voters in an election without fear. d.o.j. had worked on the case and secured a default judgment on april 20, 2009. inexplicitly, political appointees at the d.l.j., dropped case and dismissed two men entirely and no penalty and winning an order against the third man that prohibits him from bringing a weapon to future elections, something that's prohibited. and instead of protect ing it the voters' rights, the political opinion wipes out good work. and this is your statement, you would "listen to them and respect them and make them proud of the vital goals we

will pursue together." . and it contradicts your statement during your confirmation hearing, that "that justice department must defend the rights of every american." another concern that we discussed during confirmation that you would operate under pre-9/11 law and you said you learned from the past and you would do your best to aggressively depend on the terror. and you said, you would work to strengthen the activities of the federal government and protect the american people from terrorism. yet instead of taking the lead and protecting the american american -- american people you have enacted poor policies.

one example of this pre-9/11 is that anyone from afghanistan be given miranda warnings. and miranda rights were given to any combatant obtained in afghanistan. just this march in an interview, president obama mocked the giving of miranda warnings, and he quote, do they deserve miranda warnings and do they get this? of course not. what has changed. the battlefield of detainees will hamper the intelligence gather of the war on terror. even though the new approach is something founded and intended

to preserve a federal court criminal prosecution. which is not necessary, because we have used the commission for battlefield captures. under the obama global justice initiative approach, even capturing high-level al qaeda operatives advise they be silent. and this has an adverse effect, and the red cross has advised the detainee, take the option and request a lawyer. and a detainee has requested a lawyer than talking. and the american people have remained in limbo whether the

detainees from guantanamo will be transferred to the united states, and we got a letter last night finally on that. and the solutions that i think are dangerous. in march you said some detainees could be released in the united states. and a few days later the director of national intelligence expanded that some sort of public assistance is needed for them to start a new life. the american people need to know the plan and how you will protect the national security. i think you should have laid in the state's secret act and the media shield's law that is opposed by your predecessors and stood silent on bills such as the reauthorization of the

patriot act. i think you need to take an action on many areas. mr. holder, i am disappointed and i am worried, i don't think that the american people are happy with the agendas we are seeing. i think these are serious matters and the office of legal counsel told you something that is not constitutional, and i am not happy you ignored that. and when told to keep these confidential, you said no. and when civil rights were trampled on by the black panthers and you let the offenders get away. and as the american people look to you for the war on terrorism, you have remained too silent.

and you have remained silent on jose's alleged accomplice and another detainee that killed a diplomat. your department has defended the nation's secrets this time three times in federal court, that's something you need to do and is right. and in standing up you have faced a lot of criticism, i know from the left. but i think you did the right thing. i am encouraged that you listened to congress to impose the release of interrogation photos. i thought that was an unwise thing. and release of these photos is not necessary and place soldiers at risk. even though i am disappointed in your long delay, and about

the question on uighurs, and you understood there was not an authority to release them into the united states. i said at your confirmation, i respect you. you know this department well, i support you and i want you to succeed and i want to do what i can to help you. but some decisions you have made are baffling to me, i don't think they are good and i think they will set a pred -- precedent to the future that is not good. i hope you will evaluate these matters more critically. and sometimes you have to let the people in administration know. as we discussed in your confirmation. i look forward to your testimony today, you will be given full opportunity to respond. and i want to tell you, i think we can work together on

important things but i am troubled at this time. >> as you may gather, attorney general holder, there are different views by the two leaders of this committee. but you can speak for yourself, go ahead. >> good morning, chairmans and ranking sessions and members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to appear to highlight the work and priorities of the united states department of the justice. and i want to thank you of your ongoing support for the department. i look forward to working with the committee and appreciate your support of the department's mission. for the four-and-a-half months i have been in office, we have a set of goals. working to strengthen the activities of the federal government to protect the people. and to work to restore the credibility of a department

shaken by improper interference and to fight crime and protect the civil rights and ensure fairness in the marketplace. and let me talk about several initiatives, and have provided detail in my written statement. the highest priority of the department is to protect the american people against acts of terrorism. working with the federal, state and counterparts, the department has worked tirelessly to safeguard america and will continue to do so. we will disrupt terrorism plots that will seek america harm. and we are consistent with america law and values.

