climate they pigeonhole it into some kind of a tree hugger issue or a polar bear issue. you know, and we've had to make, and i think this goes to mickey's point of we've had to make this a much more personal issue. the faith community helps us do that. it helps us do that by putting faces on this, by reminding us that we have an obligation to protect people who cannot protect themselves. they are the ones most at risk. the other issues to help us design strategies that engage people. there are things epa is doing to engage the faith community and things like our food recovery challenge, looking at food waste and other reduces methane but also allows you to organize things so that people who need food get it, and people stop wasting food. so that are wonderful ways in which you can build this into the very things that faith communities has focused on, water is a clear example.

it is -- we can start engaging people with listening to the people that they most listen to and get activities going so that this doesn't become just waiting for international solutions. but bringing different ways in which individuals can participate. >> yes, please. >> thank you. i'm paula stern. i am a member of the renewable energy advisory committee over at the commerce department, and mother of a documentary filmmaker who focuses on climate change and putting the face on what you have been so articulate about today, as has the obama administration. so thank you. my question goes back to something i think you raised with particular regard to the bilateral relationship and discussions between u.s. and china. and i am deeply concerned every

time i open my google alert ands yet again another thing on renewable energy and climate change stuff in china, and they are building more incinerating plans come consideration plants. knowing that they so my own experience there are entrepreneurs i've worked with once year in energy that has the technology which eliminates these kinds of pollutants that come into the atmosphere because of incineration. we've mentioned methane, i think about the dumps and what is being produced out of there. i would love it if you would address how as a nation the united states takes those small, those entrepreneurs who have patents and technology and get

them developed into investment, investment worthy activities, particularly in china because i know i worked on this for some years, extremely, extremely frustrating and difficult. and yet china is making these constant investments in old technology which is only going to add to the problem. >> so you saw this happening at the conference? the solution to? >> this is something that there have been more solutions put on the table. you are not wrong to be frustrated. it takes a long time for these technologies to work their way into a market. but one thing that's different out is that they see a market. one of the reasons why this president and why epa went out for as long as we did in our clean power plan was because we needed to send a longer-term market signal than three years or five years or seven years.

that's the only way that investment is going to have the window that it needs to invest and understand it's going to have a return on that investment. the are two things that happened during the competition. one was nation innovation which was secretary moniz really great initiative to get eight of the larger countries to get together to double the research investment and coordinate on the. that's a big deal but also was bill gates and his group has a worse name than ebay, i thought private sector would be better acronym. what is -- did you alter the bill gates initiative? maybe it's a good one but i can't ever remember it. basically this was an effort to bring billions of private sector dollars to the table for the sole purpose of investing in early startups. this was the commitment to say we have agreed to take the added

risk because the reward, the need is so great. that we will risk some losers more than we usually would. i think we need to have that. so the is an acknowledgment that technology is clear. what frustrated me and climate efforts i think for decades is that there has been a sense that if we don't have every technology solution identified to be able to get that to less than two degrees are now less than 1.5, then it ain't good enough. well, what's not been good enough is nothing. so this is really i think changed the dynamic in terms of setting a long-term investment. in terms of china i want to push back a little bit. you are right that the continued investments. their investments now are shifting rather dramatically. in terms of how they are investing.

i can give you some follow-up information because i don't have it readily available but their commitments on how they're going to bring renewables up to a certain level and start reducing their lives on coal is already showing. they are already changing the investment portfolio dramatically. and some of the additional commitments that they made while in paris are consistent with that. so nothing turns on a dime but nothing turns out all and less viewer to them that there's a direction that the rest of the world is going ahead. that's what we got. >> china even wrote it into their hive your plan. strategic industries, one of them being renewable pollution reducing industries which should be of concern to american companies because that means trillions of dollars of subsidies. yes, please, right here. >> hi. i'm a university student at the college of william and mary, and

i have two questions for you if that's okay today. the first question is more about the agency itself. one of the critiques from critics and environmentalists of the epa is not they feel sometimes that there's a revolving door between industry leaders and epa leaders. i was wondering if you comment on that think that's true. and in the second is more just about current events and what's happening in the u.s. right now. we have seen in california, of course there's the big story on the methane leak. i wonder if you can kind of comment on how you feel that moving forward the u.s. and the u.s. government can improve how we are regulating these different plans -- plans and places of these different industries are keeping their equipment up to date because i know that this was one of the plans were some say there was a

part of the leakage facility that was outdated and get the event up to speed with correcting that we might have missed some of these problems. >> nothing a lot worse than co2? >> yeah, yeah, i know. painfully know. let me get the first issue first odyssey is the revolving door for industry. i don't want to be flippant in the way i say this, but honestly i'm open every door and window of this agency. i think everybody deserves to be able to get in and have their voices heard. if we can't get them in second you for going outside. i did not see industry as coming in their in a way that is crowding the field or taking away our ability to see what the science or the law actually says. we do it for with the science and what the law says.

what i'm looking at industry to do is the same as everything else. every stakeholder can come in and tell me what is the best most reasonable sustainable way to achieve what the science tells me i need to do and what the law is demanding it give you the best ideas, i am running with their ideas. i might even give them credit for it. i think of it clean power plan we didn't. it benefited by those discussions. -- we did it. these are not behind closed door discussions. everybody knows who i am meeting with and they are not coming in there and thinking they are meeting with somebody who's going to just take a quick note and go do what they say. they know their come into got a substantive discussion about why they are right and other people are doing the same thing. i welcome it every time i don't the agency continues to have the opener policy. the second thing is on the

methane leaks and keeping up with technology. actually think that is a really, really good point. i tend to think that we have some outdated regulations, and epa tends to keep up or because our laws require that. but there is the challenge for us to get in and look at technologies and making sure that they're being kept up and that our regulations keep up with the different ways in which industry is changing, and the energy world is changing i think we do the best we can do in the case of the portal i can speak up because i'm not privy to the investigation but there is one of the survey going on. we have minimal oversight of those types of facilities to contact we don't have any. and so we are working with the state on the public health

issues around to making sure people are being relocated everybody knows about that. if you, yoif you don't you shoud about it. is a significant methane leak from a well that is used as a storage that is as went to a pipeline. so it's a storage facility essentially. and it is, it is leaking significant amounts of methane and their candidate got out to depressurize it so they can stop the leak but it's been going on since october. that's not a good situation. but you're not wrong to say we need to keep up with it and we need to make sure that there is compliance with current standards. >> questions from the press weight in the back, anybody? way in the back. >> high. climate wire. the moment around the president's signing appears to accord him isn't going to be sort of the next wave for the

u.s. to weigh in and show leadership and is that going to be a big event in new york without signing? can you tell me about the strategy around it, the communications and everything? >> i don't have anything i can share. i've not been engaged in the discussion, sorry. >> right over here way in the back. >> dave shepherdson with reuters. can you talk a bit about the status of a volkswagen diesel emissions issue? you will be meeting next week with vw's ceo. are you satisfied with the fixes they proposed to date? any sense of when you think vw may be beginning the process of recalling and fixing the vehicle's? >> date, you probably know we've been having a large amount of technical discussions back and forth with volkswagen. at this point we haven't identified a satisfactory way forward but those discussions are going to continue. we are really anxious to find a way for that company to get into compliance.

