have a cloture motion which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in

accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the reid motion to condition occur in the house amendment -- concur in the house amendment to s. 627 with an amendment numbered 589. signed by 18 senators as follows. reid of nevada, baucus, boxer, levin, harkin, cardin, schumer, durbin, leahy, warner, murray, coons, blumenthal, brown of ohio, conrad, begich, kerry, stabenow. mr. reid: mr. president, i have a second-degree amendment which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nevada, mr. reid, proposes an amendment numbered 590 to amendment numbered 589. mr. reid: i have a motion to refer the house message to the budget committee with instructions to report back forthwith with an amendment. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from

nevada, mr. reid, moves to refer the house message to the senate budget committee with instructions to report back forthwith with an amendment numbered 591. mr. reid: ask for the yeas and nays on that motion. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. the yeas and nays will be ordered. mr. reid: now, mr. president, i have an amendment to my that is also at the desk. -- to my instructions that is also at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nevada, mr. reid proposes amendment numbered 592 to the instructions on the motion to refer the house message on s. 627. mr. reid: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. mr. reid: mr. president -- the presiding officer: the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. reid: thank you a lot, mr. president. i have a second-degree amendment to my instructions that is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nevada, mr. reid, proposes an amendment numbered 593 to amendment numbered 592. mr. reid: mr. president, i note

the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. mr. mcconnell: would the senator withhold. mr. reid: if my friend, the republican leader, wishes to speak of course i withhold that. mr. mcconnell: i thank my friend. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i just wanted to ask my friend one more time, we have here a situation where the senate has voted to table in effect the house-passed measure and the majority leader has filled up the tree and filed cloture on his proposal. and as i indicated earlier, every single member of my conference here in the senate would be happy to move that vote up. as we all know, the markets are waiting to see if we're going to act. it strikes me that it might make sense for all of us on a bipartisan basis to go on and act as rapidly as possible. i believe every member of the senate is pretty well -- has pretty well determined how they would vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to my friend's

measure. therefore, i would ask again consent that we immediately proceed to a vote on invoking cloture on the reid amendment. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: it's very obvious that there should be a vote on my amendment and it should be with a simple majority. that's the way it has traditionally been in this body until the republicans have tried to establish a supermajority which doesn't work. this is a filibuster. this is something that should not be filibustered. they should back off their filibuster, let us vote on this. let us vote on this. that's where we are. that's the -- we feel very strongly on this side that if the house can pass something with simple majority, so can we. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. reid: i object. the presiding officer: objection noted. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i would just finally point out -- i don't want to belabor

this, but i would just finally point out that we're in a rather curious position that the house of representatives tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. will vote on the reid proposal before my friend and his conference are willing to let us vote on his proposal. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: mr. president, we know that if the legislation in the house of representatives had required a supermajority, we would not be dealing with the boehner -- trying to say a nice word -- the boehner legislation. we wouldn't be doing that. we're here now. we have tried our utmost to come up with a fair proposal that deserves an up-or-down vote. it's fair. it reduces the debt by $2.4 trillion. it -- most of it -- well, in fact, most every bit of it includes material that the house has voted on before, the senators have voted on before. it's something we should do. it's fair.

we have tried to compromise. that is not a bad word. we -- i had a meeting set, tentative meeting set with some republican senators this afternoon. the meeting didn't come to be. i've asked my friend, the republican leader, to negotiate and he has chosen not to do that. and that's too bad. i want to move forward. and if he wants, my friend wants to negotiate with others, fine. my door has been open all day but we're doing the right thing. we will not agree to a six-month extension, putting our country at jeopardy in just a few weeks. the ryan budget is -- has been out there whacking medicare, whacking medicaid. the cut, cap and whatever it was does the same thing. what i have put forward is a fair proposal. it's something we should do. it would get rid of the disaster that's facing us. it's the right thing to do. the american people want us to work this out and we have tried.

we've given. we've compromised. there's just been no give on the other side. in fact, mr. president, it's been quite the opposite. we had -- we had a wonderful agreement set up here between the two people who ran the budget committee for years, senators conrad and gregg, wonderful proposal to move forward, expedited procedures. what happened? when we moved to it, seven republicans who sponsored the legislation didn't vote for it. then we moved forward with the biden group. what happened with that? the republicans walked out of that meeting. we had a situation where meetings were going on with the president. leader cantor from the house walked out on that meeting. speaker boehner walked out on the president twice. a gang of six, trying to work something out, one of the leaders, the most vocal leader of that group took a sabbatical leave and he stepped back in just a few days ago. we have tried our utmost to negotiate something in fairness.

we are where we are. we want an up-or-down vote on my proposal. if the republicans are going to continue to filibuster this, they are going to have to show at 1:00 sunday morning or thereabouts that they are going to continue to filibuster. we are not going to give up on this. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the minority leader. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i think we all agree it's fairly routine to have the 60-vote threshold in the senate, particularly on a matter of enormous significance like this. it's really almost unheard of to suggest that a matter of this magnitude would be dealt with at a 51-vote threshold. so where are we? i mean, it's an interesting history lesson that my friend gives us about various debates we have had in the past, but this is where we are right now. where we are right now is our good friends on the other side do not want us to move forward with a vote on what they are advocating. we just heard the majority

leader suggest -- talk about -- could we have order in the senate, mr. president? the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. mcconnell: we have just heard the majority leader making the arguments on the merits for his proposal. that's what we would like to move forward with. we would be happy to have the vote on cloture on the motion to proceed -- cloture on his measure tonight so we could move forward in that -- and finally get a resolution here. so we have the curious position that the majority is, in fact, stopping action on its own proposal and the house of representatives tomorrow will vote on the reid proposal, apparently, before the senate will vote on the majority leader's proposal. mr. reid: mr. president, finally, as you said, we don't need to carry this on forever. i agree with my friend. this is -- this legislation is of utmost importance. it has great significance, as he said. all the more reason there should not be a filibuster being conducted on this legislation. our country is in the throes of

an economic disaster, and to think that they would filibuster this, they're not negotiating, then that's why we -- we waited as long as we could to come forward with something that we would try to get through here, but we have not been able to do it because they have not negotiated in good faith. all the negotiation has been -- we have been negotiating with ourselves. so i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

sphor mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. udall: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its -- are we in a quorum call, mr. president? the presiding officer: we are in a quorum call. mr. udall: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 1:00 p.m. on saturday, july 30. that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date,

the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. that following any leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of the motion to concur in the house message to accompany senate 627, the legislative vehicle for the debt limit increase and that the time from 1:30 p.m. until 7:30 p.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees with the majority and the republicans controlling alternating 30-minute blocks of time, with the majority controlling the first block. further, that the time from 7:30 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the republicans controlling the first 15 minutes and the majority controlling the final 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: mr. president, as a reminder to all senators, the majority leader filed cloture on the motion to concur in the house message with a reid

amendment this evening. mr. president, if there's no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous ord order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until to try to be direct with you about a political situation, i am not going to be predictable in terms of saying the left is always right or the right is always wrong or always right. i'm good to tell you what and as

we think and see if we can agree. we may have pointed disagreement, but i'm going to try to give you my honest assessment of what is taking place. >> sunday "fox news" juan williams on the controversial comments that resulted in his firing from "national public radio" and how political correctness impacts debate. his new book is smuggled -- muzzled on c-span q&a. >> the i figured that is moving the veil of ignorance from human understanding. it is enemy -- american invention but sort of classical. >> if you miss c-span's latest documentary the library of congress, there's a preview right now on c-span's youtube channel. become a subscriber. it is free. be notified of the latest videos and watch the entire library of congress documentary at hundreds of other timely videos on line at youtube.com/c-span. >> at this house oversight

hearing officials with the bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms apologize for mistakes made during "operation fast and furious" and arms smuggling sting aimed at mexican drug cartels. atf guns from that operation had been linked to murders in the u.s. and mexico including the killing of the u.s. border agent in arizona. this is two hours. >> the hearing will come to order. today's hearing continues the committee's ongoing investigation into the reckless program known as "operation fast and furious." the oversight committee exists to secure to fundamental principles. first, americans have a right to know that the money washington takes from them is well spent. and second, americans deserve an efficient effective government that works for them.

our duty on the oversight and government reform committee is to protect these rights. our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to taxpayers because taxpayers have a right to know what they get from their government. we will work tirelessly in partnership with citizen watchdogs to deliver the facts to the american people and to reform the government's bureaucracy. thus far at the committee has heard testimony from atf agents who reported that they were ordered to let guns destined for mexican drug cartels to walk away from the hands of known criminals. today, this committee will have the opportunity to question supervisors of these agents who knew about and believe to these tactics were appropriate. the committee will also hear from atf agents who worked in mexico and who were horrified to learn ultimately about this

program. the task before the committee is very serious. the acting director of atf in a transcribed interview with investigators had said that the justice department is trying to push all of us away from its political appointees. indeed, the justice department continues to withhold key information and his inappropriately interfered with this investigation. let me be clear, the justice department is not our partner in this effort. they are the subject of this investigation and their continued interference will not be allowed to derail the committee's work. last month, members of this committee traveled to mexico on a fact-finding mission where we were briefed on how the u.s. and mexican law enforcement agents are working together to fight the drug lords who are

responsible for more than 34,000 deaths in the last four and a half years. that effort cannot be derailed i.d. fallout of fast and furious. one of our goals is to ensure that the mexican government can have the confidence in his partner here in the u.s. from this day forward that we in fact will not let guns walk, that we will be as open and transparent as possible. in their time the time atf officials and mexico have been increasingly alarmed by both volume and location weapons that have been recovered, after reporting these concerns to atf and the justice department officials in washington, these agents were told nothing about fast and furious. again, our trip to mexico city taught us that atf agents and more importantly likely dea agents and likely to u.s.

