federal investigation. you know, unfortunately, that happens all the time. too many times. what makes this case, this situation unique, are the inappropriate tactics, and i don't think there is any indication that mr. wilkinson, or anybody else was aware of these tactics until the january, february time frame, late january, to early february time frame. that is -- you make no inquiry as to whether this vaes investigation involved the gun walking? >> i'm sorry? >> you made no inquiry as to the investigation involving brian terry's death involved gun walking? i have no indication. there was no indication, no basis to believe that gun walking was part of any of this. i knew nothing about gun walk org the use of that technique until february, and by february the 28th and early march, i said guess what? we're not doing gun walking. it tuque took me or month or

less than a month. brought to my attention fairly rapid response to say don't ever do this again. >> we go to the gentle lady from california. ms. spear for five minutes. >> thank you. over here, attorney the last pe totem pole so to speak. >> she'll be moving up in future years. >> don't count on it. in any case, first of all, let me say that i think we can stipulate for the record that this hideous chapter in the attorney general's office, dating back to 2006 is one that we never want to see repeated. but i think it's important for tows recognize that this has been going on for a long time and but for the death of agent terry would it still be going on today and that's one of the things that continues to trouble me. for the record, mr. chairman, i

would like to ask unanimous consent to put into the record a memo provided to then attorney general mukasey in november of 2007 in which it specified to him of particular important atf has recently worked jointly with mexico on the first ever attempt to have controlled delivery of weapons being smuggled into mexico by a major arms trafficker, while the first attempts at the controlled delivery have not been successful, the investigation is ongoing and atf would like to expand the possibility of such joint investigations and controlled deliveries. >> i'm more than happy to have that piece of discovery placed in the record. no objection. >> thank you. attorney general, were you ever told mr. general mukase ye's controlled deliveries, in other words gun walking? >> about that

until late in this process, as we were developing documents to submit to this committee with regard to operation wide receive. i didn't know it before that. >> all right, this committee is government oversight and reform. i'd like to spend a couple minutes on the reform side. hopefully we are not continuing to have hearing to continue to beat up on what is an atrocious chapter in our history but how do we make sure it doesn't happen again? speak to me about the fact we do not have a federal statute on gun trafficking? >> we have a tool -- we don't have a tool that we really need. we need to say gun traffic something inappropriate, wrong and there's a federal criminal penalty for it and a statute can be drawn in a way it's respectful of the second amendment rights all americans enjoy. i'm talking about people doing things for criminal, illicit

purposes that put the american people at risk and put at risk our colleagues, our neighbors south of the border, in mexico. >> what other things do we need in place to avoid this activity? from your own testimony you said you could trace 60,000 weapons but that's a small percentage of what's really being trafficked from the united states into mexico. >> i think that's right. 64,000 weapons have been traced from the united states to mexico but those are the ones that had been traced. there are since a substantially greater number of guns that have not been traced. we need to have a statute that will make meaningful what i think is a crime straw purchasing and make meaningful a penalty for people who engage in skrau purchasing to get around the rules this congress enacted and i am charged with enforcing. we need to have an atf head who is confirmed. i'm great to hear the chairman

say we would support that. there are other management changes we have made as i said that are consistent with the minority report and i think you all have done a really good job? making that list. there are a couple i didn't think of and we are looking at and we'll try to implement as well. there are a whole variety of things that can be done in a way that if we are truly going to put partisan concerns aside, put lobbying concerns aside and have some courage, because it will take some courage, it will not be universally approved, with he can really make a difference in the lives of the american people and, and protect the lives of law enforcement officers. >> have you developed a statute that you could provide to the committee around penalizing straw purchasers and gun trafficking? >> i can check with our legislative affairs folks and see exactly what it is that we have there. as i indicated before, congresswoman maloney and

congressman cummings have actually put something on paper that i think is a good place for to us start but i can also check and see what it is we have and what we can share with this committee. >> i would appreciate that. my time is expired. >> i thank the gentlelady and ask unanimous consent that discovery documents hogr sb doj, 0057, 52, 53, 54 be placed in the record along with the gentlelady's documents from earlier, just immediately before thoop these show lanny brewer lobbying for gun walking in a coordinated nation across the border to be, for people to be arrested in mexico, february 4th, without objection so ordered. >> mr. chairman i'd reserve because i don't think that accurately describes that document. >> well the document sfeepeaks itself.