we are not there yet. >> councilmember questions? yes, please, right here. >> thank you, john. and thank you, gene, for coming back here, this is i know alicia second time because i had the privilege of moderate blastomeres i think it's an indication we've entered a new era of environmental diplomacy that's recognized at places like the council on foreign relations. so my question -- [inaudible] >> sherri goodman, consortium for ocean leadership. my question goes to what might characterize this top 21 is heralding a new era of investment powered diplomacy -- top 21 which has been building for some time but really has took its full force here in paris, not on our talking about

unleashing the power of clean energy and renewables, but also market for clean air technology, clean water technology, autonomous system tracking of everything from air, land, water, food that we needed environmental monitoring and provide environmental intelligence in the future, but a range of other new markets that potentially are opening up. and how do you see, do you see that being a model for future diplomacy, not on the climate diplomacy but other as you talked about international environmental and not just environmental diplomacy but sort of a new era where you have business as powerful as government at the table and sort of pointing the direction? >> i think i'll probably one of the least diplomatic people in the world about speak like a diplomat. i would be really lousy at it. i can't speak to it more broadly

but my sense was it was a powerful way to do business or government and business to work together to figure out how a path forward can be made. i suspect it will have an impact. one of the things i think from me, i think it is expanded our ability to be able to work with business in a productive way. epa has been looking very hard at new technologies, particularly monitoring technologies. because i think from my perspective the world of environmental protection has been really looked like it's just a government issued in the hands of a few when i really think it needs to be a shared responsibility, much more broadly. we have been looking at ways of increasing citizens science can look at new technologies and how you reconcile those in our decision-making and advance those and provide markets for those. because the world is changing. i don't think we can expect to be monitoring everything the way

we have done it before, and we needed to be more broadly recognized and bring everybody together. newtek elegies are amazing in terms of their ability to take hold and change the way we do business. we just need to integrate those more into business. >> yes, way back there. >> penny starr with cns news. ..

>> the opportunity for significant investment, and that is going to be our direction in which we are heading. i think you're going to see an escalation of that transition going forward. >> we have time for one more question. >> thank you, adam taylor, world bank. >> thank you for your leadership. retalked about finding efficiencies on renewable energy. i think the paris agreement relies upon quite a bit. this is a cutting edge area. i'm kind of curious where you see the process. there has to be some progress in that area, again, it's not really clear where that's going to come from. >> you know, i haven't been

directly involved in those discussions, but certainly i'm aware that they're happening. john holdor and it's been an area where he's been considerable amount of time. i can't speak to the discussions that were behind it because i wasn't engaged in it. but when you're dealing an issue like climate, it is a big enough problem that has to be addressed, but for me, i'm going with -- with what i have available and with -- with -- >> you can watch all remarks online at c-span.org. we are going to take you live to the pentagon where general john kelly will be holding a briefing with reporters. >> for the last time. i retire at the end of this month.

change of command is next thursday. ly tell you that it's a very unique organization. remarkable organization. very different mission. it's all about broadening and deeping partnerships down there to say the least and i will tell you the partners we have in latin america, caribbean like the united states, want to be associated in the united states. but some of that is even turned around, but they really do like and associate with us and they very much like and are proud of the fact that southern command and work with them and we deliver an awful lot of good advice, good education, good assistance. the other thing we do a lot of as interagency partner we introduce in a big way.

we have a tremendous year with addiction of cocaine, the way we partnered with nations allowed us to interdict over. that's after it left latin america. our number one partner and the country where we have a special relationship with remarkable people, remarkable military is colombia. a couple of metric tons before it ever left their country. they eradicated tens out thousands coca plantians and plants and cocaines labs that are destroyed and also in this effort is peruvians. the difficulty of drugs it's

really devastated. some of our really good partners, honduras, el salvador and guatemala, to a large degrees their problems are associated with drug consumption in the united states and owe all know what it does to méxico. it's good news for most of the region and as i say, as i get ready to hang it up here, i left the pentagon, i was getting some options and i was kind of tired and spent so much of my time in early 2000's and command would be in place that would alaw me to unleash other energies and talents and it essential has allowed me to do that. and then you may or may not know this, but i went to guantanamo bay, i ran guantánamo bay, i do not do policy whether it opens or closes.

i do detention ops and my mandate from the president through the secretary of defense is to make sure we are in accordance with all laws and regulations that detainees are treated well, treated humanly, well taken care of, medically and we do that, we do that superbly. so open up. >> two questions. later this month we were told that we can expect a large number of detainees will lookly be -- likely be transferred out, more than a thousand. i wonder if the recent releases

have been gives to the argument that the military had been dragging its feet over previous years and whether this amounts to new effort that could have actually happened earlier and then a second question because you mentioned what you have been doing with little u.s. military assets. there was a lot of discussion about additional drones, drones that could be used. has there been seen any increase at all in terms of other help for the drug war and it's still an unmet need? >> let's start off with the drug question. the partnership issue can't be overstated down there particularly when we don't have military u.s. military assets or sufficient military assets, in

that i count the united states coast guard. we have partners like canada that frequent i will provide ship, the dutch will protectly, these are not warships, uk, 70% of take last year, 191 metric tons would not have happened if it had not been for partners. i don't colombia on this because they do so much before the product ever leaves their country. i can see -- we can see that the joint interagency task force in key west, you really need to go down there, it's probably the best tactical fusion center in the world. cia would say the same thing. it brings entire power to the u.s. government into one place to get after drugs as they flow up through latin america, caribbean. the beauty of it is a long way

from washington. people actually talk to each other, people actually socialize with each other, they work together, there's no rice bowls. so we can see in -- when i say our partners, cia, fbi, dea, homeland security, it's a phenomenal organization and so we can see the drugs, much of our human intelligence comes from law enforcement sources. dea agents having working with partner countries, panamá, honduras, there's no equivalent to our law enforcement people in the world. that's where much of our human intelligence comes from. i sometimes, not unusual, plus or minus an our or two when it's going to leave port, i might know the guy's first name and

phone number. that's the human intelligence. when we pick them up, most of we pick them with p3 aircraft flying out of various locations down there, sometimes, often times homeland security. i cannot say enough things about my number one partner jay johnson. we can see it move. what i can't do is interdict it. it's very simple, all we need is a helicopter. helicopter shows up, they know it's coming. they throw electronics over the side and wait to be picked up. it's a law enforcement effort, remember, we take the driver of the boat and he goes into all legal typically into the federal justice system and that's -- that completes the cycle of human intelligence. so i'm actually -- i don't get much isr but i don't need an awful lot more. now drones can be nice. they are less expensive to