ambassadors were not informed about a program that was causing an increase in violence and an increase in guns arriving throughout mexico from tijuana to mexico city to sonora and beyond. we have before us today witnesses who worked in mexico for years and they will tell the committee their frustration about being kept in the dark by officials in washington and in phoenix. and about what really happened as a result of "operation fast and furious." they are going to have the opportunity to tell this committee about what happens when the justice department lets weapons flow across the border and how mexican officials reacted when they began to learn the truth. the committee will also offer atf supervisors the opportunity to publicly explain why they thought it was okay to let

weapons flow from phoenix to mexican drug cartels without making an effort to interdict them. the committee is eager to know why one particular suspect was remitted to purchase 685 weapons before he was arrested. we are also eager to hear justifications for decisions that have created deep divisions within the atf and outrage in both the united states and mexico. we have yet to -- we have not yet seen the end of the violence from "operation fast and furious." the deadly consequences of this irresponsible program could last for years to come. today, the committee estimates at least 1600 weapons, including .50 caliber sniper rifles are still out there waiting to kill. the possibility that administration officials, perhaps at the highest level of the justice department, approved

the strategy and are now trying to cover up their own involvement by stonewalling the committee is alarming. today we are focusing primarily on the effects of fast and furious in mexico. president obama is keen to talk about who didn't know about the program and who didn't authorize it but the american people have a right to know once and for all who did authorize it and who knew about it. the ranking member and i've both pledged to the terry family that we would focus our efforts on finding out who was responsible for "fast and furious." until we have those answers, the committee will remain focused on these basic questions. with that, i yield to ranking member for his opening statement. >> i want to thank the chairman before this hearing and i want to thank all of our witnesses for your service to our country and for what you do every day to

protect so many lives. we have an important responsibility in on this committee to thoroughly investigate waste, fraud and abuse. and to follow evidence wherever it may lead and to base our conclusions on the evidence before us. the committee has now been investigating allegations relating to "operation fast and furious" for five months. the committee staff conducted 16 transcribed interviews of the atf managers and doe agents in phoenix, washington and mexico. during these interviews, officials at various levels have acknowledged mistakes in the planning and execution and oversight of this operation. that is most unfortunate. although key questions remain, i would like to make four points. first, the head of atf acting

director ken nelson stated during his transcribed interview on july 4 that he did not become aware of any allegations about so-called gun walks until they were reported publicly. this is what he said. that issue had never been raised. it had never been raced to our level by the whistleblowers in phoenix that stayed in house down there. second, officials interviewed by the committee did not support the allegation that the controversial tactics allegedly employed in this operation such as the spending, surveillance or failing to detect weapons were part of a top-down strategy devised by atf management or the justice department. acting director nelson said that no justice department officials never told him or anyone at atf that these tactics were part of a new strategy to let guns go.

he stated, and i quote, we never discuss those types of tactical strategies end of quote. william hoover, the acting director of the atf and the principle between atf and the deputy general's office. he also rejected this. when asked whether these were a top-down policy responded and i quote, no sir. is my firm belief that the strategic intractable decisions made in this investigation were born and raised with the u.s. attorney's office and with the atf and the strike force in phoenix, end of quote. he added, and i quote, there have been reports that deputy attorney jones office was aware of the techniques being employed in "fast and furious." that is not the case. because i certainly didn't brief them on these techniques being

employed end of quote. third although these factors may not have originated in the headquarters of atf or the justice department, the evidence before the committee indicates that after receiving briefings in march of 2010, deputy director hoover and other senior atf officials became seriously concerned about the number of weapons being trafficked by these suspects. as a result, deputy director hoover ordered an exit strategy that was -- and those are his words, to close the case to seek indictments within 90 days. although this exit strategy was developed, there were no indictments until this past january. one question i hope to explore today is why it took nearly 10 months, from march 2010 to january 2011, to close this operation and bring indictments. finally, nearly all of the officials interviewed by the

committee strongly supported additional law enforcement tools to combat the flood of high-powered military grade assault weapons from the united states into mexico. mexico is our neighbor, our ally and our friends. yet u.s. weapons are arming the world's most violent and powerful international drug cartels, costing the lives of 40,000 mexicans in the last five years. while i will continue to work with the chairman i said to investigate the effects of "operation fast and furious" we must also examine opportunities for reform and i look forward to again following the evidence where it may lead and with that mr. chairman i yield back. >> i thank you ranking member. all members will have seven days to submit opening statements and extraneous material for the record. we now recognize our first panel of witnesses. daren gil is a former atf

attaché in mexico. jose wall is atf senior special agent tijuana mexico. carlo canino. i will get it better in time. he is the atf acting attaché in mexico. lorren leadman is the atf team leader field intelligence support team southwest border. william newell is the former atf special agent in charge of the phoenixville division and -- i am having a good day. mcmahon is the atf deputy assistant director for field operations west. and i apologize as usual for never getting the names quite right. pursuant to the rules of this committee, all witnesses must be sworn. would you please rise and raise your right hand and take the oath?

do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? let the record reflect that all witnesses had said in the affirmative. thank you. please be seated. now even for this committee, this is a large panel. so, if each of you take five minutes, we have 30 minutes. if you take or than five minutes, the guy next to you will also take more than five minutes, so please observe the green, yellow and red lights, realize that any official material or even additional material you choose to submit will be put into the record. so, you can provide us with exact in your opening statement which often happens red and a verbatim way, or you can summarize and get it all done in five minutes or less. it is your choice, and i appreciate your staying within the time so we can have maximum time for questions.

mr. gil. >> thank you chairman isaf i said ranking member cummings and and. >> you are going to have to pull the mic close. >> thank you again for inviting me to the conference this morning. first i offer my sincere condolences to the families of agents brian terry and zapata. i'm deeply sorry for their loss in this ill-conceived operation may cause. also i thank the service and sacrifices in finding the narco-violence in mexico and along the border. i can only imagine the horror of watching a brother law enforcement officer die in the line of duty. as a former head of atf in mexico i also would like to apologize for my former exit and counterparts in the people of mexico for "fast and furious." i hope they understand it was kept secret from for me and my colleagues and unfortunately as a result of this operation it is

the mexican people who will continue to suffer the consequences. i have no doubt in as recent reports have indicated that american citizens will also face more firearm related violence as a result of this operation. that you provide the committee with a brief description of my background. i received it background -- masters degree in criminal justice and currently completed my dissertation at the university of southern mississippi focusing on international affairs and security studies. i've been in service to our nation since my enlistment in the united states army in 1980. after service in the army joined the las vegas metropolitan police department and later received my commission as an atf special agent in 1987. server 23 years in various positions in a tf including intelligence and assignments as attache to mexico until a recently retired. i chose a tip because of a small organization with a focused mission combating the most violent offenders in america. during my first 12 years as a field agent i participated in or

directed investigations that targeted the worst of the worst. for the remainder of mycra supervised manage and lead similar investigations. throughout my career not once, never did firearms walk for for many investigations i directed or that fell under my command. this includes my service as attache in mexico. to put it lovely it is inconceivable in my mind are the mind of any competent atf agent to allow firearms to disappear at all. for the more it is more inconceivable a competent agent would allow firearms across the international border destined for the worst of the worst criminals in the western hemisphere. i thought my first days where was chilled and was under no circumstances would any firearms in any investigation with leave the control of atf. instructors dress even of weapon was lost by accident the agent was still subject to termination. my point is that atf agents don't allow and the organization is not tolerated firearms to disappear. apparently, that have been here.

after -- from former colleagues including special agents as well as from the press. they all wanted to know whether i was aware that we allow firearms to walk into mexico. i've find i was not aware but i refuse to speak to the media without a complete understanding of the issue. after talking with several agents i became convinced that firearms might've been walked into mexico by atf. thankfully congress and the media continue to investigate and "fast and furious" began to receive greater notoriety. nonetheless remain reluctant to speak out about what i have come to suspect that was never told about this operation. when i later learned atf executive staff would not make statements exonerating my former staff in mexico of any knowledge of the gun mocking aspects of this operation only then did i decide to speak to the press. my understanding is my initial interview with cheryl atkinson of cbs news did have some calming effects between the government and atf personnel in mexico.

to this day is i did understand the failure of atf executive staff to provide their own support in this matter to their personnel in mexico. during dissertation research i came across a study entitled the waco texas raid. management judgment and the man -- the papers titled "operation fast and furious" for waco texas a different and the conclusions would have been the same namely poor management, poor judgment and poor leadership resulted in disaster. "operation fast and furious" is indeed a disaster. i'm here today to answer the committee's questions but i also have a few questions of my own. for example who presented this operation replication, what was the objective? my staff is art of working with mexico and tracing thousands of thousand firearms recovered from crime scenes. why the need to introduce more firearms into a country besieged by narco-violence? whited leadership that's exercise oversight of this disaster and why were atf personnel mexico kept in the dark on this operation which is

now in peril trust and cooperation between u.s. and mexican law enforcement at a time when trust and cooperation is more essential than ever. during my tenure in mexico i observe these ordinary changes. the heads of agency leading the changes are some of the bravest people i've ever met. is a result of their leadership they become targets of mexican of mexican drug run stations. i find it ironic as a representative u.s. law enforcement in mexico isaf and i were asked to expose ourselves and our families to the same sort of wrist while speaking to our american counterparts of integrity, rule of law, honor and duty and policing. meanwhile members of her and on atf and department justice or whatever reason appeared to refuse to have to follow the same principles. is especially schmedley than omission of people of atf and the men and women go to work everyday with a strong sense of duty. i hope that once all the facts are not about this operation that atf will emerge a stronger more effective organization focused on its core mission taking the worst of the worst armed if it -- offenders off the

streets. thank you and i will be happy to answer your questions. >> thank you. mr. wall. >> thank you chairman issa and members of the committee for inviting me to speak today. i'm saddened by the circumstances that bring me here today. as an employee of atf i know that the situation is an anomaly and not reflective of the good work that atf does in the service of this country. and i'm hopeful that this process will shed light on what has occurred so that we had at atf did not have to travel down this path again. this year marks my 26th year of federal service and 19th as an atf special agent. during my years as in a tf special agent i've been involved in hundreds of firearms trafficking investigations. these investigations date back to the early 1990s. i've seen firearms trafficked internationally from the united states two countries as diverse as the netherlands, canada and mad cow.

