requirements around the world. i believe we have started to make a pretty significant transition within the organization of recognizing we have made missteps and we need to learn from these incidents and improve. >> and you think the steps you have taken have resulted in discernible improvement in the culture? >> i think these steps along with the continuing to promote and support new management will help us in that process. >> thank you. >> i yield to the gentleman. let me ask a follow-up, because it gets back to this bunch question. under your direction, was there a reduction in the countersurveillance manpower under your directorship? i under my directorship, established a new permanent division -- >> was there a reduction, yes or no? >> i do not believe there was a

reduction. >> the whistleblower seem to indicate that there was a stuttering -- study that there hundred people per countersurveillance, and you made the decision to cut that by 1/3. is that a correct? >> the witness can answer, and the time has expired. will you answer, please? >> yes. i would like to review that study. i know that we have asked for a study in the past that related to countersurveillance and countersurveillance methodologies to be a ploy by the secret service in the con capitalthe national region, and we established a countersurveillance division and staffed it with what are appropriate resources for this time and will go back and look at the process and see how we need to continue to resource it as appropriate. thank the witness. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i have respect for the numbers of the secret service and cannot believe i am about to begin the fun of questioning is a member of congress, because it should have never gotten this point where i have to ask you these questions. i would like to touch on your aar process. do you conduct aar's? you mentioned you did, but do you? >> yes. findings atnduct all level, for example, following the herd and is shooting incident, -- the herd nandez shooting incident, maybe the next morning at the next shift change, and then all the way up to the region and director level, would you be a normal course of action? >> yes, it would. >> at the fact-finding sessions, once you discover something that

is deficient, and you then change a procedure based on what you learn in the fact-finding session? >> yes, we would. have you changed your procedures for when the white house comes under a shooting incident? if the shooting happened at 9:00 p.m. at night and it was too dark, i am not sure you have access to flashlights and spotlights to check the white house in the evening. it was too dark. do you now have a procedure for checking the entire building, including the third floor, grad night or the next day? is that not part of the new procedures? >> yes, it is, and that night, it is a three-story building, so oftentimes it would require lift trucks, but we have a better protocol to ensure that proper switch are done across the complex. >> it is the people's house. i think the american public

would begrudge a lift truck. do you have that procedure in place. there is a suspected shooting , and three or four days before we find the bulletin the side of the white house, because of the new procedures? >> yes, ma'am, lessons learned. mr. ortiz, the recent breach that just happened to him he was apprehended, and he had this story, was information of that apprehension or that discussion that the agents had with him, was that shared, would have been shared as part of fact-finding the next day? with pictures of him been shown to the officers coming on shift on the next shift? we stopped this guy, he had an ax and will he stand -- in his

waistband, what's up for him. was that ever done? understanding that he was observed by the countersurveillance division, so i am assuming and i would have to get back to the committee that that would be part of the protocol of the division as well as the uniformed vision officers that are frequenting these people to me along the south fence line. >> with that have been shared with all of the officers stationed along the south fence line who might have contact with passersby, this guy has been by a couple times, keep an eye out for him? is that a standard thing that would happen as far as standard for teachers every shift? >> i would assume it is discussed, but i do not know to what specificity it is physically reported among uniformed division. the information mr. gonzález had appeared on the south fence line, was interviewed, his car was searched and all that was it a written report provided and supplemented. >> what about any results of

fact-finding that goes to the lack of communication between agents who were safeguarding the first daughters being on a different frequency as the agents who were responding to the 2011 shooting incident? my understanding is the agent inside the not know because she did not hear traffic, that the theect he does -- that suspected shooting had happen and deny find out about it through a third-party, another agent, it had not been fixed. now are all agents listening to multiple frequencies? >> are protocol would require that all agents are notified regardless of their assignment for that type of incident on a shooting on the complex habits. i would say that information is now past to our joint operations systems. >> i am very concerned that we are not learning from lessons learned, that these things are happening whether or not the fact-finding sessions are

happening. this information is not disseminated in some way, and i would love to in the executive session touch more on how you are fixing and updating your protocols, because this seems pretty standard to me. i yield back. >> thank you, and i will recognize myself. pierson.director a lot of chest beating and beating up of the director today. i want to give you an opportunity to talk about not just what took place, but what we can do to make certain that the white house is safe, the first family is safe, and these incidents do not happen again. basically, two things that we deal with to do that, one would personnel,l, your and the second would be technology. wouldd believe those two resolve the problem in the

future. in sort of to clean up the mess, the problems with performance, the problems with morale, i will say you are the first director in 22 years to ever call me personally and ask for some assistance. before this incident took place, she actually called and said i want to improve the quality of our personnel. and she asked for actually two are stilld they pending before this committee, interestingly enough. i just checked. one was to improve the standards for the agents. i know there had been a lack of academy trading and not a lot of folks trained. but you were also and you a concerneaded h.r., about the agents, is that correct? ok, and also the ability to hire and fire. he saw in the v.a. scandal the