operate, but no, we have not seen anything -- any increase, certainly no drones. a lot of the countries down there wanted to acquire drones and we encourage them to do so. we encourage them to do that, but, again, they buy most of that equipment from somewhere other than the united states because it's hard to deal with the united states in terms of purchasing things for a lot of different things. so they tend to try and default to israel or russia, maybe china , so i don't that answers the question on the drug side. on the gitmo side, i can speak personally in three years, i have been there 38 months. the resident memory is guantanamo bay, my staff down there can talk with a lot of

historical authority back to about 2006 and then less so before that just because of takeover. i can talk to my time, the fact that there was reporting about this building, secretaries of defense, people in uniform, people in detention ops in any way shape or form slowing down or try to impede the release of detainees from my perspective is complete nonsense. it's an insult to be accused of whether we agree or disagree with any of the policies that we would in any way impede the progress. the president wants to close it. i have a role not in closing it. my only role is give me a name, give me a country and time frame andly get the person to that

country. that's my role in detention ops. we facilitate the movement of foreign delegations if they want to come down. we never, ever, ever, ever do anything but facilitate the movement when they want to come to guantanamo bay. we -- typically if a delegation wants to come or they don't want to come, they are provided a summary, pretty detailed summary of the medical condition of the individual and if they do come to guantanamo, sometimes they will come with questions because they've been given an advance copy of that medical and not all transfers associated with foreign delegations traveling down, and always when they come down, they can talk to to

detainee for any time they want. typically a conversation goes above 30 minutes, do you want to leave guantanamo, yes, that's about the extent of it. typically the foreign delegation will talk to my doctors, they will talk sometimes to guard personnel and just ask how this guy behaved or whatever, and then they eventually typically get word that the country will take him. that's where i take over and execute the transfer. there is some reporting about medical records. we've never had a foreign delegation, never had a foreign delegation ask for for medical record, they're always, always satisfied with the summary we give them. in one case i recently read the report, not that it's false by

the way, the medical record is at least 15,000 pages, all of which would have to be redacted by every government agency and intelligence agency in the united states, that would take two years. i just thought it was a better idea to transfer the guy than to hold him unnecessarily. we've never been asked or complained about the foreign delegation access. and, of course, i welcome the press and i welcome the congressional delegations and they come down frequently. jennifer. >> there was a report in the wall street journal about a fire missile that was delivered to cuba and it's been considered -- [laughter] >> it's been considered -- >> we blame the post office for that? >> it was mislabeled. it was sent to nato and somehow wound its way to europe and went to cuba.

obviously you're not familiar with it, i was going to ask where is the missile right now? >> since you bring up cuba, we look forward to, you know, increasing our relationship with cuba, but for right now and certainly for the last 50 years we've had zero relationship with cuba with the exception of guantanamo bay. i do look forward, certainly after my time, one of the things i provided to the state department and that extension we do a lot of conferences, that's how we do a lot of our engagements. some of it is, i think, the kind of thing very seldom drug interdiction, but other things like disaster relief. we've invited members of the cuban military to come to the

state department. baby steps. i offered to have the fair number of cuban doctors that are around to say the least, a lot of cuban doctors. we offer it had cuban government, they're not military but offered them the opportunity to come and see what we do and they took us up on it and so we had cuban doctors come on the ship to see what we can do and they inviteed my docs, military. baby steps but i have zero involvement with cuba, cuban military. >> just follow up. your son roberto was killed in afghanistan in 2010, you served time in iraq. could we get your assessment of wars in iraq and afghanistan and

what you think could have been done differently so maybe isis and taliban wouldn't be as they are right now? >> i just -- i can talk a lot. i'm a military man and, you know, professional and i understand how these things can be done. i think the ground commanders there as we listened, he talks about keeping as many troops there for as long as he can. when i was in iraq on province, we -- there was remarkable improvement in security forces. you all know we are proud of the fact of the divisions that our province organized train and equipped ended up being in the division, but we always had advisers with them.

i believe the -- this war stuff is hard and it's not for -- it's not for the untrained or unadvised. i would say that to keep sufficient numbers of intel people to provide obvious intel advisers to -- to crituque, we know how to do this, when they move one of those decisions down, when the # fourth division collapsed, we had advisers with them. it was the eighth division, they did a superb job. the mentorship, advising is what makes those things. the equipment is important but it doesn't come close that

there's people with over time have less and less involvement when you come to steady of people. >> you're say to go pull out of iraq? >> i'm saying that there's others way to have done it at much smaller numbers than we had. tom. >> along those lines, there's been talk about having talk with iraq and iraqi forces and also having u.s. advisers accompanying iraqi forces. would it make sense to have those advisers for iraqi forces? >> tom, we obviously have a whole new war over there. by the way, i should add, when we were there towards the end, another really remarkable there american, james jeffreys, he was our embassador, former vietnam

army, they both had unbelievable influence on the prime minister and his team that was there at the time, obviously on the military team and it was a lot of learning to be done and a lot of advising to be done by those two gentlemen and their team, the iraqi civilian leadership as well as to -- and it's kind of like, if you've ever try today teach a youngster how to ride a bike, when i left iraq the training wheels were coming off. if you're teaching and running behind the whole time ready to grab the seat when they start go over and over time they learn how to drive the bike, i think that's one way to look at what we could have done. >> what about today? >> i would say if we want to iraqis to get good enough to fight this fight, i believe that we have to reinforce them in terms of not only the equipment

but as well as advisory capability, that kind of thing, tom. yes. there's only one way for adviser to advise. >> i have a question. i have a question. women in combat. the marines were against opening all ground in combat jobs to women. they were overruled by the defense secretary. the marines report found that mixed gender units were less lethal and slower and all male units. how can they put this into effect, what concerns you in the way they had with this? >> i would -- as you start off that i believe given the mission in the united states armed forces to fight the nation's wars, i believe that every decision we make, acquisition, new airplane, new whatever, i

think every decision has to be looked at, does it make us more lethal on the battlefield, will result in less casualties on our side, will it end up in less casualties on the other side because they're human beings, some of them very much deserve to be killed but others don't, and so that's the filter. so if you look at anything we are contemplating doing, does it make us more lethal, if the answer to that is do it, yes, then do it. if the answer to that is no, clearly don't do it. if the answer is it shouldn't hurt, i would suggest that we shouldn't do it because it might hurt, so that's in my opinion. the way i think you do this is you simply do it, my greatest fear and we see this happen a lot over the 45 years i've been in the armed forces is right now they're saying we are not going

to change any standards. there will be great pressure whether it's 12 months from now, four years from now because the question will be asked we let women into other roles, why aren't they staying in those other roles? why aren't they advancing? why aren't they becoming, you know, senior and the answer is, i think will be, if we don't staining standards it'll be difficult to having real numbers coming in, but that's their business, so they would have very small numbers. the only science i know was study that the marine corps contracted the university of pittsburgh, i think, the other aspect is because of the nature of combat and training, all of it there's a higher percentage of young women in the scientific

study that get hurt and some of them get hurt forever. so i think it will be the pressure, not probably generals now but for the general, the command generals to lower standards because that's the only way it'll work in the way -- specifically gender-driven people in washington in the land, the way they want it to work, so -- >> last time -- last year when you were here you had talked about the islam state, how there's about 100 islamic state fighters going to syria from caribbean and venezuela. could you give us an update on the status of how many more have gone over and on guantanamo, one of the systems has been extend it had basis and i would like to get your opinion, do you feel the basis is cost effective, is it too expensive to continue?