>> he's not talking about gun walking. i thought he was talking about a coordinated effort with the mexican government to follow those guns in a cooperative effort to -- >> which is what -- >> -- not let them just walk but -- >> right, well, the definition of gun walking, the definition of gun walking which the minority has chosen to put on wide receiver, wide receiver was a coordinated effort where they followed to the border the guns. the problem with wide receiver and the reason it had to be abandoned a eed is as they crose border they lost the guns. the program related in the e-mail to mr. brewer is exactly the same program. now, maybe if you do something enough times you might get it different in the outcome, but the program, the attempt to follow from the store to the border, and then pass off to mexican authorities is, in fact, wide receiver. that was that program which differs from fast and furious

where fast and furious they told people to peel away and they'd find the guns later. there is a distinct difference but there is no difference between what this document shows, and the stated wide receiver. the fact is, lanny brewer in this document was clearly trying to say, let's do wide receiver again but let's get it right this time. >> mr. chairman i reserve. i'd just like to see the document. >> you have the document. this is doj 005754. >> i'd just like to see it. you can go ahead. >> you've reserved. i'll wait.

>> mr. chairman i think we have a different opinion of what gun walking is and i withdraw my reservation. >>. >> i thank the gentleman. we can disagree as to what the document means. my discussion was what i believe it is. miss speier and i could both be wrong about what the document means but i appreciate your allowing it to be placed in the record. i'll give that to the member.

i ask unanimous consent doj 005811 and 12 be placed in the record but i will reserve myself until the minority has a chance to see it and be comfortable with it, and with that, we now go to the gentleman from texas, who's patiently been waiting down in the cheap skates, mr. fahrenhold. >> thank you very much, chairman issa. mr. attorney general i want to follow up on what mr. ross says, management in general and how the doj is managed. i think you told him that you were informed about agent terry's death but never heard anything back about it being associated with the guns that walked. i'm the kind of person, maybe our management styles are different, if an employee under my charge was killed in the line of duty, i would want to be briefed almost on a daily basis as to how that investigation is going.

i'm asking you again, you didn't hear for quite some time that the fast and furious guns were involved in this? >> that's correct, i didn't hear about that for a while. i mean, you know, to draw a distinction here, and i'm almost hesitant to do this, we are talking about a brave law enforcement officer. well, it wasn't a part -- that doesn't matter. i was brought up to date about the ongoing investigation, what we were doing at the justice department, but did not hear anything about the connection between that death and the gun walking tactics until, as i said, february of 2011. >> well you know we've been investigating fast and furious for some time. y'all have been looking at it internally. you've constantly blamed the atf for the u.s. attorney's office in arizona i think, mr. gotti

made it clear through some of his questions that it actually has gone up to main justice, but i just don't see y'all doing anything. there have been several questions earlier about what you've done, and then nobody's been disciplined, nobody's been fired, there hasn't even been a letter put in. i don't think that's good management and i think that's the reason that many of my colleagues, myself included, have suggested it might be time for you to resign. my question is, knowing what you know about the handling of operation fast and furious, do you believe you're capable of running the top law enforcement agency in this country, and can you tell the taxpayers that you're the most qualified person to manage the department of justice? >> first off let me just say we have not blamed -- i have not blamed the people in phoenix, either atf or the u.s. attorney's office there. they're good people down there. they work hard and i'm not going to allow that to stand in the record. i'm not blaming anybody.

we want to find out who in those offices might be responsible and who in the main office is responsible. >> don't you think 13 months is a little long to run that investigation? >> you have to understand something. i don't have an ability to do the top-to-bottom investigation because of the inspector general's investigation and i have to respect that. with regard to my capacity to run the department i'll let the record speak for itself. people have different views in this room about fast and furious, and my role in it. >> all right, and let me -- i just have a limited amount of time. >> well you ask a question -- a question whether or not i should resign and i don't have a chance to respond. >> okay. >> thank you. you asked me to resign as you have, as have some of your colleagues, you know, you've asked a broad question and how you judge that, well you look at everything that i've done in this department for the past three years and you look at the department in the state that it was in when i got here. a dispirited department that had

gone through scandals, that had the traditions of the department turned on its head. it had been politicized. i will stand on what i've done with regard to the criminal division, in the trust division, with regard to the civil division and the fraud money we've brought in, the great work we've done on national security and if you want to say i'm a person not qualified to be attorney general you take that into account as well. >> why are we withholding some of the deliberative documents, too? that's another one of my concerns. really, a lot of times here in washington, it's not what hng on, it's the cover-ups. so i'm concerned that some of those documents are going to show some of the theories that have been floated around that maybe some delays were put on stopping fast and furious, based on some of the things the people on the other side of the aisle are calling for now, and additional and more stricter laws. i mean if there was a political purpose to that i think the american people have a right to know about that. so i would urge you to release those documents, let us look at