these international investigations were as unique as the places to where the guns were going. however, one aspect shared by most of these investigations was the fact that most international gun trapping is deemed in organized crime. in late 2007, he became the porter liaison officer for the phoenix field division. my duties allowed me to develop a working relationship with mexican authorities and to travel into mexico to examine guns or meet with officials. it was at this time that the struggle against the drug trafficking cartels was started by the government of mexico. large-scale gunbattles and murder became a daily occurrence in mexico. to me and other agents, it became apparent that the level of firepower being used was more than we had ever seen. at the level of firearms trafficking increased, we in in the phoenix field of vision realized that this was an arms race between the various cartels, an arms race that could very well determine the future of mexico and tremendously

impact our own country's future. scenic's agents initiated agents initiated many good investigations during this time. these investigations serbs to disrupt the trafficking of guns and prevented them from reaching mexico. the urgency displayed by the agent in stopping these gun traffickers was not apparent in the prosecution of these cases. as we saw some of her best trafficking cases languish at the u.s. attorney's office. in an effort to do more against this type of weapon and the fall of 2000 on a transfer to the atf field office in tijuana mexico. there i worked mostly with an atf and other agents. as a travel to some of those heavily fought for areas of mexico. in these contested areas i examined hundreds -- hundreds of firearms and mondays i examined some that can be traced to this investigation. the majority of these firearms had been seized from criminals engaged in drug trafficking, kidnapping, extortion and other crimes. having first-hand knowledge of the reality in mexico i was

skeptical when the first whistleblower came to this committee that allegations of hundreds, maybe thousands of guns being allowed to walk into the country of mexico. i could not believe that someone in atf was so callously let firearms wind up in the hands of criminals. but it appeared that i was wrong. hundreds and quite possibly thousands of guns have been allowed to reach the hands of organized crime in mexico and this activity has seemingly been approved by her own justice department and atf management and the misguided hope of catching the big fish. having had enough experience with gun trapping investigations, i can only imagine that once the doj oig report was released, to report that was critical of atf efforts in stopping -- drug trafficking the emphasis changed to follow the food chain of the leaders. what they fail to realize is that the end is not just -- justifying the means. these are in the hands of people have no regard for human life who pose a threat to all of us,

a threat to watch out of us is immune. i am especially concerned for the brave law-enforcement officers and military in mexico and here in the united states. i fear these firearms will continue a -- long after hearings are over. finally, the request of this committee. the serious problem of gun trafficking will not be forgotten. i don't believe in another toothless love. what we need is vigorous enforcement and prosecution of those that would traffic in firearms a policy of no tolerance and a change in the sentencing guidelines that would dictate mandatory sentences for these crimes that would go a long play in curbing criminal at 70. i thank you. >> thank you. special agent canino. >> thank you chairman issa, ranking member cummings and the committee for allowing me to speak today. on behalf of john seley i want

to convey his deep appreciation for interest in mexico and u.s.-mexico relations. i am not here today to lay blame.a finger assigned punishment. that will be for others to determine. i'm simply here to discuss these events as i know them and let the committee and the american people know what the atf mexico country office referred to as the mco new and when we knew it. during my 22 year career with a tf i probably spent 15 years as a street agent investigating violent crime and drug trafficking and in the less of an supervising the same. i am a recipient of the u.s. attorney general's award for excellence in law-enforcement, to atf distinguished service medals and two medals of valor. i mention this not to boast but to illustrate my recognize dedication to atf and public service. i paid my dues. i can say with authority that walking guns is not a recognize atf investigative technique. these guns went to ruthless

criminals. u.s. law enforcement and a mexican partners will be recovering these guns for a long time to come as they continue to turn up at crime scenes in mexico and the united states. it infuriates me that people including my law-enforcement diplomatic and military colleagues they be killed or injured with these weapons. in my professional opinion this investigative strategy was flawed and was allowed to continue through -- due to an effective oversight of the phoenix field of vision and possibly be on. it is alleged over 2000 guns were trafficked in this investigation. to put that in context upon information and belief, the u.s. army's 75th ranger regiment has approximately 2500 rangers. that means that as a result of this investigation, the senate loa cartel might have received almost as many guns as were needed to arm the entire regiment. ..

critical details were kept from the and ceo as well as the officers strategic intelligence. i have reason to believe we were kept in the dark because the leadership in phoenix feared we would sell our. reasonable people can disagree on investigative techniques, but there's no room for locking guns. this goes against everything we are taught at atf, and i told the committee gets to the bottom of these allegations. in mexico, atf has been doing

great work and i am pre-- hour effort of combating crime of our mexican counterparts. the whole point of law enforcement in mexico is the mexican government officials to support their efforts to combat the transnational organized crime that pleads with our countries and threatens the security of our people. these allegations stem from this case that if you atf agents and supervisors deliberately allowed guns to what, have destroyed atf credibility with our mexican law enforcement partners and public. as this committee knows, mexico was plagued by terrible violence, and again my mexican counterparts blame the united states for contributing to that violence. but paramount to atf, they blame us for an uncontrolled flow of weapons that end up in the hands of mexican criminals. i do not endorse the view of the mexican government at american differences responsible for the violence and deaths. i make mention of this because it's like here on a daily basis in my dealings with my mexican colleagues, however, in this

particular case with these specific guns, i am unable to defend this position this case has made my life more difficult for me personally. imagine my shame. my mother called me on the telephone and said please, tell me. my mother is a wise person and she may not know much about law enforcement but she knows right from wrong. even at great risk, a great distance, she can see that walking on guns was a terrible risk. the public safety must always come first. please remember regardless of good intentions, walking guns will never be right. the atf rank and file notice coming and we haven't been given a satisfactory explanation for what happened, so why would like to say to my atf colleagues is simply this, stand tall, hold your head high, we will work for a great agency.

looker now, because there are heroes of atf. who do not quit, will not lie down, will continue to honor the commitment to each other and to the public. i think you for your time and welcome any questions the committee and a half. >> thank you. >> good morning, chairman my son. ranking member cummings and the sick -- distinguished members of the committee my name is darren leadmon and i'm honored that he taught me as a witness for the united states. i mean intelligence operations specialist for the bureau of explosives and law enforcement veterans with 40 years of dedicated service. i met hearing before you today with a heavy heart laden with sorrow to provide the committee with testimony that i hope will prove to be useful. i express my grief i extend the sincere apology on behalf of

myself and like-minded atf colleagues for the family of border patrol agents. likewise, on a pro in apology to all mexican law enforcement officers and personnel placed in harm's way while confronting violent criminals on the associates of the fierce investigation. i started my employment with atf in december, to those of four in the office of the strategic intelligence information. i was designated to support the atf gun runner for the inception of the initiative in april, 2005. in july, 2008i became the team leader of the vista bushfield intelligence support team for the southwest border. the team works in partnership delete with personnel assigned to the el paso intelligence center and atf personnel both in mexico. each of the partners work toward a common goal to determine the location of circumstances

surrounding farms and throughout mexico identifying the criminal element associated with farms, collecting intelligence pertaining to the criminal elements and ensuring the firearms are triste. the coordination of the information of speeches and field intelligence groups a major function of the team is to widen a fight the farms patterns and to establish links between the farms cases and seizure events in mexico. the team is dedicated to the strategic mission has set forth in the 2007 project gunrunners southwest border initiative report to summarize as follows. working with the domestic and international law enforcement partners, atf will deny the tools of the trade to the firearms trafficking infrastructure of the criminal organizations operating in mexico through the pro-active enforcement of the jurisdictional areas in the affected border states in the domestic front as well as through assistance and

cooperative interaction with the mexican authorities in the fight to effectively deal with the increased violent crime. the report had the following strategic outcome. suppression of the firearms and explosives related violence occurring on both sides of the border through effective law enforcement collaboration involving focused training, investigation and interdiction of the illicit trafficking and illegal use of firearms, explosives and ammunition. the southwest border team first learned the fast and furious investigation of the bertoni of, 2009. i've located the cesar event. the mexican authorities had recovered 42 guns from two transporters in the vehicle the trust crossed the border in mexico. the assistance of the u.s. immigration customs enforcement i was able to obtain the information on the firearms traces the and the result of the