>> on the islamic extremism, again, goes without saying the vast majority of the people that follow islamic faith are good-law abiding folks. there are a fair amount of muslims where the old english colonies down there, jamaica, trinidad and tobego. not a huge percentage of for populations. there's a few radical mosques, one that's associated with isis. we are not seeing huge numbers. i said it 100 last year, 150 this year, i know a few of them have been killed. one of us americans take for granted is the military but the fbi and cia and nsa and the tremendous law enforcement people we have inside our country. we take that for granted.

many of the countries, most of the countries in the world don't have anything approaching and certainly none better. so the countries that we work with, partnership issue, we provide them, work with them and give as much information as we can. don't forget tsa. they don't really have the same things as airports, so we do the best we can to help them. i am more concerned particularly now it seems like the islamic extremists and terrorists have shifted a lot of their message. rather than come to syria, why don't you stay at home and do san bernardino or boston or fort hood, and my concern is the commander, they can even just a few of these, you know, nuts can cause an awful lot of trouble down in the caribbean because they don't have an fbi, they don't have law enforcement like we do and many of these countries have very small

militaries, if they have militaries at all and they welcome the help from the united states, but did i get that? okay. >> guantanamo. >> it depends on how expensive guantanamo, it's a functioning base and has been for 100 years. when it costs per detainee and all that, someone else comes up with the number. i know if you look at my gitmo budget is something in 100 plus million dollars, but that is -- that is an approximate. if you keep counting the costs of the facilities which, i guess, you should, i don't run the commissions, i support the

commissions. they have a budget too. as a commission you make a decision on what you're going to spend the money on. if a detainee in guantanamo cost more money than taking the person to the united states, if that's the policy decision then sobeit. i don't really have an opinion on -- on whether it's too expensive or not, i just know that, you know, the money i'm giving i spend very frugallg. >> i-- frugally. >> what do you think about the five senior taliban standards? >> policy decision. you know, it was an unusual transfer in that when i got the call, these are all very

administrative things, you know my staff gets an order from others in iraq, ultimately we get a piece of paper from the joint staff to say, acquire c-17 and move two or three or one guy to a certain country. in this case i got a call directly from a senior official in the building and it was get these guys ready to go and having worked up here before, this transfer issue was -- was brought up initially and my involvement was yes or nay for secretary. so this was a couple of years -- it's got to be four or five years. four years ago and the transfer wasn't done obviously at that point. but i did know that given the five names, is this the crowd? yes, these are the same guys. is this on the up and up, my

question is am i going to get the paperwork on this. paperwork is coming but it has to be done quick. as long as i get the paperwork afterwards. it was a dicey transfer. it was a commission's period. a lot of press down there. in fact, when the press were waiting for their claim and the families of the 9/11 crowd and all of us were done, we were doing the transfer. anyone who has done it at the time was probably, you know, should have been pay a little more attention. that's a policy decision to transfer them. i know it's caused a lot in a lot of areas. i don't track slowdown transfers. i facility transfers and i do, by the way, get the follow-up paperwork and -- and when the airplane took off, we did.

>> just follow up. were you concerned that it was illegal since congress had not been notified? >> i didn't know that they were notified. again, i was not involved in that process. i would never assume that anyone -- in terms is the paperwork ready. as you know, jennifer, we work on those kinds of things. i didn't assume that anyone was kind of doing something illegal. >> radio colombia. president santos will be celebrating for plan colombia. i would like to know the balance and one more question, president maduro from venezuela said it's planning an intervention and the united states is leading it and

you were heading it? >> on colombia remarkable story. plan colombia was a lot of people here in washington and other places if they know about it at all think that the united states gave massives amounts of assistance and money and all of that, the colombians really did it all themselves, we did no doubt provide intelligence, advise, back to the questions about advising and how long to do that for, takes a long time. never boots on the ground that we never went to fields with them, we just human rights training was huge, how do we change our military to be better, better than it is and it was very good at the time. raised money through war tanks. frankly the elite, are you colombian? >> yes. >> your country at the time was standing on the edge of a cliff looking down into hell and your

people decided to change that. we are not perfect and your people decided to change that and united states worked with colombia, four or five cents on the dollar came from the united states but all of the effort from the colombians. i know it's controversial. nothing is perfect but you're that close of ending the war. my fear is the process of ending the war -- i remember the first time i talked to president santos and the administrative defense and military down there three years ago. my first trip, my collection to colombia, if you think the previous 50 years of this war has been hard, the next 15 years will be more complicated because you're trying to do something that isn't done very often. you're ending an internal conflict. once you get the piece of paper, you have to figure out the treaty, you have to figure out what do you do with all of those

young people, young fighters that have been kidnapped, not recruited from their villages. what do you do with them after they've been fighters and that's all they've known and many don't know what village they came from? you need to train them. i use the term gi bill for la farc. la farc is up to here in drugs. so it's going to be hard. i hope my country and i've been vocal about this, maybe too vocal, but i think people understand on the hill that's where i pitch this more than anywhere else, we have to stand and continue with colombia for another 10 years. it gets smaller and smaller but we still have -- again, it's not

a big money thing. it's more involvement in the process and i think with all -- i'm not in line to suggest something and that is the peace dividend is not going to be immediate. it will be there but not immediate and the idea that once the peace treaty is over, it's not going to happen. maduro, often times said i spend about 40 seconds a day contemplating the situation of venezuela and that's in prayer for the venezuelan people. any people in this -- at this time deserve better than what many people in venezuela have. it's a democracy, it's -- we just saw a great election. democracy is getting stronger but i can tell you there's no plan of any kind that i know of to do anything but leave venezuelan problem to the

venezuelan people. >> thank you. happy new year. one going back to guantanamo. do you think that one of the retainies released in the process had joined the fight undersiege and right now we have isil and isis, do you think are fighting the isis and young people because if they're leave now and they know -- what do you call, they are feely wanting in those countries where they were released? >> well, i can only use the same numbers you all report. i don't think there's any definitive number. a certain percentage have returned to the fite. -- fight. sobeit. i don't know. i don't have any specific