them, and let the american people make that decision. but i'm almost out of time and i've learned from the testimony here things tend not to fwububb up to your desk very often. i did want to make sure you were aware of an operation with the dea that has two houston, texas, based pilots being detained in panama over money laundering. i realize that's out of the scope of this investigation. you can choose to comment on it or not but i wanted to make sure it bubbled up to your level and my time has expired. >> i thank the gentleman. will the gentleman yield? >> yes. just quickly the minority is not objecting to the cole document from march 10, 2011, so that is placed in the record. i thank the gentleman and with that we go -- >> excuse me, did you wish to answer? you're welcome to or not. >> you certainly may respond. >> there's a limited amount of information i can talk about that. the dea leadership has told my staff that the incident you described in your letter was not

a dea operation. i can't respond much more than that, but dea can provide your staff a briefing with regard to that, outside of this setting. >> that's fine. i'm just worried about the pi t pilots. >> that's fine, sure. >> i thank the attorney general, on december 5th we actually asked for a briefing on that. we appreciate your commitment to that briefing in an appropriate setting. now we go to the very patient gentleman from missouri, mr. clay. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you, attorney general holder, for once again, coming before the committee. our job on this committee is oversight. it is to examine the facts and come to conclusions, people of good faith may disagree, reasonable people can look at the same evidence and come to

different conclusions. in this case, we're not looking at evidence and then coming to conclusions, rather, the majority is not looking at the evidence and coming to conclusions. the majority came to a conclusion before any facts were examined, before any evidence was produced, before any witnesses were given the opportunity to testify, and that conclusion was that there was a scandal, a scandal that the majority could exploit for political gain, and obama administration scandal, that could go under the majority, the splashy headlines they promised when they took control of this committee. i remember now, this was when the chairman of this committee promised the american people that he would hold seven hearings a week times 40 weeks.

these plans weren't reflective of actual evidence, of actual facts already gathered, that would determine the number and pace of hearings. this was at a time when flushed with victory, the majority began to display the hubris that would be their hallmark for the last 13 months. >> would the gentleman yield? >> not yet. this was at a time when the incoming chairman of the committee said that president obama has been one of the most corrupt presidents in modern times. since then, we have sent through, politicized hearing after politicized hearing, and we have seen the majority level wild accusations against the administration with absolutely no basis in fact. we have watched the majority berate witnesses. we have heard the majority accuse witnesses of lying.

we have seen the majority attempt to deny us the right to call our own witnesses, and we have seen what we see here, once again, today. the majority has been and is accusing the administration, the justice department, the attorney general, of participating in a vast conspiracy. the chairman has compared the fast and furious operation with the iran-contra. this was a completely irresponsible comparison. iran-contra was, indeed, a vast conspiracy, one that reached directly to the oval office, and the evidence proved that. it is irresponsible to take that gavel to assume the grave responsibility of leading this committee and to will the power to subpoena, the power to call and examine witnesses, the power to investigate like a political

instrument, solely like a political instrument, to accuse the a.g. of no, i won't repeat the irresponsible wholly manufactured accusation, but to do so without evidence is irresponsible. now there is evidence fast and furious was a fatally flawed operation. we know that, from the evidence, we also know from the evidence that an attorney general knew about flaw, failed gun walking operation. we know that from the documents produced by the justice department. however, that was attorney general mukasey, in president bush's administration. so we have evidence of knowledge at the highest level of the justice department about a bad flawed policy.

does the majority call for former attorney general mukasey to testify? does the majority examine the full history of these operations in a fair and responsible manner? does the majority even attempt to avoid the appearance that this is a politically motivated attack? i think from the evidence we know the answers to those questions, and mr. chairman, i will now yield the balance of my time to the ranking member. >> okay, the ranking member has five seconds. >> mr. chairman in light of the latitude that you've given on your side i'd just ask for two minutes, to the gentleman's time, unanimous consent. i think you've been very -- >> i would approve -- any objections? without objection, the gentleman from missouri has an additional two minutes. >> thank you very much. i'm going to look at this organizational chart, attorney

general, and i see that every single person with immediate supervisory responsibility for operation fast and furious has been removed or reassigned. let's look at atf. here the people that have been removed from their management positions and from anyoperation, deputy director, the assistant director, the deputy assistant direct your, the special agent in charge, the assistant special agent in charge and supervisor. is that right? >> i think -- i can't see the bottom of the chart but i think that's all accurate. >> similarly, at the u.s. attorney's office in arizona, all of the key personnel involved in fast and furious have resigned, been removed or been reassigned, the united states attorney, the chief, section head, prosecutor, is that right? >> i believe that's all correct as well. >> one of the criticisms is that no one has been actually fired. can you explain why you are waiting to take final personnel actions against some of these