hands tired to hire and fire, and you asked to create to call the service and exempt service. is that correct? >> yes, sir. is referred to as accepted service. >> and will give you more ability to discipline. i asked the staff of the status of those, and it is still pending. it has been some ejection from the other side of the aisle, even to take them up. i thank you for stepping forward, and also recommending that. there are things like technology. 2011ere not director in when the bullets hit the white house, were you? >> no. >> you got beat up pretty good on that one today. it is interesting the white and they discovered some concrete or something that had been shipped -- checked out of a

balcony that was examine them in the service area of the white house is quite a it and you would not want to examine some of it. that was not on at 9:50 at night. the fact remains that a window was broken. that concerns me because at my house, i have a security system that if a window is breached >> when i left this morning, i did not want to disturb my wife, the security -- but the security alarm sort of notifies you that someone is coming in or going out. i do not have a very sophisticated system. but a window breaking in the white house in 2011 it seems -- and thereuld are two barriers. one is a bulletproof and the other is original or antique glass. that should have been taken care of. has that been taken care of, do you know? >> the windows have been replaced -- >> no, i'm talking about

security for breaching that. again, sybil thing. if someone opens a window or a window is broken at my house, i have an alarm. have you ever heard of these guys? it is not very costly. you can subscribe. that can be installed. it is a simple technology a privatecompany, system can do that. i do not think we can spend a lot of money. it can improve the quality and professionalism, you got to be able to hire and fire people. you have to put some technology in place. we do not have to put cement trucks and barriers in front of the white house. it is the people's house. do you know when the current seven-foot six inch fence was installed? >> 1965. >> i do not want to go through

some outrageous things. taxpayers have to fund this, but maybe we could raise that a little bit. editing is your part -- he lived in florida. we could put some vegetation barriers, simple things like how about spanish bayonet? you jump that fence and you get quite a greeting when you hit the ground, inexpensive invitation -- vegetation barriers. there are whole host of things we can do cost-effectively. i hope you consider some of them. dubbing the fence at the white house is not new. is that right -- jumping the fence of the white house is not new, is that right? >> correct. >> i understand the president and first family were not at the white house when this took ways, and sometimes the security personnel and secret service do get refocused to address where the president is, and he had just departed. is that correct? >> that is correct. governmentto the

reform and oversight committee. it is good to have you here today. thank you. chairman, can i make an inquiry. a reference that the director made two requests and there was objection from this side. could you expand on that? we are not aware of that. >> the two requests that were made. -- we contacted staff and we asked staff to look at it. i asked the staff just now, what is the status of that, and they said -- i said, have we move forward? they said no. i said why. they said some of the members on the other side of the aisle objected to that. i mean, you can object to it -- >> that is my point. we are not aware of that. >> staff has taken steps to improve performance -- >> we understand-- >> and the status of one of the

most respected law enforcement services in the world, not just -- >> we appreciate that. is. got to tell it like it >> [indiscernible] >> that is the facts. >> she testified under the oath that it was contacted in that regard. i asked -- >> will the chairman yield for a moment? i want to make something very, very clear. on this side of the aisle, we will do everything in our power to make sure that the secret service has everything it needs -- >> there are two -- >> everything it needs to protect the family, the president, the vice president, and our former presidents. this is extremely important to us, and i do not want this hearing from anybody to get the

apression that we are not million percent supportive of making sure that the secret service has what it needs, legislatively or financially. thank the gentleman, and i know he will work with us to accommodate the requests of the director. >> will the chairman yield? irhaps to clear the record, think the entire committee needs to be aware that there have been personnelo have standings of exempt changed in some cases to make them easier to terminate. that is a debate we can certainly have. i do believe today that although that is something the committee should consider him and i am supportive of at this level people being subject to disciplinary action if they are unable to fulfill their mission easier, i do not believe today

that is the basis under which these areas failures occurred. i am happy to have a discussion later on the details of the personnel changes. that was the limit, and again for the director, i did receive that. i did not, because we cannot immediately act on it unilaterally, but i do not believe it has anything to do with today -- the number of failures. it may have something to do with low morale. if you make people easier to fire, that also sometimes leads to low more. stating respectfully, my point on this, i think the director has taken on the responsibility of improving the performance, and very key to that is the educational qualifications which she has and the ability to hire and fire people. i think they're relevant because when you do not have discipline, you do not have good performance, and when the director does not have the tools