knowledge of that other than what -- we all know some number that return to the fight. as far as gitmo, did you ask me instigating isil? i don't know of any -- gitmo is gitmo. the one thing i do feel a little bit disappointed about is the fact that there's a lot of things that have happened in the war on terror or whatever we are calling it today but i'm a little disappointed sometimes of the role of my troops at gitmo is often times joined to maybe things that happened in other places, maybe the things that happened in other places. i would say i'm very proud of the things that they do down there and i wish sometimes i was the only person making the point and sometimes i wish other

people would make the point. >> second question. futures and security of afghanistan, what do you think now, where do we stand? [inaudible] >> i don't believe that we can allow islamic extremists to have, which is, i believe, small percentage of people that follow the great religion. i don't think we can afford to let them have a safe haven. some of the recommendations might be distasteful or out of the box in terms of policy makers thinking. we can't let them have safe haven, we have to do social economic military action, political action to prevent that. this is hard. this is really hard and we know

how to do it but it generally translate to more expensive longer term than what maybe the nation hopes of. yes, ma'am. >> i believe that you're the most senior in uniform, i wanted to ask that do you believe scenarios gold star families are supported, is there anything that you would like to see the nation and following your retirement, what is your plan involvement in that community? >> well, i think there are things about losing any child and you can't imagine until it happens and i hope to god it never does to you or anyone and it doesn't matter how they die, to lose a child is -- i can't

imagine anything worst than that. i use today think when i used to go to trips, i would go to funerals with the secretaries of defense that i could somehow imagine what it would be like or when i would send young people back from iraq that died under my command, somehow as you write the letters to try to somehow sympathize. i lost a father and i lost a mother and you think it's something like that but it's not, it's nothing like that. and so as a person that's lost a -- a child in combat and the strong one in all of this is my wife karen and my two kids, but if you lose one in combat, in my opinion, there's a pride that goes with it that he didn't have

to be there doing what he was doing, he wanted to be there, he volunteered, generally speaking there's no encouragement in our society to serve the nation but many, many people do in uniform as in the military as well as police officers and cia and fbi, so i think they're special people but they were doing what they wanted to do and -- and they were with who they wanted to be with when they lost their lives. but i can tell you it's -- it caught me by surprise the level of emotional impact and every single day it continues that. gold star families are special to say the least. they don't ask for much, i get -- i get occasional letters from gold star families who are asking was it worth, it doesn't matter, that's not our question to ask as parents. that person thought -- that young person thought it was worth and that's the only

opinion that counts. they don't ask for anything, i will say, the only thing they ask is that the cause for which their son or daughter fell be carried through a successful end, whatever that means as opposed to this is getting too costly or too much of a pain and let's just walk away from it. that's when they start thinking it might have been not worth it. does that answer your question? >> of course. >> to follow up on the narrative, seeing what's going on, does that give you pains of frustration or anger and your wife and your family and kids to -- keep in mind that ever transfer different, is there an amount of time when the foreign

government acknowledges when they'll accept a detainee or what is the general time frame for that? >> it's pretty quick. i couldn't put a number on it. when i first got to the job there weren't nearly as many foreign delegations. they seem to be fairly common now but i think and i have no idea what the countries offer to take these guys. they have never asked a question, it's none of my business. when they come i think they're just going through the motion. i think they've already decided whatever the deal if there was a deal and they come, i think it might be particularly the west in the countries, it might be that they can sell it to their own population, we met with the guy and seemed honest and he would be willing to be a good boy, but it's pretty quick. but i don't think -- i don't think they come made up their mind. i think they come here to get the check and -- and as you said, they are always taught and

usually to my senior confinement guy, if you will, the kernel to find about behavior. the vast majority of them are very compliant and kind of waiting. but there's no -- it's pretty quick. >> a couple of manufacture transfers before you change command, since you're in charge of sending them, was any that you kind of looked like and said, this isn't going to go well, you had heartburn while putting them on the appear. >> they're all bad boys. some of them. >> more effective in being bad boys than others. we can -- we can quibble on 13-14 years is enough for having paid for whatever they did, but they're bad guys.

i think some of that is a question about the taliban, they were pretty senior guys. i was really happy to see that -- that their year of restriction was extended and the administration fought hard for that and the receiving country allowed that to happen, i don't know anything about that. these are pretty senior guys. but at gitmo, the senior guys they were kind of not -- not very difficult to deal with. so there's a few down there i would like to punt because they are pains in the neck, but the vast majority of them are pretty right now easy to work with. 156, i think it was reported, if not, we got one yesterday to

ghana, y'all know there's more coming this month. but if they go back to the fight, we will probably kill them so that's a good thing. so i want to end with that, i guess, i should end with that. [laughter] >> just say really and truly, i know some of you fairly well. some of you i don't know at all but it has been a pleasure getting to know the pentagon press, not just for me but a responsible group of men and women and you always try to write the most accurate story you can and that's what it's all about, i think, so i guess i will go with a side now and have a talk to a press again but wish you well but please, please remember what my troops do at gitmo is a mission that the president has given them, they do it honorably and decently and until those guys are transferred and until the facility is

closed, those men will be taken care of in exactly the way i've told them to take care of them. so thank you very much. i appreciate it. [inaudible conversations] >> general kelly has been in charged since the southern command since november 2012, he's retiring after 40 years in the military, a ceremony takes place next month n. politics remember the white house coverage republican presidential candidate ohio governor kasich is campaigning in new hampshire. c-span will have live coverage beginning this afternoon beginning at 5:15 p.m. eastern. >> the time magazine cover story how trump won, now he just needs the votes. joining us is david. he is editor with time magazine. thank you very much for being with us.

>> thanks for the opportunity, steve. as your piece summarizes, donald trump is for real. >> he's absolutely for real. i think all of us, certainly the media anyway and most political professionals thought that this was kind of a vanity campaign or a joke or some version of that when he got into the race back in june and people have kept forecasting his demise and predicting his decline, here we are less than a month from the actual votes starting to be cast in iowa and new hampshire and all across the country and he's not fading, he's gaining strength, there's really no one in the rest of the field. it's not clear that there's anyone gaining any ground on him so it's time to start taking him seriously.