-- ascertain the results of the investigation. firearms there were 37 the related back to the fast and furious investigation, and the information -- this information became the foundation for the fact of firearms obtained in the operation fast and furious for potential crime guns and murder weapons predestined to be utilized by all laws and assassins affiliated with a criminal organization of mexico. in the months leading up to this february, 2010, the fast and furious purchasers for volume the types of firearms preferred by the drug trafficking organization in record numbers. by this time they purchased over a thousand firearms and some of the purchases were procuring them at ten to 20 at the time. at the same time approximately 200 firearms were in this investigation recovered in the united states and mexico. the types of firearms and volumes of the purchase of the seizures and circumstances surrounding the seizures with

the information provided by the law enforcement partners. fully cooperated the fact that these farms are being acquired by violent criminal organizations in mexico. in december, 2009, i began to the beginning of march, 2010, i conduct numerous briefings on the investigation with the atf management staff at headquarters. during each briefing i provide a detailed information depicting the progression of the acquisition of firearms and discard the location number and identity of the purchaser for each recovered. i prefer the briefing to the acting director and first part of 2009 concerning trafficking to mexico in which he was briefed on the upstart of the fast and furious investigation. he later attended one of the steel operations briefing in the first part of january. in march, 2010, i conducted the video conference briefing with the managing officials from the atf border decision and the

department of justice and every one of the senior management staff for the acting director. with the assistance of the group supervisor in charge of the sand during his investigation and provide a briefing outlining the amount of fire arms purchased and expenditures to the end of february along with a number of firearms seized in the seizure of locations. the troubles before the same as previously stated. the issue of the firearms not being seized by the case agent was brought up briefly and discussed. >> if you could summarize -- >> basically wait we are talking about is by the end of the 2,000 guns to date there is about 590. it's been recovered 363 in the united states, to 27 in mexico and they're still coming. i would just like to say at the end of the strategy of the fast and furious investigations didn't take into account the

public safety citizens of the united states and mexico and buy yen to concentrate only in the investigation. the blatant disregard for public safety has had a tragic consequence that will continue in the unforeseen future and the rest of my testimony you see. >> thank you. special agent newell? >> thank you, mr. chairman. distinguished members of the committee, and william newell. as a former special agent in charge of the bureau phoenix division in june 2006 to may of this year i oversaw atf operations in the state of arizona and mexico which include 552 miles of the border. i appear before you today to discuss atf's operation fast and furious and ongoing strike force investigations of the large scale firearms organization. for the past 23 years i fully dedicated myself to confronting violent crime especially firearms along the southwest border. having served 15 of these years

along the southwest border, and firearms in the year i am keenly aware of the violence is largely by mexico's drug cartels poses a serious challenge for u.s. law enforcement coming to this mexican law enforcement threatens the safety of civilians in of law enforcement personnel on both sides of the border. at the conclusion of a free investigation of the magnitude a review is appropriate to determine whether tactics, changes in tactics and strategy are in order. with that in mind i recognize in this case and future large scale investigations it is imperative that there exists an effective flow of information between the field and headquarters to ensure critical information is being shared timely. second in retrospect indication of the magnitude incumbent upon me to communicate to a greater sense of urgency to my stuff and the u.s. office as to the need of the turn of the expeditious churches. finally i now recognize in these types of institutions more frequent risk assessments would be prudent. the trafficking investigation is not always easy to conduct for a variety of reasons including a

lack of a federal statute with prohibited firearms trafficking related activity, the firearms are was altered in some ways in and of themselves contraband. the lack of adequate punishment for the purchasers destin pact inability to identify the leadership of the organization and limited resources at the disposal of these investigations are meeting in march alleging when none of the individuals in the firearms trafficking are prohibited by law possessing firearms. consequently in order to identify and investigate the responsible higher level of individual agents must use a wide variety of investigative techniques. this can take time and considerable effort. through the case conscientious dedicated agents pursue numerous to determine who the decision makers of this organization works in an effort to get beyond the purchasers and as potentially disruptive dismantle the organization. the experience whether the arrest and prosecution of the purchasers alone does more to frustrate the capacity of the mexican cartels to continuously obtain firearms as new straw purchasers are recruited to

replace those arrested and continue the purchasing firearms. finally the conduct of the investigation as with any large scale investigation is coordinated with supervisor headquarters in washington, d.c. and firearms prosecutors of the phoenix united states attorney's office to read in october, 2009 the department of justice proposed a southwest border strategy to conduct which was finalized in january, 2010. and which outlines of these strategies related to the of vinification disruptions and dismantlement of the protest for the comprehensive multi agency, one for some operations with an emphasis on impact in the leadership and the command structure of such organizations to have a substantial and sustained impact. the doj strategy recognizes ineffectiveness -- recognizes and effectiveness of interdicting what to weapons and the source of the network responsible for transporting them. it was with this guidance in mind that operation fast and furious originated. to be clear fast and furious as the most operation to one, identify the purchasers

transporters and decision makers in the mexican cartel based organization to read to interdict the possible firearms presumptively destined for mexico. three come to share the relevant information with u.s. and mexican law enforcement authorities. to develop intelligence on other firearms trafficking organizations and five, charge and dismantle the entire organization. in this regard, there are key points i would like to make. one, it wasn't the purpose of the investigation to permit the transportation of firearms into mexico and best of my knowledge none of this was ever witnessed by the agents crossing the border firearms. to the agents' and compliance with the policy we are engaged in the effort to determine who the decision makers and actual purchasers of the firearms were to disrupt the criminal organization. the effectiveness of this tradition is recognized by the department of justice office of inspector general in the review of operation gun runner. three, we attempted to be innovative and trucking and seizing firearms purchased by the strong wire. four, when a pre-during the

investigation we made efforts to share and coordinate the relevant investigative details on the mexican law enforcement counterparts. finally, throughout my past 23 years and long for lost very good friends to firearms in violent crime. i witnessed firsthand the grief and despair suffered by families who lost loved ones in the law enforcement profession. that's why i take very seriously my responsibility to the king myself to doing everything within my authority to confront and curtail the criminal organizations we see to do harm to my peers and innocent civilians. i do not discard their responsibility in the conduct of the investigation. the death of border patrol agent brian terrie is lamborn for my life as i do for all those brave heroes who've taken of the badge to serve and protect and paid the ultimate sacrifice. i express my deep condolences to the family and make hour heavenly father bless the family through these difficult times. distinguished members, i stand ready to answer questions and thank you for the opportunity for the opening statement. >> thank you. special agent mcmahon?

>> good morning, mr. chairman, ranking member comings and distinguished members of the committee. i am a deputy assistant director of the field operations for the bureau of all, tobacco, firearms and explosives. thank you for inviting me to this important hearing. let me be clear from the onset, as the speech 16 exited in charge of the west region, i share the responsibility for the mistakes made in the fast and furious investigation. the advantage of hindsight, the benefit of a thorough review of the case clearly points to things that i would have done differently. however good our intentions, regardless of the resource challenges, and notwithstanding the legal hurdles we face in the firearms traffickers, we made mistakes. but i'm very proud of the men and women who risk their lives investigating this case. under tremendous pressure, they continue to work this case and many others in the american southwest. please do not let our feelings and packed their noble deeds.

mr. chairman, i was the special agent in charge of new york city on september 11, 2001. our offices or in the world trade center. i've witnessed great human suffering, brought to bear by those to whom violence is a stock and trade. this is one of the reasons i was so committed to bringing down the complex network of criminals operating in the homeland and bringing violence on both sides of the southern border. arnall zeal to do so and in the heat of battle, mistakes were made. and for that, i apologize. mr. chairman, i am no stranger to the creek and ultimate sacrifice made by my fellow law enforcement officers. i've lost friends in the line of duty whether it was in the rubble of the world trade center, the streets of the communities or in the desert southwest, nothing hurts more than losing a fellow law enforcement officer in the line of duty. with that in mind i want to express my sincere condolences to the family, and while the investigation to the tragic murder remains on dillinger and

because of this i may not be able to comment on that investigation please notify honor his great sacrifice and i am truly sorry for his family's loss. with that in mind, i appear before you today on my own free will to answer to the best of my ability questions you have regarding this operation and my role in it. thank you. >> thank you all. before we begin, i've been made aware that all of you, presumably all of you received from the department of justice council a letter that speaks specifically to your testimony here today. and it's from barry s. orlo to read all of you receive that letter? no, you did not? >> dever issued to people under subpoena and that's normal for any case we have agents under subpoena by defense or others.

>> okay. i want to make some clarifications. the letter inverse that you may not be able to answer certain questions here today, and i want to make sure that it's clear that where it says, for a simple, you may not reveal any information covered by a rule 60 of the federal rules of criminal procedure related to the manner that occurred before a grand jury, and it goes on up and left we have a card due to former 20 your defense attorney to my right and a former prosecutor down below, former u.s. attorney and a number of other people who have worked before they came here in law enforcement. i'm asking all of them at a question occurs from any of us it clearly would lead to something believed to involve compromising the ongoing investigation or the actual

chances of contracting somebody we take a pause. i'm not beyond that. if you believe, any of you, that you are asked to question the in this format by it being over to the public would compromise the ability to conduct any of the 20 people now charged or others who you reasonably believe will be charged. i want you to take a pause. on the other hand, i want you to understand every question that we ask you are compelled to answer unless you assert your fifth amendment rights. there is no executive order or executive branch decision that can stop us from propelling the answer. if you believe that you are protecting the ability to reach convictions or to save somebody who was under cover in any other way would be harmed by you're giving an answer and open

hearings, i want you to assert that we need to be an executive session. the committee can go to the executive session at any time by a simple vote of the committee or conference of the chairman and ranking member. we probably will not go to the executive session at that moment but would attend that question to the end. so understand our intention is to be very clear. we know that in fact the cartels to continue to operate. we do not want to have materials here and reasonably disclosed. i want to make one other thing is clear before we start and i will recognize the ranking member. this committee has been made aware that there were wiretaps in this fast and furious investigation. that was not by the justice department turning over material required by the subpoena. we will not be going into the details of any subpoena in the questioning, and we do look forward to the justice providing