to a cobblers that, then we -- to accomplish that, then we do not get that. i recognize the gentleman from nevada. chairman issahank and the ranking member mr. cummings for holding this extremely important hearing. director pierson, let me be frank, i believe you have done a disservice to the president of the united states. not only have you compromised his safety and security, you have compromised the safety and security of his family and the staff of the white house. xhe pattern of la security and follow basic circles indicate a culture at the secret service that needs to change. bele the president may not in a position to publicly criticize this failure to adequately protect his needs, i will. this president has far too much to worry about them up both here

and around the world. he should have not to also have to be concerned with his personal safety and security and that have his family. is,y question, director, why should we have confidence in the secret service's ability to protect the president and the first family when there has been such a pattern of lax security? >> i believe the incident on september 19 is not representative of a pattern. as i have stated, there have been others have attempted to gain access to the property that were immediately arrested. my biggest concern is that security plan, that effective security plan, was not properly executed on the night of the 19th. >> beyond september 19, the most recent incident, the fact that we are just now learning from

the washington post that ran a story about the 2011 shooting where a person fired at the white house, it took four days for the secret service to realize that bullets actually had the white house residence, and that only occurred after a housekeeper and usher identified concern because of a broken window. can a broken window be observed physically from both the inside of the white house as well as the outside? >> in this case, the location of the broken window, up against themansion the sod along truman balcony, it was not visible from the exterior. >> from the exterior. what about the interior? >> the interior, the private residence of the president and the first lady, there were indications that the ballistic last had a dimple or damage to

the ballistic glass. that was not recognized by the housekeeping staff until the curtains had been told in preparation for the first -- for the president's and first lady's return. >> how was it that the secret service personnel prior to the that,eeper finding they did not do the proper assessments, inspection of that location in order to identify that until four days later? >> i will be happy to have a discussion with you in a private session, but typically the private residence of the president and the first lady is that, their private residence. >> i understand you are not able to discuss the exact details of some of the security protocols in this open hearing, and i look forward to asking you more detailed step i step questions about the exact protocols that failed, the missteps by

individual agents, and that's and breadth of this review of the investigation of this incident covers. has there been any disciplinary action pursuit against any of the personnel who failed to follow proper protocol to date? >> that is pending, based upon the conclusion of the investigation to determine , andly what the facts are appropriately, enhancements will be made at propria action will be taken. >> that is where i tend to differ and little bit. of lax of this pattern security, not just from the most recent incident, but from prior incidents, someone should be held accountable. the security of the president of the united states is serious,

and his family is serious, and we do not need a long, lengthy review for someone to be held accountable. so i look forward to getting more facts about this in our executive briefing, but ultimately, director, we need to make sure that people are held accountable. there are men and women in the secret service that doing great job and they are to be commended for that job. but when an individual fails to do their job properly, they need to be held accountable. >> i agree with that statement. people make mistakes. they need to be held accountable. >> thank you. for all members as we near the end of this hearing, we will be going into executive session upstairs at the subcommittee room immediately following this. gentlelady from new mexico is next. mr. chairman, thank you very

much. couple of things. i want to go back to many of the statements that have been made today, and i want to fast-forward to the situation that we are all dealing with, and then i have a very specific question about a protocol that i not in executive session you can answer. we are trying to figure out what we can do in this hearing to understand this incredible breach, but that the same time recognize that this is the people's house, a public building, and to work on this now wants this. you have heard many members be concerned about the thought that sort of camacho should go first, and i think about earlier. this year we had a toddler breach the fence. for me at least, it is clear that that is too far and would create an environment where we all feel that there is a public

safety aspect here. but i think in your earlier testimony, you said that we have had 60 individuals try to preach -- 16 individuals try to breach the fence. >> 16 over five years. 16 this year. >> we know that folks, whether it is a mental illness issue or that,ing in addition to we know we have an issue. i also heard you earlier in your testimony talked about your career in the secret service, that you were at one point in time working on some of the i.t. issues. is that correct? >> yes, ma'am. >> i want to go back to the 2011 incident, and i want to read you what "the washington post" said about that incident. and we have said this several times there's repeating. key people in charge of the

safety of the president's family were not aware a shooting had occurred. because officers guarding the white house grounds communicate on a different radio frequency from the ones used by agents who protect the first family. the agent assigned learned of the shooting a few minutes later from an officer posted nearby. and radiounications dispatch in and of themselves may not be narrowly construed as i.t., i construe communications efforts and particularly in the context of interoperability to be definitely inside that realm. since 2011, have you resolved those two mitigation issues? >> yes, and as a result of the the incident, we have ensured