consistent with the priority, we are leading the work set out by the president in guantanamo, and interrogation and transfer of detainees live up to our values. congress has made subject of this and we will work with the branch to make sure that the appropriate individuals detained after the guantanamo bay defers. and we have looked to impose that of the west border of mexico cartel. and this has the confronting of illegal goods and confront the operations on both sides of the border. and we bring together federal,

state and local law enforcement agencies to disrupt and dismantle the cartel's leaders and seizure and forteur of their assets. and the department is committed to defending the civil rights of every american. and we are dedicating to the range of rights in the workplace, the housing market and voting booth. i have made restoring the function of civil rights a top priority for this justice department. as many americans face the unstable economy in the unstable housing market. we have a new effort across the sector to target loan, mortgage fraud and rescue scams. these from law enforcement and

state prosecutors and private sector to protect the homeowners of homes affordable program for those with predator schemes. i appreciate the committee's work that will enhance the tools and resources for fraud and money laundry and to protect the packages. with the tools and resources that the bill provides, the department and others will be equipped to face what challenges us in economic time and to do their part. in addition the department has been investigating and prosecuting crimes aggressively. and has been successful in

fraud schemes including securities and market manipulation and ponzi schemes. as part of the administration's fiscal responsibility, the department is working with the health of human services to combat the ten's of billions lost every year to fraud. those represent dollars that could spent on consumers but wasted on fraud. and we have launched a new effort to combat fraud that will have increased tools and resources and sustained focus by leadership in both agencies. we recognize that health care fraud has impact on elderly and those in long-term care facilities. our initiatives work with attorneys and agencies to

understand the abuse and neglects of these victims. and to bring to bear the full weight of my department to ensure that these crimes are prevented and/or prosecuted. and finally the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009, included $4 billion in department justice funding. and this is used for state, local and law enforcement for hiring of new police officer to combat crimes against women and children. and it will reinvigorate the commissions that is vital to keeping our communities strong. chairman lahe, and ranking member sessions, i want to thank you for allowing me to address the priorities and i would be pleased to answer

questions. >> thank you, there was mention of the new black panther party, and i understand that the department rights made the decision of which defendants to charge and dismiss, and the career there during the bush administration and past administrations. i thought i would point that out so to have the facts here. and i am also glad the department has decided to seek injunction and civil penalties against the person who was charged with intimidating. again career decisions being made. it would be helpful if we had the president's nominee in the civil rights division, and i would note we don't have that

to make these decisions, because my friends in the republican party have held up that nominee from confirmation. i want to make sure we have accurate views of what is happening. last week's tragic shooting at the holocaust museum in washington, reminds us of the serious problem motivated by violence and hatred. the reports i received in open sources and classified areas show that the number of hate groups is growing and their positions are hardening. i think we have to strengthen the hand of law enforcement to respond to these vile crimes. and there is noted an increase

of hate crimes in the years, and note to the rhetoric on the internet and throughout the country. this great country of ours, it's a blot to see these hate crimes. and of the matthew law to provide law enforcement to prosecute hate crimes. it's long overdue, and we owe this to the officer at museum and matthew shepherd, do you agree that this hate act is a good tool for investigators and prosecutors? >> absolutely, mr. chairman. if there is a need by this legislation, that's been done away by it is nation in washington. and we saw it in kansas and arkansas. and if you look at the

statistics, of the rise in hate crimes over the last years and troubled by the hate crime violence directed at latinos. 10 years ago i testified in favor of this bill. which is i think limited in scope but rational in what it's doing. it expands the scope of hate crime legislation to include gender, disability and sexual orientation. and it would allow the federal government to assist state and local counterparts to prosecute these offenses. i think the time is right for this legislation. >> thank you, last year we passed a surveillance amendment in 2008. i objected to it because i thought there were lack of protections in it. and today "the new york times" is reporting that the security

agency is collecting and reading immense numbers of e-mails to and from the united states citizens done without warrants. and calls to mind the abuses in the f.b.i. national security letters. how do we -- i don't know how we justify continuing these expansive authorizations whether it's the pariot act, when they are being expanded authorities are being abused this way. what is the problem? what is the justice department doing looking into these reports of abuse >> the department works with the intelligence security to ensure that national security