the subpoena material in a timely fashion they have not yet done. but again, those are under seal so their existential which was obtained in has been fairly widely understood is no longer under seal. but the details of those at this point in putting kenneth noss and's statement that when he read the details he was sick to his stomach is as far as we are going to go on the details of this wire tap at this time. this hearing is about the relations with mexico, with the new mexico, but they didn't know, how the agency did or did not communicate. it doesn't mean we man of what other information from you in due time, but i think we want to be very careful that today we have no reason to go into some of these areas and so we are going to avoid them. with that of the ranking member has any comment. >> just some clarifying items. first of all, mr. chairman, i want to thank you for when you just said. i think that is a very balanced

approach to take we are all concerned about the ongoing investigations and putting people in jeopardy that should not be as a result of our efforts here. i just want to -- there may be some things, mr. sherman that say for example these gentlemen may not know they are crossing the line, and i know that we are looking to the justice department and i have no problem with that. but we have a situation where justice, and i ever since we have some justice attorneys here, there may be a crossing of the line. is there a way we can at least pause and make sure that we are not crossing over into some territory, the type of territory that you're talking about. >> i appreciate the gentleman's question. although i wanted very carefully and despairingly used as not an

invited guest here today if you believe that a line of questioning is going that way we will entertain a request from the justice. again, these investigations are about justice. it is about we believe there in fact our people culpable for what happened and the mistakes of the special agent said the mistakes that were made beside a special agent mcmahon. so we do intend to get to those errors and mistakes, but the ranking members absolutely we want to make sure that of someone inadvertently starts down the line of questioning whether you see or someone from the justice brings this to our attention, he certainly understands what it takes to preserve the prosecution, mr. lehane or anyone else, that i want this to be a little bit like the quality control line on a toy iota production. anybody can pull this topic would be a mistake about to

happen. that doesn't change the fact that this letter is a little out of line. it may be boilerplate, but it applies that you don't have to answer. yes, you do have to answer but we will use executive session or another setting to get additional information so as to ensure that what we must do does not get in the way of what you all must do. >> mr. chairman, just one other thing. i'm just looking at these of the special agent mcmahon. i want to make sure the understand what you just said. do you understand what he just said? i just want to make sure. >> i use the english language so poorly that sometimes my wife does mention that perhaps just as i say what i mean doesn't mean that they can figure out what it means, too. but again, to set it off at the right tone because it is important the we get to where we have to get to do it in the

respectful way for the fact there are lives at stake on both sides of the border i now recognize myself for a line of questioning. mr. mcmahon, you said that to meet mistakes people make mistakes. would you like to give us just one of those mistakes? >> sure, again as i said as a federal review of everything after the fact that i do see that one of the mistakes that i made personally was may be more thoroughly reviewing some of the documents coming across my desk on this case and that has been brought out in my review, and it's something that i know will not happen again. >> special agent newell, as recently as yesterday, you called this comegys it is fast and furious is a phenomenal program. >> it was, i hope not is to read to you stand by that? >> i'm sorry, chairman -- >> this was quoted in "the

washington post" that came out yesterday and they quote did you by name as having called this a phenomenal program. did you at one time think and do you think to date at best and the feeling is a phenomenal program? >> mr. chairman, that quote, i don't know the date of that quote. it wasn't yesterday, it was -- >> it came out. let me rephrase the question as goes back to my inability to work in the language. did you ever think the fast and furious was a phenomenal program? >> well, mr. chairman, to answer your question on believe fast and furious was conceived in the idea disrupting the dismantling -- >> let's get into the details. fast and furious was at its heart about letting guns what. you're agency knew that if you left the guns be brought by straw purchasers who you knew in fact were straw purchasers, including two felons and in the opening statement when people talk about people that had every right to buy them come at that

moment that they were criminals the could have been stopped and arrested, there was an inherent crime. so at least in the case of two of the buyers they were felons comedy about guns, they did a crime by buying them and they were allowed to move on and eventually turn those weapons over to the intermediaries to griffin to the drug cartels. that was always a part of the program. do you think that that was in fact whether to use a phenomenal, do you think that there was a good idea? >> with all due respect i'm aware of to in this case. i informed during the tendency of the case so i may not know the exact date. let's go on beyond that. even if the one of felons, documents that we have seen provided by whistleblowers show that in fact all along in this program you knew that the

weapons purchased were destined for drug cartels. you knew all along that the weapons, some 1 billion over 600 weapons wasn't buying them for sport hunting especially 50 calpers. so, do you -- and my time is running low trying to get an answer, did you think it was a good program? it appears as though you thought it was a good program at some time. >> as i sit in my statement i acknowledge now we did make some mistakes in this initiative in this program, but i did that we will all acknowledge you are right on that. when i was in mexico i observed a lot of things coming and special agent, understanding i was told in mexico by a number of your colleagues you were not there at the time, that when they entered into the database, the tracie database on a fast and furious weapons they got a system error, in other words they didn't get a hit or miss, they got in network error. are you aware of that?

so, when your agents, your federal agents with 20 or more years entered in the information that would have allowed them to contact the special the agent in phoenix, they did not get the information that would have allowed them to contact the special agent in phoenix, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> secure blocked. i've run a lot of time with my ever questions, but both for both of you, if you had known about this program, for you or were you not obligated to tell the ambassador? >> upon my arrival i had discussions about the arms trafficking being the number one issue. the second call i would have made would have been on the investor in the first call would of been directly to the acting director of atf to find out exactly what this case is all about. >> in my remaining time, and special agent, this would of course a point to tijuana, too. if you are not really for the nation as an american law enforcement in the vegetable, as

a liaison invited on behalf of the government, not having the law enforcement in that country, don't you owe it to the ambassador to keep him or her fully informed of anything you learn because you are not there to do law enforcement, you are there to help them to law enforcement through the embassy come so for all three of you, isn't it reasonable to believe that one of the reasons you were not told about the fast and furious is have you been told in addition to the acting director the ambassador and the rest of the state department would have been had to read into the program considering its magnitude >> sir, to follow what darren said, if we were not aware of the atf agents were actually falling among gun traffickers away, and letting them go that is in same.

inconceivable. you would never think that because atf does not do that. if i yet known that that was in fact occurring, i would have called the headquarters, and if we do not get relief from them we would have gone upstairs and told the ambassador and hopefully he would have been able to stop it. >> thank you. mr. cummings? >> thank you, mr. chairman. from early on in this case as atf agents and officials raise concern about the number of guns purchased by fast and furious, they were flowing from arizona to mexico. mr. leadmon, you testified in march of 2010 that you provided a detailed briefing about fast and furious to the acting deputy director hoover assistant director javan and several others; is that correct? now mr. mcmahon, after the march 2012 briefing, mr. hoover

directed the phoenix field officer to prepare an exit strategy to shut down the operation within 90 days; is that correct? >> that's correct we asked for an exit strategy. >> and in his interview mr. hoover told the committee this was the first time in his career that he had ever asked for an exit strategy but that he felt that he needed one because he was very concerned about the large number of guns being purchased by the suspects. mr. spiegel, did you share mr. hoover's concern about the large number of weapons in this case? with others? spearman absolutely. i think we were all concerned about the large numbers in the magnitude of the case was something we had never encountered before in my career. >> did you ask mr. newell to provide you with an exit strategy? >> i did, sir. >> when did the exit strategy envision indictment arising?

>> we received the it's a strategy in the end of march. >> what your? >> 2010. >> i'm sorry. >> and we had a 30, 6790 a plan of certain things were accomplished by 30 days we would be able to do it and accomplished by 60 days we would not team. >> said you had more less some kind of time schedules; is that correct? >> that's correct. >> were you following that schedule and were deutsch checking that every 30 days? >> we were actually checking back more than that. we were probably talking weekly about the activity of what was going on in the case and how much closer we were to completing the investigation. >> according to that strategy at the beginning, what was the day that you expected the indictments are writing? you did it in march 2010? >> correct, we were expecting indictments in the summer of 2010. >> i want to understand why it took from march of 2010 when

mr. hoover ordered the operation to be shut down to january, 2011 when the indictments were finally issued. can you help with that? >> we were working day today with the attorney's office and it is a partnership when you put a case like this together, and we thought we had enough and we have to prove that the prosecutors that we have enough and that just to give a lot of extra time. >> that was more than a lot of extra time was it not? you're talking initially by about the summer of 2010 year ended january, 2011 you approach a year as opposed to a few months; is the right? >> about six months. >> and when did you eventually shut down the atf investigative forces of the operation? >> while the investigation is ongoing as we speak. >> but at some point -- i'm talking about what we were just talking about, special agent. there was a plan to shut this down, an exit strategy, asking

you to refer to what i just asked the special agent mr. mcmahon about. what was the plan? the plan was the end of july presented the u.s. attorney's office what we believe to be evidence that we needed to secure the first round of indictments against the exit strategy said the 90 day, 30, 60, 90 day was not a firm depending on what type of investigative information we get into that depending on each time frame, so it was roughly about i believe about mid august when we felt we presented the united states attorney's office all the evidence we needed to secure the first round of indictments, so in essence, we probably went over a couple of weeks. >> so i assume, did you approve this and going beyond the time period that you had initially stated for the exit strategy, is the right? >> there was nothing to approve, i was getting updates about his work with the u.s. attorney's

office. >> if he said we need more time, you just assume you needed more time? to keep you a reason why we needed more time? >> and so, mr. chairman issa asks that the purpose of the program was to let the guns walk coming and i just want mr. newell and mr. mcmahon to be we are trying to get to the bottom of this. we can be going bring around the rosie forever. what was the purpose of this operation to the best of your knowledge, special agent newell, and then yours, mr. mcmahon? >> thank you for the question. the purpose of this investigation was to identify and disrupt and dismantle an entire organization that was linked the mexican drug cartel. that was the purpose. and to do so, we needed an extraordinary work on the part of the agent to achieve that goal. >> but it wasn't to let the guns of -- is that correct?