>> and you read about the huge crowds that he's been gathering whether it's burlington, vermont tonight or mississippi, what has he tapped into? >> well, a lot of people have commented on the anger among voters and definitely there's a lot of anger and frustration about uncertain economy, world events, terrorism, just a very uncertain world, middle class that does not seem to be gaining much ground, if any, over the past 10 or 15 years. i think all of those are factors. another thing that he has caught onto that we talked in our piece is the technological change that's doing on and implications that that has -- will have for politics. the same thing that netflix did to blockbuster or amazon has

done to retailers, cutting out the middleman, connecting people in their homes and with their mobile devices directly to the products that they want, i think that's starting to happen in politics and the products are the candidates. their fancy term for this in silicon valley is disintermediation, cutting out the middleman. and i think trump in a way the first disintermediated person. his relationship because of all the years that he's been famous, because of his experience of a reality tv star, he has a very direct relationship with voters and he's not waiting for the media or the republican party or elected officials who might endorse him, he doesn't need their approval. the voters don't need

intermediate to tell them what they think about donald trump. they have their direct relationship with him and i think that may be the direction that all politics is going to be in. >> for so many years candidates that traveled the iowa, new hampshire that one-on-one retail politics, from day one to donald trump it's been a wholesale politics campaign. >> it really has but the interesting piece of that, steve, is i was hinting at is that so many of these people feel like they have a one-on-one relationship with trump because they've seen him on tv and the reality tv shows, they're not reality, they're scripted, edited but they do create the illusion that you're up close and personal with the tv star and so people have, you know, seen trump in the back of his car, they've seen him in his board room deciding who is going

to be fired and who isn't. they feel like they know and in a sense he's got one-on-one relationship with millions of people now who follow him on twitter or on facebook or, you know, watches instagram. >> so let me ask you the question that you pose in your piece at time.com, mainstream republicans come to go grip with the idea that they resisted since last summer, could they learn to love the donald? >> yeah, it's a conversation that is starting in washington and other places, what do we do as the republican party if he runs away with this nomination or even if it could be a close battle all the way to the convention, are they willing to blow up the party, are they willing to risk him running as an incompetent and splitting the republican party in half or could they find a way to get along with him. as savvy as trump has showed himself to be i wouldn't be

surprised if we don't see in the coming months kind of charm campaign out of donald trump. you know, we've seen how tough and mean and plain spoken he can be, but what we haven't seen yet is the charming side of the donald and it does exist according to people that have spent a lot of time with him and he could turn it on potentially and have a lot of folks feel better about him by late spring. >> so where does this put senator rubio, senator cruz, former governor bush, governor christie, governor kasich all trying to get oxygen? >> they have been trying to get oxygen for seven months now. senator cruz is doing the best of the bunch in terms of, you know, moving up in the polls while everyone else is kind of

flat and there's a sense among the political pros that there's one room for one more candidate, trump, cruz or one of the above, rubio, christie, bush, kasich, it was some sort of more standard conventional-type of establishment experience politician in the race and that that would be the three. there's a feeling that if it happens soon enough that one of those might be able to burst through at the end and -- and take the nomination from trump, but the clock is ticking. you know, donald trump in one poll over the holidays was above 40% nationally and that's a very large number as you know at this point in the process, certainly in a field as big as this and people have been talking about, you know, someone emerging to take him on but that talk has

been going on for months now and nobody has managed to do it yet. >> donald trump's art of the steel, a lengthy piece making up the cover story of magazine. thank you very much for being with us. we appreciate it. >> thanks for the attention, steve. >> c-span takes you on the road to the white house, best access to the candidates at town hall meetings, speeches, rallies and meet and greets, we are taking your comments on twitter, facebook and by phone and always every campaign event we cover is available on our website c-span .org. >> next reform committee jason chaffetz and the recent data brief of personnel management. he also updated institution audience about the ongoing irs

investigation in efforts to impeach commissioner john. >> well, good morning, everyone and welcome to bookings. i'm honored to have jason chaffetz do discuss oversight and he's going to talk today about various things that that committee discusses, covers, analyzes and tries to keep government accountable. i'm mike ohanlon.

but we look forward very much after 20 or 25 minutes of conversation up here among ourselves to your questions because clearly we can range very widely given his expertise and background. he's also chief of staff to governor huntsman of utah and i would like to think that young quarterback always wanted to be. this is a dyu if you believe that did run for public office and fund raising for the country. congressman welcome to bookings. >> thanks. i always wanted to meet steve young. [laughter] >> steve young is the real deal so -- >> well, i think, you know, a lot of us would like to be steve young but a lot of us are grateful for what you are doing

and it's a remarkable portfolio. you're covering mostly all government in many ways. i wonder if you could explain for the general viewer on c-span and audience what the house oversight and reform committee does, what you've seen as your priorities since becoming chairman a year ago. >> well, again and thank you for having me, it's an honor to be here. it was founded roughly in 1816, expanded to 17 different committees, interesting side note, when abraham lincoln came to the united states congress he served on this committee. there's a great story about he was referred to as spotty lincoln because he was challenging the administration and challenging the president and their account of how the mexican american war had started

and very inspirationial. we could investigate anything at any time. there are certain parts of intelligence, human intelligence that's certainly the exclusive purview of the committee. anything else we can get our hands and paws on and every day try to figure out how to narrow the scope because there's always somebody doing something stupid somewhere. >> how do you think about narrowing the scope. a lot of the things that you've done a lot with is tsa. maybe that's an example. is that the sort of case where you look and see where you can play the greatest role or keep an eye as to where there's a big issue that other committees are not looking at or how do you choose the topic that's of greatest support to you?

>> we have some degree of authorization that we have -- that we authorize. but 90-plus percent of what we do are investigations. >> it's a rather large operation. we are overwhelmed. we are broken into six committees. i have an it subcommittee. that is the information technology. the federal government will spend roughly $80 billion a year on it and it doesn't work. since barack obama took office, it was the same time i was elected, the federal government has spent an excess of 525 billion, billion dollars on

it and i can tell you, almost every department and yes, sirria, it doesn't work. it creates great massive vulnerability. it's a very visible part of what the public comes in contact with the federal government. ..

sfwl and hundreds of millions of dollars going into the machines that don't work and jus provide theater. they don't secure the airport. >> this is an interesting theme. it sounds like, in a sense, if you forgive me, you are a radical on tsa. most of the debate is do we use the full-body scanner or not, increase training or not, and you are saying the whole logic of the technology oriented tsa may be incorrect and we want to think about low technology solutions and maybe even are you saying discard some of the machines or compliment this with a canine approach. >> i want to do what works. we need to talk to the israelis and the people in france. we are still playing catch up.