is conducted with the parties. there is a framework, congress establishes a variety of practices, and there are strict policies and guidelines. >> but the article today and my concern is that more and more we find out about the abuses not from the intelligence agencies, not from the government but picking up the newspaper. we are reaching a point that "the new york times" get the information quicker and get the cross word puzzle. what are we doing to go after that? if this continues i don't know

how would reauthorization any of these things? >> the department and agency takes serious the requirements we are to follow. in a couple of instances where the problems were detected by those of us in the department. we altered the programs, informed the fisa court and members of this committee, and corrected the problem. and after those things occurred did i reauthorize the beginning of the program again. i haven't reviewed the article in "the new york times". >> i wish you would, i wrote months ago to ask for the department for extending or modifying the pariot act authorities. we need that answer, if we are going to reauthorize it, we

need ton -- to know what the department wants. i found it troublesome because i heard similar rumblings and first i heard in detail. if the article is accurate, then we have some real problems. and we want us to be secure and want us to be able to use the abilities to gather intelligence. but we want americans who are not subject to any criminal investigations or terrorism investigation, to know they can send e-mails back and forth to the family and friends and businesses without being read by someone having fun doing it. and it's, you know we had similar things when we saw the i.r.s. look into people's reports. because of interest. and this goes way beyond that. i hope you will look into it.

and i also hope you will redouble your efforts to work with me on media shield bill. and yield to mr. sessions. did you want to respond to that? >> i would say that the patriot act and some members are frustrated with regard to those measures. and i think that what we have seen in the paper today is an indication of some things we need to look at and consider. and one reason we haven't settled on a firm position, we want to take into account how these measures are used. and if there are issues and problems. we take a final position. i know they don't expire until december and the time grows short. but to base our information on

as much as we can is a wise course. >> mr. chairman, with regard to these intercepts, legally i don't think there is a difference of intercepting an e-mail than a telephone call. and there is no exceptional preference, do one or the other. and we have wide authority to do that with foreign intelligence dealing with foreign intercepts. >> would you yield, i read the "the new york times" this morning and i assure you there are inaccuracies in that report and the assumption that it's right is erroneous. >> in my question, i asked, if the article is right. i would like to hear this from the attorney general. >> thank you, i would offer for

the record, senator grasly's statement. and mr. holder, i have been disappointed to have you late in responding to my letter about the uighurs. he specifically said he has three letters that have gone unanswered by the department. and has serious concerns about that. i mr. chairman, i would briefly note with regard to hate crimes legislation, i think we should have a hearing on that. it's worth of our attention. and i offer for the record, june 16, 2009 letter, from the civil rights, i believe that six of the eight members signed it. and they write to us and the president and vice-president urging that we vote against the hate crimes prevention act,

they believe "it will do little effort and great harm." and i hope we can do that and not have it pop on the legislation of the floor. and mr. obama signed an executive order to close the guantanamo facility and to review the case of every detainee, whether released or handled in some other way. and the executive order makes you as the attorney general, the person responsible for coordinating the review and other agencies of the government. do you agree that as the person incharge of it and you bear the responsibility for release of transfer of the detainees of guantanamo bay? >> i believe that i bear responsibility with other cabinet members that make up

the principles committee, but i am primarily responsible. >> they are looking to you to set the agenda. well the administration has released and transferred controversial figures already, without any criminal commission or trial. and on friday they transferred suhare, that's responsible for the murder of william jefferson, a u.s. citizen and diplomat in 1995. planting a car bomb in 1997. and the involvement with the attack on the u.s. s. cole, did you release suhari to saudia arabia . >> i did with the former administration, released by the bush administration. there was not significant proof

to bring a case to him. and he was transferred, not released, transferred to saudia arabia where he will be subject to judicial review and the education program they have. >> was that based on a question of evidence? that could not be utilized? i understand there were military intelligence showed that he was responsible for the shooting death of william jefferson when a diplomat to bosnia. was there evidence that you felt was inadmisable. >> no, there was not sufficient evidence to tie him to the crimes. not that but submission.

>> and mohammed received from jose badias accomplice in the attacks after 9/11. and there was a plot to blowup buildings and with a bomb? did you approve his release? >> i take responsibility. >> were you aware of the serious allegations? >> in the determination we made, we made the conclusion of charges and allegations lodged against people, there was insufficient proof to bring those cases. anybody who poses a danger tots -- to the united states will be held and tried.