>> no, sir, as i said in my statement, one of the things that frustrates me to some extent is that relief and at no time in our strategy was it to allow guns to be taken to mexico, no. >> i don't know if you heard the special agent, but he was almost in tears and very frustrated because he felt that all of this went against the very things that he stands for and these other agents stand for and with that i would like you to answer my question. >> without objection. >> i totally agree with you, that is not in the makeup of the agent. we do not allow guns to walk. what we did in this investigation was invested a large but individuals or breaking the law and we were trying to put the case together so we could actually make an impact. if we take off these one or two purchases degette replaced in a day and we have even more guns going into mexico. that was the plan. >> thank the gentleman. we now recognize for your five

minutes. >> for >> was the origin of the program. who came up with this idea, where did it come from? it is based on the fact that when the strike force was initiated the idea of the program as organization -- who came up with this idea, was it you or somebody higher up the food chain? >> the idea for what, sir? >> the whole program. >> it's one investigation, sir. it's one investigation. >> well, where -- where was -- i mean, the selling of the guns, the giving of the guns in the fast and furious, where did that come from, who made the decision? >> well, sir, we have a policy that allows the transfer to

pursue the targets and investigation and identify. >> there were as many as 2,000 firearms, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> and you were allowed to for 2,000 firearms to go in the system, this fast and furious program. how were you tracking those? >> well, sir, fast and furious i apologize to the was of a program, it was an investigation. >> how did you track the weapons, the to thousand weapons? >> welcome depending on how the information got to us, sometimes the information got to was after the sale, sometimes it got to us through investigative means. >> did you have a set of records that show who got them and reported to you where they went and all that? >> through the tracing system we have a way to determine when they are received and we also receive information. >> on all the firearms that you get, this information? >> i don't believe so.

>> why not? >> why didn't we get all the information? >> if you have 2,000 firearms that are out there that are going in the program or the investigation and you are putting them out there it seems to me that you would want to if you're making the case would want to track those. >> well, we did attract once we know about, yes, sir. >> endeavor 2000 firearms come if you have control of those at any time. >> we seized approximately 300 guns in this case through the efforts. >> and the others we put on the database. >> well, i must be missing something. you had 2,000 firearms. you put them into the system come into the investigation; correct? >> i did not, no, sir. >> who did? >> agents in the group. >> who kept records of that? the agents that were doing it, did anybody keep record of who they were getting the guns to?

>> server, the weapons were being purchased by criminal organizations. >> okay. >> so, when we found out about the organization for the weapons seizures were cooperating dealers or other means, we would keep track of that, yes. >> said you have a record of all of the weapons that were put in that were sold? >> to this day we are still discovering more because this is a very prolific firearms trafficking organization. when we initiative organization in november, 2009, i believe the number was to this day the number changes something like 400 firearms. by the time we initiated the strategy to focus on the entire organization i think it was close to a thousand by the time we opened up. >> i must have missed something because it seems to me if there were 2,000 weapons that were sold and printing into -- and you were investigating this and you were trying to find the

criminals that are buying them that there would be a record of all of the weapons there were sold. a cynic we have a record of -- no, sir because we are still to the status covering firearms purchasing use individuals. >> did you have a record of the ones that purchased as individuals? ayman purchased those weapons, the individuals who purchased those weapons? >> the ones we are aware of, yes, sir. i do believe so, yes, sir. >> and you are still in the process of making the case on that? >> because we are identifying additional suspects as we go, yes. >> with the gentleman yield? >> let me understand from previous testimony, agents were there at the scene videotape or video observance occurred. the agents in many cases followed the suspect leaving with six, ten, 20 weapons free period what time and then they

were ordered by this task force to break off and let those weapons continue going. and you charge to one of the 20 defendants, the only one that is not just a myth user who was strong lobbying, you charged him with trafficking. when did you know that he was trafficking weapons and his intent was to traffic weapons and to mexico? and when the weapons occurred in mexico you knew that he had received from the straw buyers and they turned up the crime scene in mexico and what did you do? >> i believe that it was mr. costa is the moneyman actually in the investigation right now he's the head of the phoenix traffic organization.

>> and you knew he was trafficking and receiving the weapons and that they were showing up at the crime scenes. >> my time is expired but why you couldn't seem to answer the question straightforward you knew the guns that you had watched to be delivered or brought to be purchased went to third parties and ended up in mexico and yet the program continued as if you somehow didn't know that the purchasers, the same purchaser who had purchased guns that were already in mexico was purchasing more. ie bonds yield that. >> mr. davis is next for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. you have been here for seven years studying done trafficking on the southwest border. before that, you were detected here in washington, d.c. for

many years. can you describe to us briefly held the mexican drug cartel and its firearms from the united states? one way to kind of summarize this came to light to me several years ago when an individual described to me put it as follows says the mexican people have been trafficking drugs into the united states since 1980 and we have been abiding gun since 1880. so that kind of gives you the groundwork of the culture and the reason why we have this problem because we have these firearms being sold and the mexicans coming up in these cartels and they are purchasing these weapons, that is a fact. >> in your experience, what type of weapons are in demand? by the cartel >> it's like on a limited to in my written testimony which i

didn't get to finish, but there is -- we have actually gone in and identified a lot of what we call dto preferred weapons and it is ak or a hour. we have a list of them, and in this particular case the firearms being purchased by these individuals -- let me ask why do you think they focus on these types of weapons? >> because they are used we've to pretend ourselves against rivals and number two, confronted by law and for set and mexico and the military, so they need this type of fire power and the heavier firepower to exist down there. >> thank you. you have spent the last 19 years as a atf agent and have most recently served as the atf

representative in a tijuana mexico. we have heard a lot today about the problem of the gun trafficking in mexico, and i am hoping that you can help me to better understand the problem. based on your experience in mexico, where are the cartels and guns coming from? >> from my experience, the majority come from the united states. are you seeing a representative sample of all of the guns used in crimes in mexico for the mexican authorities just may be showing you firearms that they believe come from the united states? >> they make them available to us in the last four years since 2007i have probably looked at slightly over 2,000 firearms in mexico. these are firearms that i went

out and soon after they were seized at the crime scene or stash house i went out and examined the guns come in and of those 2000, less than 50 of them i could tell were from the foreign manufacturers meeting outside the u.s., possibly from south america and guns that were media type of back to even guerrilla war of central america. >> so you believe that these statistics are accurate, that they are real? >> i know guns, and i know what i see coming in by the person on the ground, yes, sir. >> are you finding many of the weapons coming from central america, some people seem to think that actually are coming from central america.

do you think that many of them are? >> some do, yes, especially with some groups, surgeon cartels have more of a tendency to acquire the firearms in central america or south america. possibly even from the guerrilla groups. however, the other cartels, the ones that i am familiar with most of them are u.s. source of firearms. >> you think the united states is the main source of these weapons? connect yes, sir, i do. >> thank the gentleman. the gentleman from utah, for five minutes. >> thank you. agent newell, when did you first become aware of and in his bid for me even suspect that these firearms in the program were being transported or transferred into mexico? >> i think we started getting the first traces i want to say i

believe sometime november of 2009. >> so in november of the line, you believe they were being transferred or transported into mexico. did that cause you any concern? >> yes, sir, it always does. >> using the program continued on, knowing full well that they were going to mexico. he said in your opening statement there isn't the purpose of the investigation to permit to the transportation of firearms into mexico. >> we were lawfully able to seize firearms in the many firearms trafficking cases we conducted in phoenix and arizona across the southwest border we take every act to stop that, yes. >> that is in january coming out of your office, the january, 2010i mean, you testified today in your opening statement is not the investigation to permit the investigation firearms into mexico. yet in february or march -- in

point number 13 you write it is written currently the strategy is to allow the transfer of the firearms to continue to take place. albeit in much smaller place to further the investigation and allow the identification of additional coconspirators it would continue to operate and illegally traffic firearms to mexico drug-trafficking organizations. so it was the goal, it the intention of the program to allow bonds to be trafficking to mexico. based on this, is that correct? >> no, sir. >> that is from your statement. it also says in here a number of different seizures in mexico. it seems very inconsistent at best to suggest it wasn't the purpose to allow them to go to mexico did you know that in 2009 they are going to mexico and put it in a memo in 2010, january, 2010. how are those statements

compatible? >> well, if i may, what i'm getting the opportunity to clarify that has been obviously well publicized. the wording in that, my understanding is on the briefing paper was drafted was that our efforts to allow the transfer to identify additional co-conspirators was so that we get further the investigation, take out the organization otherwise these individuals would in fact continue in the larger -- >> is it hundreds or thousands of weapons to continue to flow through the program and going to mexico? >> i'm sorry? >> how many hundreds or thousands of weapons did you allow to be purchased knowing that they were going to mexico? >> the purchase is being done by the criminal organization. >> but you facilitated and allowed it, did you not? about the straw purchases to happened so that the guns could end up in mexico and you know that in 2009 that has happened. >> again, the goal of the

organization and the investigation was to disrupt and dismantle the entire -- >> understand the goal, but the problem is that you were purposely, knowingly, allowing the guns to go to mexico, and you have information in 2009 that it seems successful that you never put a stop to it. meeting the goal that you leave out in the memo january, 2010. and a continued on and on and consequently there were hundreds of weapons that ended up in mexico killing people. killing people. the reason that we are today. when did you first know or think that they were walking? >> in this investigation come to the best of my knowledge, we didn't let them walk for that perspective. >> when did you first think that they were? or what, walking? >> search, dan -- >> have you ever thought that they were walking? >> the policy regarding the transfer of the firearms that were trying to develop -- >> when did you first think that the guns were walking?