i think behavioral profiling is something that has to happen. canines have the ability from whau entbeings -- when you ente the parking lot. amtrak is using dogs. you don't see the scanners on capitol hill and they said because it doesn't work. when i went to afghanistan and pakistan and all of these other places if the middle east, iraq, do they deploy them there? no. why not? because they don't work. behavioral profiling, i want them to go through a metal detector. you want to see an entertaining twitter account go to the tsa account. i think the week of christmas something like 50 guns were

confiscated at airports. more than 40 were loaded and 18 of them had a bullet in the chamber. that was one week. that is just from the good ole metal detector scanning the bag. but the idea of the pat downs, the idea of taking this shot around you -- it doesn't work. go look at the news report on when the inspector general came in and looked at this. i think it failed almost a hundred percent of the time. it is so important. >> americans care about this and thank you for your diligent oversight. but what is the next step? you are not authorizing new funds but shining a spotlight on

how things are going today. do you need to build an airings with the appropriate group that forms the funds? or are you trying to bring attention to the subject and spur them on? >> i call this a triangulation to achieve the government reform. we are oversight and government reform. you have 450 airports, 2 million air travelers going through the system, tens of thousands of workers, and we have to work with the authorizing committee and the appropriation committee. so much of what we are able to accomplish is just by

highlighting and working with the inspector general community. i think there are 72-74 inspector general representing 13,000 people. we rely on the due diligence and work. they will look at an issue for a year and have a hearing, highlight that, and bring them into the administration and ask questions. >> how well does the committee work in terms of bipartisan cooperation? it is always a fascinating subject having worked on capitol hill myself. the country sees congress largely polarized but i wonder if this is an issue where it is more legislative versus executive? how would you describe your ability to collaborate with democrats on the committee? .

they should have had more hard hitting investigation. i do think it comes down to relationships. cummings and i have sent over 200 letters. usually it isn't a hey, that a boy. it is more aggressive. we are going to disagree on stuff. but i think we have a mutual understanding we will disagree and be passionate about what we agree on. i went to baltimore and he took me around and took me on a tour. and elijah came out to yukon and i took him to moab and parts of

the world he had never seen before. i am lucky to work with cummings. he is a good decent man and we are working together on bipartisan stuff. >> you mentioned the problems with morale with tsa and you were kind and gracious to say most of the employees are hard working and dedicated but they have this crisis of moral and often times they are the butt of jokes because we ask them to do impossible things and put it on them when it dozen -- doesn't work. what can we do about the morale issue? >> one of the things we are looking at is the rise in morale at a place like the fbi and the decrease in morale in homeland

security. this is really a question for secretary johnson. job satisfaction, management, treating people equally, one of the things we found at the secret service, and there are parallels to the tsa. management is not held at the same standard as the rank and file members. that is demoralizing to people. epa is another area we are looking at that has one of the

worst bits of morale there is. lots of sexual misconduct at the epa. people who are viewing porn sites by the thousands are still allowed to stay at work. that is demoralizing people have to go in and work with them. grumpy people don't want to be patted down. it is a tough job. >> a quick question on the secret service and i want to ask you about the upcoming freedom information act you have coming up and then turn it over to the audience. but on the secret service, it has had a lot of the same issues over the years, where do you think we are with the repair of

that unit? >> it scares me. we issued a nearly 450 page bipartisan report. we offered i think more than two dozen recommendations along the way. they got to turn that ship around. training is a huge part of it. you know what the average training time for a secret service -- you take the agents, officers, and average it out and what is the average amount of time a secret service agent spends in training over the course of the year? it is 25 minutes. you go to major metropolitan police department most of the time is training. i am supportive of spending more money to help with the training. when we got into the how do you protect the white house the you had the guy in the crocks jum

over the fence? he wasn't carl lewis but he runs across and gets in. the secret service can't lie to the american people but they did. they said they stopped him at the door but he got past the person and got in and turned left and then right. they were not candid about it. when the person jumps the fence, they say what did you hear? well they were not working.

i can see the audience smiling and laughing. how come they haven't come to congress saying i have to a mock white out? this was the top of it. the staffing levels have been going down and the independent recommendation was they go up. and going into the presidential year of 2016 i worry about this. we are looking at bills that will allow the secret service to pull from other agencies. they need to have permanent or

temporary for the next year assignments to happen it make sure they are staffed properly. trapth travel increases and multiply candidates. >> maybe the only agency where it is worse than the way it is portrayed on house of cards. congress behaves a little better than they do on house of cards but not the secret service. you have something with the freedom of information issue on monday with a new report. maybe you can share a little on that. >> the committee has been looking into this deeply. the freedom of information act is the way the public can go in and access information. it is the way the media will go and introduce the freedom of information act request. it is not working. it is failing. we did two days of hearing. what you heard from the

administration and i am not trying to pick on just the obama administration, if we would have asked the bush administration there would have been the same. there is a tendency to protect. that is not the way the government works. in the united states of america, we are different than everybody else. we do open up the books. it is the people's business. the people are paying for it. you ought to have access to that information. there are certain things and personal files and classified materials you should not see. i get that. but cummings and isa have a piece of legislation that will hopefully come to the floor and narrow these acquisitions. and we have a report that will sed sunshine on how broken this is. the state department is probably

the worst at all. we have to figure out a way to make it work. 40% of the request is homeland and their backlog is just unbelievable how big it is. it needs fixing and we will issue a report on monday. >> let me ask, my last question at this point at least, one last big picture question. now that you have been in congress for seven years and this committee chairmanship for a year. you are looking for problems obviously. you are not usually getting christmas cards when you get letters. but when you take stock of the big picture, the way the country works, how well it is governed, and how well the federal government delivers, leaving aside the big policy debate that is going to be there, what is your impression as to how well government works for the

american people. >> i think we have a lot of good, patriotic people who work for the federal government. i worry about the management of the government, i worry about the size and scope of the government. i'm a very conservative person. we need to figure out how to do more with less. some agencies need to be fluffed up. there are other places we need to spend money. i think our military is behind in its infrastructure. so much of what the federal government is doing they should not be doing. it is back to my conservative roots but a lot of this should be given to the states to do. a lot of it the government shouldn't be doing in the first place. new laws, new regulations are added, but rarely do we have anything eliminated. that is what i would like to see us do. trim the fat, get in the under brush, clear it out, and remember the core function of

our federal government and allow that to happen. we have too many people doing too many things. i don't believe the government is the solution to everything. i think people can make decisions themselves and the states can do a lot of these responsibilities to just be state responsibility. >> starting the gentlemen in the back. wait for the microphone, identify yourself, and then a question is appreciated. >> good morning.

i am todd wiggins of meet me dc. i have a coupleal question. i want to ask you to go airport security. can you talk about the underwear bomb and how was that diverted? who is the provider that is benefiting from selling this technology? how should we look at better and best practices maybe around the world where things are working more efficiently with respect to security at the airports? and secondally, i want to ask you if you had an opportunity to

speak with either the secretary of the navy or the chief of naval operations because there is a lot going on in the pacific. i am sure you have insight on that aspiltespecially when you about east china and the south china sea. >> as it relates to overseas operations, tsa, probably the biggest threat are the international flights. how we go and help secure those airports and work with people in for instance paris is where we have so many of these flights. they walk me through how they do the security under the plane with the checked levels and that is exceptionally done

internationally and domestically. there have been other threats and things avoided that were rooted out. some once in a while get by. the underwear bomber, they learneded a -- learned how at a do that. there are things they have learned we cannot talk about on c-span but they have made great progress and our international partners are exceptionally good. but it is no-fail mission and they have to be on their toes at every moment. if you go go overseas and out of tel aviv you will get an interview, you will be looking at you to see if you are sweating or how nervous you are, and have you walking by a dog. i think that is the right way to go.