employees? >> well, i don't want to single those people out, because the universe is actually larger than that but certainly one of the things i'm going to take into consideration is what we find from the inspector general report, and what factual findings that she makes, in addition to the material that i've just gotten, i guess over the past couple of days, the minority report, i think the chairman is right, there are a couple of majority reports i should look at as well before i make final determinations. >> would a confirmed director of atf be able to improve management supervision? >> i don't think there's any question about that. todd jones has done a great job and put in place a great number of reforms and has done a lot of the things you are pointing up to there on the atf side but i think you need to have a person with the prestige of a senate confirmation to really run an agency in the way that we would like it to be run. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i thank the gentleman and thank you for making my point that no one in washington has been held accountable, and with that, we go to the gentleman

from pennsylvania, mr. kelly. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm over here, attorney general. >> okay. >> another cheap seat, i'm afraid. it's not that cheap though. >> you will move up though. >> we appreciate you being here. i know you've gone through a lot of questioning and fact that it's not a political hearing, i a little bit confused because we keep going back to the political sideto me this is about trust, you're the highest ranking law enforcement official in the country, and when the people lose trust in an agency, that's a very difficult thing to recover. if you're going to recover at all. and i go back to a couple quotes and ones you'll recognize, with unis transparency is the best thing, that's from you, by the way, in january of 2009. for a long time now there's been too much secrecy in this city. let me say it as simply as i can, transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency."

so we always hear this talk about we're going to be transparent. we're going to be clear and the only thing i hear and am clear on, you were never informed of these things. no matter what it was, "i never was informed" and i'm not questioning your management style. i come from an industry that if you lose somebody's confidence, it's very hard to get it back. now, we can keep talking about this for a long time, but what i'm amazed about is that, since 2009, 2010, 2011, there's little information about what happened. when you go back to 2006 in the previous administration we can clearly demonstrate what they did and what they did not do and what i'm really bothered by is the letter from the department of justice and we've already made reference to it, and this is to senator grassley, the response dated january 27th, 2011 and january 31st, 2011 to acting director kenneth nelson of the department of bureau,

tobacco, firearms, explosives. we thank you for the support. the allegation described in your january 27th letter that atf sanctioned or otherwise knowingly allowed the sale of assault weapons to a straw purchaser who then transported it to mexico is false. atf makes every effort to interdict weapons purchased illegally. then on that very same day, below is a synopsis of assistant attorney general lanny brewer's meetings with the mexican attorney general's office, mexico' federal police and the secretary of foreign relations. now who else is there? a.g. brewer, deputy teef mission, john feeley from the state department, daag blanco, kevin sudwell, all of these folks are here and at the end of it, at the end of it, here's what they come up with. aag brewer told ventura there had been a proposed increase in the u.s. sentencing or guidelines for straw purchasers.

aag brewer suggested that a letter from the are or pgr in supported of increased sentencing guidelines for straw purchases may be useful. the proposed cross-border operation, aag brewer, suggested allowing straw purchasers cross into mexico so ssp can arrest and pgr can convict and prosecute these folks. such coordinated operations between the u.s. and mexico may send a strong message to arms traffickers and now it is propostruss for me to sit here and listen that you as the highest law enforcement ranking officer in the country say i didn't know. i didn't know. that was the problem. had i known, i would have changed it. had i known earlier i wouldn't have waited until december 2nd of this year to pull the message that brewer had sent. i wouldn't have allowed the february 4th letter, 2011, to be entered into it. don't you see the problem, mr. attorney general. it isn't that you say i didn't know or i wasn't quite aware of

it. the problem is the american public relies on you, sir, to follow all those guidelines. you are the chief officer. and then to come before this body and for us then to be accused of some type of a political agenda, this isn't a republican issue or democrat issue, this is a united states of america issue. so you have your aag down in mexico saying yeah, this is a good idea, we're going to keep doing it and the people back home saying we never did that and we don't want it to go on. is there any wonder then the american people have lost trust and lost faith in this system? absolutely not. the fact that they still hang on to a this red of it goes back to what they know the country was to be in the beginning and still can be but when you continue to find out that those who were responsible don't do their work and at the end of the day they don't say it happened on my watch, it's my fault. what they say is it happened in the previous administration, and doggone it, the people who are supposed to brief me never briefed me. iable that the transition from the last administration to this

administration there was no briefing? i mean there may be in the aag's return but the same people are still on so to say we really didn't know about it, to me is absolutely propostruss and that's something i can't accept and if you go back to northwest pennsylvania, you no he what integrity is, it's saying what you mean and meaning what you say and don't run around the outsides of it. go right to the middle and tell what happened. i would appreciate you saying i didn't have the foggiest idea what went on. i went after the people that handled it and handled it poorly and they're no longer involved. >> the gentleman's time is expired. we go to the gentleman from ohio, mr. kusinich for five minutes. mr. attorney general we'll get you close to 1:00. we're down to go six people left. go ahead, mr. kusinich. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, members of the committee. i want you to know, attorney general, i'm sorry i'm late to this hearing, but my wife and i were at the prayer breakfast this morning, and i k