>> again, the goal of the investigation -- >> when did you first think that guns were walking? do you think that that's here today? >> i truly believe as i've said before that i didn't -- we didn't intentionally let them walk. >> let's go to slide number two if we could. this is an e-mail from mr. newell to mr. mcmahon on december 21st, 2010. six days after brian hatari was killed. quote, i don't like the perception that we allow the guns to walk. i had him pull the number of the guns recovered in mexico as well as those we had a direct role in taking off your in the u.s.. are you telling me that you didn't suspect the guns were walking? >> as my e-mail says it is about the perception. i didn't want people to think there was a perception because in my mind that wasn't the case. >> how were they not walking? >> knowing and proving that the transfer of the purchase of the

firearms is the legal are two different things. >> i am asking. this is one of the indictments in the two months before john donelson went on cbs news for the accusations of the active investigation. >> why did you have ample the numbers one day after the murder for the number of guns recovered and mexico in the united states? did you know that fast and furious was about to come under massive scrutiny? >> i did not know at that time it was going to come under this level of scrutiny, no, sir. >> what is the difference between -- and explain to me why you don't think they were walking. you thought others -- >> could you summarize? >> i'm way over a. >> thank you. we now go to the gentleman from vermont for five minutes. >> thank you very much mr. newell, trying to understand the sequence here that some of my colleagues were asking about. as i anderson, the agents would watch a straw purchaser purchase

guns, correct? they would follow the purchaser and go some place is to another location where they would observe the guns were left; correct? >> they were dropped off by the straw purchaser and deliver it to whoever the middle man was, right? >> yes. >> on a couple of occasions the agents called in for permission to make an arrest and they were denied that permission because of the overall objective of the plan, correct? >> i'm aware of that in one instance, yes. >> so the question that i have, and i think that they were asking this, but procedures did you have in place to follow where the guns went from the point where they were dropped off to wherever they ended up? >> i know that we have surveillance their job was to do that, yes. >> he got to report.

i'm an agent. i observed a straw purchaser. i watched the purchaser go to a delivery point. so the next step is following the guns from the delivery point to wherever they may end up. now, i'd understand how this plan worked from the point of watching the straw purchaser make the purchase, watching the straw purchaser make the drop. but i don't understand what happened after that or what your system was in order to follow where the guns went. ..

you would follow where the guns went after the draft middleman. >> to the best of my knowledge, we did everything possible to do that with the resources we have in the field. but i'm asking how you did it. >> with surveillance, who's on the ground. >> if your boots on the ground, how is it that you wouldn't know where those guns went from the drop to the next step? >> at some instances, guns would go to a home unless we had any lawful visas to approach the individuals we sat on surveillance as much as resources would allow another priorities would take that away from the house. >> so basically, there is not

either the resources to follow those guns from the drop to wherever they ended up? >> that it never instances, but some instances, yes. >> mr. leadmon come in her testimony he discussed the 2007 project gunrunner. you highlighted the need to conduct domestic and international law enforcement to deny the trade to the firearms trafficking infrastructure. can you clarify one important issue about what happened. you have an opinion he was a mistake in this operation to focus on the mexican cartels in the criminal organizations that are trafficking firearms or was it a mistake or failure to prioritize public safety has atf targeted the cartels? >> it's not an opinion. it's my observation. but i will say is i think there is a turn here that everybody said what these cotton swab.

i personally believe our agents walked away from the guns as they were traveling down the road, similar to seeing something off at a train station. to skirt around this to me as it occurs. these firearms, like i testified earlier or crime guns, murder weapons. we knew in 2009. we knew that the sun or permission of mexico. we knew where the guns are ending up i are partners in mexico and down a recovering. there is no doubt that this is going to a criminal organization as early as 2009. as every day when i'm thereafter, it became more and more -- more and more substantiated. my thing here is for talking about lawful ways of investing are going in. we have an obligation to the mexican people and the u.s. government and the citizens of the united states. there's other ways to stop the

flow of guns other than arresting people. you can go and sees the guns. you don't have to arrest them. you can approach the people and put an obstacle in front of them so they can stop the purchase of these firearms. out of the line thousands of guns to be purchased and tried he tried to case and make it a case because you got eight numbers. what we should have done it broke these people down as they came out he for real at these guns go south and then through our intelligence assets in through the hardware cover other agents and networking from other traditions, we can tie these cases together and go after a good debate people appear that sewer line for some partners do it enough so we should do it. >> thank you. my time is expired. i yield back. >> now go to the tunnel from the south carolina, mr. doughty for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. special agent, newell counties that firearms are not contraband

faster unless they are sold to, possessed by a required by the person which would include a straw purchaser. so my question to you is this, does atf have contemporaneous or pre-knowledge of any purchasers purchasing weapons in arizona? >> circa mistral purchases are not prohibited to individuals unless they been convicted of some crime. >> at against the law to purchase a gun and i know transfer to someone else to therefore get around the fact the person you're going to give it to is a prohibited person. a great? >> yeah. >> someone who is going to give a gun to a prohibited person is a straw purchaser. so not that we have that cleared up, teach ye not that anyone who was acquiring firearms from firearms dealers in arizona for straw purchasers, contemporaneous with the acquisition, did atf know it?

>> we have to improve as the violation. we presented to the u.s. attorney's office evidence labeling individuals -- >> let's do it another way. the very first weapon recovered in mexico to retrace, did she go back to the purchaser of that weapon and interrogate them? >> i did not, no commissary. >> did anyone 18th of atf? you got a gun purchased in mexico and make sense in mexico. you know your trace because that's the gun. did you go back to the person who purchased it? that is an old-fashioned investigative technique. not as complicated as letting guns walk. it is more effective to go interrogate the person you meet the acquisition. did you do that? >> server, as i stated earlier in this investigation, relays and if you take one straw purchaser not making an impact on the crater organization -- >> i want to ask you about the

greater investigation because i read now four times he said disrupt, dismantle, destroy. how will you extradite drug kingpins from mexico? >> with china plans to do that. >> someone's guns make it to mexico, there's nothing to do about drug kingpins? >> yes, sir, there was. >> as soon as we have solid information under the kingpin was committed sure that was mexico. >> they are supposed to trust american law enforcement who's been conducting an investigation in those firearms are going into mexico and you tell them after the fact and they're supposed to thank you can be partners in this endeavor? >> sera, it was only until the investigation under the specific recipient or the tribe kingpin was the result was predict to share the information. >> how he dismantle mexican drug cartels if you're not going to extradite the kingpins back to the united states? >> we hope mexican officials

will prosecute for that. >> you are hoping the mexican criminal justice system, you're just not going to tell them about it? does exactly what you just said, special agent. do you tell them about it after the fact. >> we had to know at first. we had to, through this investigation -- >> okay, you've got the first reset tells you a u.s. gun is discounted mexico. why did you not go interview the person who acquired the gun? why not do the investigation the old-fashioned way, with car stops, search warrants, active surveillance? why do it this way? it was never going to work. >> again 10 years of experience have shown us removing one straw purchaser will not have an effect on the lurcher invest negation. >> well, special agent, the only way possibly could've worked would've been if if mexico had extradited these kingpins. if you want to disrupt,

dismantle, destroy, the only way could work is if he told mexico or i would've settled for you just trolling your old federal agents about it at time because atf in mexico to know about it, did their? yes or no. that mexico atf office know about this? >> they were aware, yes, sir. >> do rare mexicans went to mexico and you knew about it? indexer, weapons went to mexico all the time. >> friend straw purchasers that you knew about? let me ask you this. if mexico were to ask us to extradite the law enforcement officers who knowingly aided and abetted up and escorted to mexico, what would your reaction to that feed? >> i would explain to them are concerned of an investigation this type is to take out the whole organization so we have the greatest impact possible. if you just take off one straw purchase you don't have an impact on the greater effort.

>> special agent newell, i'll just say this in conclusion. i've worked with atf six years directly. i've worked with atf incorrectly for 10 years. as justice dta. this is one of the saddest days in my sixth month in congress. it may be decided today. atf is a wonderful reputation of south carolina. we never once contemplated letting firearms walkover. the first year quantico or clinical person knows that. i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. we now recognize the gentlelady from california, and inspire. >> thank you, mr. chairman. special agent newell, what were you thinking? i think that is what we are all scratching our heads about here today and the embarrassment that you half put on atf generally an outstanding organization of wine agents is deeply troubling to all of us.

but what i am concerned about is the fact those whistleblowers when, senator grassley, tbs didn't investigation, this travesty would still be going on today. that is my big objection. who did you tell? did mr. nelson know about this? >> about the investigation? >> yes. >> i briefed him -- >> when did he know about it? when you started it come on you can see their? >> i'm not sure when he was aware of the investigation. >> or did you make aware of this investigation? >> when the investigation first initiated and i believe in november we sent -- we sent a briefing of the first part of december. >> to whom? >> to my supervisor.

>> mr. mcmahon, what did you do? >> when i was briefed on the investigation i passed up the chain. this was an investigation. we had pretty early on what the title "operation fast and furious" came on with a large amount of people who are buying guns in the short amount of time and having recovered in mexico. but we had was purchased in the u.s., recoveries in mexico. we didn't have what was in between and that's what the agents in phoenix are trying to prove. >> so you all thought this was a great idea? this particular investigation of finding gunstock in mexico. >> we didn't have an investigation. we had a group of individuals breaking the ontrack condense into mexico. >> 2000 gunstock into mexico. you have retrieved maybe 300, is that correct? >> i believe the current number

is roughly 600 firearms have been recovered. >> and my understanding is the way you a quote surveilling is putting gps systems on them, is that correct? >> , firearms or vehicles? we used all kinds of investigative techniques to further the investigation determined the firearms are going that make it. >> with the generally peeled? for your previous testimony that three times and only times were in electronic devices based on the products. >> only three times? >> yeah, correct. >> those batteries ran out? >> exactly. >> what peter forcelli testified earlier said that in his opinion, if we monitor money being wired to the middle east and we take down actual information about people who buy sudafed because we are concerned about meth labs, we know that

gunrunning is coming from the united states into mexico. that is the source of it. why are we required -- why are we requiring people who purchase multiple long arms from the poor do not? my question to each of you is, should we be doing that? we do it for things like sudafed, but we don't do it for a long arms. >> i believe we put forward a demand letter requiring drug dealers on the southwest border to report the sale of two or more firearms that fire from the shoulder at greedier than 22 caliber. >> what is the penalty if they don't? >> it would be part of the revocation process. space taxi would lose their license? >> correct. >> that's a slap on the hand. >> that's how we have -- >> i'm asking if there should be a law passed, requiring the reporting of long arms that exceed a certain number. >> that is the job.