i just got back from my second trip. i spent time visiting the specific command which is operated out of honolulu. but i spend time in vietnam and indonesia and others understanding the majority of our naval forces are out there in that region. there is a reason why, we he here -- hear about what is happening out there.

we have personal not getting enough flight time at the airport and you have a recipe that could a disaster. i think america has to be working with the south china sea, our friends in the philippines and vietnam. but you have the chinese making these pretend, you know, new facilities, new islands, new land, and then building military capability on those and that is just not acceptable. and i think the country needs to pay attention. congress needs to pay much more attention to that. if not more attention to those types of things long-term as what is happening in the middle east. >> up here in the second row,

please. >> thank you for coming, mr. chairman and thank you for all you are doing. let's go back to the question of managing the federal government. let's talk about the things the federal government has to do or not might do less of or divulge to the state. what would be your priorities to improve the management of the federal government? >> well, thank you. i do think -- i want to give them more flexibility.

we have to understand the core missions. military and veterans have to be taken care of. they protect us. they are out there on the front lines. we are not doing enough good work for them. a lot of these departments and agencies, i would challenge them to tell you are you telling me there is no reason why we cannot cut 5% of what they are doing? you do that in business. i think it is a very reasonable goal to figure out how to start trimming that fat. there are other areas where i get concerned about. i.t.is probably my biggest concern. we with spending 70% of the $80 billion on legacy systems.

we have places i heard have punch cards still. you have agencies that just got windows '97. they don't even service that at microsoft anymore. you have people looking at the dock operating system. we are training people to go back and learn cobalt which was introduced in the '60s. it is demoralizing, takes more resources. technology is supposed to make life swifter but it becomes more

cumbersome. >> i am sarah thompson and a consultant at the work bank. there is a government agency that has a congressionally man dated oversight committee regarding sexual assault cases. they have been investigated in the last two decades and all of these reports reveal several recommendations that have to be realized.

how can we be more critical of agencies that are acting illegally by ignoring the request for information and how can you flag this so they can be officially investigated? >> a little background. we did a hearing that included the peace core. i met with the director of the peace core. they have a wonderful mission and with the latest budget they have more people serving around the world. i think we get more bang for buck out of the peace core than any other foreign aid that goes out there. i could go on and explain that. my concern in this case,

critical of the obama administration, and the office of legal counsel that lingered. they came up with a new theory that was never implemented before that said there were certain things the inspector general act would not allow them to get access to. we are still fighting this. there may be a new piece of legislation. but we have the stiff arm from the obama administration saying we don't want you to look at this stuff. that is a dangerous precedent. we rely on the inspector general to go in and be the impartial body, no politics, and to dive deep in the issue. in the case of the piece --

peace core there needed to be a look at operations and how it works. i think it was embarrassing and that is why they didn't want to look at it. when you get to the freedom and information act request, that is not going anywhere.

if someone retires, it doesn't need to excuse them but it does under the law now. that has to change. >> kevin with tax magazine. can you please provide an update of your committee's investigation into the irs targeting scandal? and the effort to remove mr. can? >> we filled papers to impeach the irs commissioner. the short of it is they had these e-mails in their possession. they had a dually issued

subpoena and they destroyed it. the department of justice isn't going to prosecute or go after people. the congress has the power of the purse and the power to impeach. last time we impeached a civil officer was in the 1800s. it is important the united states congress stands up for itself and not be afraid and

bashful. someone is going to be held accountable for that. he had responsible for that and i think he should be impeached. >> it is now at the house judiciary committee myself and six other members are on the committee.

>> in light of the president's actions will you increase scrutiny on the atf? >> yeah, i disagree with the president's approach. you know, the latest announcement he made -- he made the work of congress. i think the president is getting to the finish line and recognizing he didn't make any progress on the core things he believes in. i believe in sincerity. but the way to get it done is working with congress. he didn't do that over the last seven years. he is throwing out things i never heard them suggest doing. they wanted to change the hippa laws. that might be something we need to look at. but through executive order? that is not the way to do it. atf, a lot of good men and women there.

we have been more about secret service, tsa, and dea, and bpa is up there. they don't seem to go away. i cannot tell you that is imminent they are doing it. they have the same challenges within atf at the department of justice as others. i give you one other quick example. sexual assault, sexual harassment in the workplace is defined differently throughout government. and that is one of the things we are taking a look at.

it was a mem row saying engaging in prositution is not a good thing. >> we hear the debate rather than have new regulations we have what is on the books. donald trump as well as others have been making this argument. i realize you may not want to

lay out the full agenda if you have one on gun safety. >> tim murphy has a bill about this. very deep concerns -- what was one of the administration's first things they did on the gun front? fast and furious. they knowingly gave one thousand weapons mostly ak-47 to the drug cartel to see where they would pop up. they don't want the public to

see what the operation is all about. the laws on the book are not being enforced. i wasn't planning on talking about this but we have been quitely doing an investigation on tsa. when you go to the airport and you do have a loaded gun do you get prosecuted? the overwhelming majority of the time it is no. these are irresponsible gunown e gunowners. a lot of the prosecution happens at the local level. i hope they tried to learn this but straw purchasing is already

ill illegal. it isn't a sexy crime. there is not a prosecutor that wants to go try and make the case to the judge. it is a small penalty. so they don't do it. instead they want other things on the book and enforce the laws currently there. if you are here illegally on a visa you are not supposed to be able to purchase a gun. have they populated the database with this? we give out drivers license to people here who are illegal. they are not nearly doing enough with the laws currently on the

books. and i think there is a lot more they could do to make sure guns don't get into people's hands. but they also have to prosecute these laws when they are broken and i don't think they do. >> there is a gentlemen in the third row then i will go back. >> one other thing i want to bring up. this one really gets under my skin. this goes back to homeland security. we have a large population of people that are here illegally. not everybody is here to better their family or provide for their kids, okay? the obama administration had 66,000 people that were here illegally, committed a crime, got convicted, and released them out into the public. they did not deport them. you want to go look at public

safety, look at gun violence, i think that is a population -- how do you you release 66,000 known criminals here back into the community and at the same time say what we need is another law on the book to make it more difficult for a law-abiding person to purchase. the criminals don't give a darn about having a new regulation out there. when you have known criminals, this is a criminal element, i still don't think the public understands, i don't understand how the secretary of homeland security says it is in the best interest of the united states of america to put these people back out on the street. >> andy pervy, i am a private company. i want to ask a follow-up question to the work we did at sentenci sentencing committee. we look at