>> no, you are out in the field. you're telling us that the gunrunning into mexico, the drug cartels are getting those come dates. the originating here. i want everyone on the panel to just answer that question. >> what is going forward is going to be a great tool for us. >> yes, any tool we have to assist us and detect the merrily on, to help us assist and detect early on in an organization that is trafficking in large quantities would help. >> yes, ma'am. i think you are going to do this should be in a balanced approach may be through legislation, but we also have to take in mind we do have second amendment rights in this needs to be balanced. i think we should approach this with caution.

>> well, what does this mean? >> areas of common good in this idea in this legislation, but there is the responsibility for us to balance also. >> next. >> yes, ma'am, it would help. >> yes, ma'am, i agree with mr. leadmon, we need to balance the second amendment right. we require purchases of handguns within two or more handguns within a five-day period to be reported to us. however, the situation in mexico right now and along the southwest border is exited and see that we have from typos -- some help along that line, but the assault weapons. >> i would disagree to some extent that that would be beneficial. i would rather have a relationship at the federal firearms licensee for when an individual does come in and wants to purchase multiple

weapons of any source, handguns are long guns, that they would work with us on not then that would provide us information targeting individuals. i was somewhat disagree with that. >> attendants expired. >> we now go to mr. walberg for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a thank you for giving us the opportunity to go to mexico city and meet with officials, both are hard-working agents these as well as the federal police in mexico. hearing some of the responses this morning, i'm kind of surprised mexico's federal police and us for such openness in providing information to us of what they are temp thing to do when it's apparently let them down. i guess to try to get not from the other side than answers, but

may not mr. canino, thank you for your service. when did you first learn a large number of guns were seized in mexico and trace back to phoenix? >> well, sir, around november or so. my intel officer in mexico reported to me there is a large amount of weapons and a suspect to database. >> what was your reaction to that? >> well, fair, i looked at it and it got three things about this case. number one, i thought that they case was out of phoenix. anyone who has ever popped agents in mixer works in phoenix that the u.s. attorney's there is number that didn't to prosecute firearms cases. that's number one. number two, et cetera agents in phoenix had stumbled upon a gun

trafficking group and in due diligence for finally realizing, okay, these guys because of this many guys. number three, but somehow our agent are losing these are a combination of all three. never, never in my wildest dreams would i think that atf agents were ordered or participated in actually following gun traffickers and just walking away. that is to be inconceivable. into this day and still trying to get my head around this. what happened in this case is the atf gun trafficking book, something we have done since 1972. and we do it well. and they wanted to phoenix to the shredder and shredded the best practices, the type makes the use to investigate a gun trafficking case. it's not rocket science. if there was, i wouldn't be

here. >> had he received in the morning from atf in phoenix or washington about the possibility of a spike in gun in mexico? >> you know, talking with lauren and the folks at the office of strategic intelligence, you know, we became aware there is a gun trafficking case in phoenix. the first comes today became aware of them related to the case where n-november is on nine, workout and workout and stirred up in the seizure of 42 guns in sonora, mexico. so no warning. >> once the guns came a point trace them, now he found out there's a case case out of phoenix. but after that case, of those nine guns, that person who purchased the nine guns purchased close to 700 guns. so it on nine, we knew, we meaning the atf from atf phoenix, atf mexico noted at least one person involved in

that case had guns recovered in mexico. like i said, that person was allowed to die 700 guns. >> mr. gil, let me ask you the same questions. when did you first learn a large number of guns were seized in mexico and traced back to phoenix? >> sir, i learned during the same event that mr. canino just referred to. he made chief analyst came into my office and i had just arrived in early october in this event came across and so they briefed me out that time. >> your reaction for that? >> i picked up the phone. we discussed it. i called the phoenix field division to find out what was going on with this investigation and we were recovering an abnormal number of weapons and if they were aware, if so what was going on. >> you receive no warning prior to that? >> no, sir. >> and the few remaining

seconds, let me move over to mr. leadmon. what is he trace? >> is the atf electronic tracing system. it is the system we use to submit traces and ticket results. >> with the database useful for tracing guns or did you face obstacles that the treason system? >> well, within the tracing system we have the flagging system called suspect on. within the database, it is utilized to notify case agents when a weapon that they suspect if being used in a criminal crime gun and the agents notified. >> weather delays in the use of each on this particular issue? >> no, the tracing comes out of mexico guns or the u.s. guns comes from the recovering officers in their agency. at the flagging system has a

mechanism that were given the exception -- and the inception of gunrunner -- excuse me, this project, fast and furious. we couldn't have it through our electronic system. >> why was that? >> division say not matter of merging the systems together. it is now part of our system and all fully available. >> the gentleman's time is expired. we now go to mr. quigley for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i apologize. they're several things going on. so if i ask a question that's been answered i apologize, but perhaps it is most obvious, special agent mcmahon, was it your intention to go back and get these weapons? after the assault took place? for the stars at guns? your intention was to go and get

all these weapons, correct? >> our intention was to prove they were doing and they know picolinate that this weapons and that's easier said than done. proving someone is a straw purchaser may have to prove the day they came in to fill out the form that they lied when they answered one of the questions. and we have to prove that they knowingly invited when they filled out that form. so once we've we have determined some undersea purchaser, we want to get the weapons they are responsible for as quick as possible. >> did you believe you could get weapons back it that was the case regardless of where it went? >> again, our problem with this case is proving a violation occurred in the u.s. and then determining how those weapons were being transported into mexico. we know about the people we identified in this case, the purchasers, none of them were physically taken the weapons into mexico. we were checking border crossings, all this sort is sin

that was not happening. there is a great unknown trying to figure out what the size of this network was and how was operating. >> well, u.n. special agent gil have used if we took off one or two straw purchasers today, they simply get replaced. in your words and your mind, why is that the case? >> the way understand trafficking in college is completely different. i'm from new york and more trafficking cases all the time, but it's totally different in mexico. what you have is a plus abbas orders comes from the u.s. he'll give someone in the u.s.a. said a thousand dollars in ca1 $70,000 a gun and he expects to get $70,000. >> how did they find each other? >> that is an established network from the drug trade of drugs going north. >> i'm sorry, so the

relationship is dirty pair. >> that personal recruit individuals of u.s. citizens to buy weapons. at least her picking up one or two people, that hurts them any person in the u.s. person mexico will still get his $70,000 worth of guns and that is what happens. so not enough purchasers one by one explain tired in the money and the u.s., but doesn't make an impact in mexico and that is the key to what we are trying to do at atf and has to be a balance obviously. as i said, the mistakes in no way should we ever had out anyway to get up to 600 purchases without talking that person, trying to find out what they were doing from the scene if they would cooperate. again, we learn things in every case we ever do what we are learning an awful lot from this one. >> well, this is a net work where people talk. so they would talk about what is like to be a straw purchaser from an economic point of view and encourage someone else to do

this. what would discourage someone from being a straw purchaser that we can do? >> i think obviously, stiffer sentences for some individuals. we are tied to we make a case to obviously have all clean records. the federal system is tied into punishing individuals who have a criminal history. obviously straw purchasers one week weapons. they either cooperate or ultimately never do this. >> we've heard the expression that many feel like this is doing the expedient of 55% reference that's not particularly strongly punished and not with the jail term. is that your understanding? >> it is. every time i talk about this weather is media are members of congress always trying to stress to individuals were actually

causing havoc in another country all steering the u.s. people buying guns are using them to create mayhem. >> and the last question. if you go into a gun store in arizona. how many ak-47 type weapons can you buy a? >> as many as he has. >> thank you. the yield that. >> i ask unanimous consent the gentleman of 30 seconds. >> thank you very much. special agent newell, i must tell you that your testimony has been quite frustrating for both sides. i want you to answer one question. mr. lieberman said the british have been contacted. you remember hearing what he said? is that the way this should have been done.

it is not to know your actions about it. >> as i said my opening statement, recognizing retrospect there were mistakes in how we handle this investigation. one of the things i said in my opening statement was it was incumbent upon me to have more risk assessments throughout the investigation. i acknowledge that tonight launched the fact one of the things they should've done was more frequently throughout the investigation, conduct risk assessments to ensure whether this is still a prudent strategy to occur. but i would tell you, sir from the years and years experience as mr. mcmahon just that, these mexican drug cartels are going to get firearms. so we have to do everything we can in terms of taking out the infrastructure that manipulates straw purchasers. straw purchasers i like a drug dealer. if you just focus investigations and not having a lasting impact. but to answer your question, i acknowledge yes in fact there should've been more risk

assessment and i acknowledge that. >> thank you. >> we now go to the gentleman from tennessee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think the panel for appearing today. regretfully have to attend a teleconference, but i would like to yield my time back to the chair because it's very important to be to this discussion. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. q-quebec to follow up along the lines the ranking member was fun. ..