that the same information is passed, the emergency information is passed to all people who have a need to know. >> all of the radio frequencies communicating are . they are all interoperable. all those committees and techniques are working collector of -- collectively, and so are the alarms? the radio systems are operating with commonality, and that is controlled through our joint operations center. agencies are allowed to operate on the same frequencies based on their work. the alarm systems are now becoming more integrated with some of our radio systems, but we are still in a transition phase. all of the other issues, i'm really struggling with the communications and the for anyal effort

personnel to decide not to have .n alarm if you are doing this continuous improvement, training, investments, and making sure that this deal eat for tech of force is, in fact, just that, state-of-the-art and effective medication could occur without anyone having any idea, for me, it's gross neglect. how does that occur? that levelone at interfere with the protocol established by secret service? -- how does someone at that level interfere with the protocol established by secret service? concern was when these alarms for putting the place that the proximity to other activities within the white house, it could be an interference, such as the tour lines or other public events. >> so interference, and i said that i think you need to be able to address the balances of the

public visiting, utilizing, meeting at the white house. that woulding to me trump your own protocols for making sure you have alarms, aose purpose is to trigger threat so that you can have an effective global within the secret service, interior and exterior, protocol to deal with that. i know i'm out of time. >> getting into a classified session will help. the chair would announce that we now have two members that have been waived on that will ask their questions. that will complete the full round. with the indulgence of the ranking member, will have an additional five minutes per side , divided by whoever mr. cummings would like to recognize

, and myself, and then we will go into executive session. five minutes per side for our two guest members. and then five minutes aside from a which will include closing. roughly 20 minutes from now we , for any staff who want to make sure their members are available upstairs. and with that, the gentleman from missouri, mr. long. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director pearson, are your agents that are charged with guarding the white house and guarding the occupants of the white house, are they allowed to use white -- use smart phones while on duty? and i'm talking about personal smartphones, texting, tweeting, playing games. are they allowed to use personal smartphones while on duty? >> no, they would not be. >> and that is strictly enforced a? you're confident? access to aey have blackberry, which is part of the tools that we give our officers

and agents to receive information and pass information. but that is an official phone to -- >> that isthey an official phone to me, something they need. i'm talking about personal smartphones usage. you say they are not allowed to do that while on duty guarding the white house and its occupants. >> it is possible that some employees have a personal cell phone for emergency contact by their family, but they are discouraged from using any kind theychnology -- nine >> are discouraged from using. ok, a week before someone was caught jumping the fence, a week later, someone was not, correct? >> yes, sir. >> were you at the white house picnic this year? >> no, i was not. >> i'm sure you are familiar with it. do you know when it was? i will answer that. it was two days before the event. picnic, ite house was senators, congressmen, republicans and democrats.

everyone is invited. our families were invited. we took our families. we get docked at the street and we have to -- we get stopped at the street and we have to show an id, members of congress, senators and their families. they are checking the books and making sure everything is in order. there is still another 70 yards, just down the sidewalk a tiny ways, and then they check our id again. we need to check your id again before you go on to the premises of the white house. so we go into the picnic, several hundred people there, 200, 300, 400. what it was, the president and the first lady are normally there. on the 17th of september of this year, the first lady was out-of-state. the president was there at that event. we have had four assassinations in this country. we've had about two dozen , including the shooting of theodore roosevelt and ronald reagan. we just heard my friend, miss earlier in her

questioning saying that this president has received approximately three times the number of threats on his life than any other president. i was surprised to hear that. the president of the united states was there that night ,mong 300 people, let's say 400, whatever it was. . shudder to think he went behind a rope. those old enough to remember clotheslines, a three or four inch was his protection that evening from 300 or 400 people. i shudder to think if this gentleman had come 48 hours earlier and jumped the fence .hat night the president of the united states was behind a clothesline rope that night. lettingictures of him people take selfies with him, holding babies, and it's a great gesture. we want to be able to talk to him, reach out to him. but if you don't take anything else away from this hearing

today, take that picture in your mind. you are not there, but 48 hours earlier, we could have been having a whole different conversation. and that is very, very upsetting to me. i love first responders. i have a great deal of admiration and respect for first whetherrs, police, local police, sheriff, highway patrol, secret service, fbi -- all of the people that protect us. let me ask you another question. are there people with automatic weapons patrolling the white house grounds standing there with their finger on a trigger of an automatic weapon? in plain sight? it might be a deterrent. have a number of tactical assets that are deployed at the white house routinely. >> are they in plain sight with an automatic weapon with their finger on the trigger? like they are outside this

building next door at the capitol. i was driving earlier and there was a capitol hill policeman with an automatic weapon, finger on the trigger. we were stopped at a stop sign and i said, i wonder if they have an extra threat today or something, because this guy is really on point. but i think if we had something like that and i'm thinking about jumping the fence, whether i have my full mental faculties or not, and i see someone like that with their finger on the trigger of an automatic weapon, do you think i would think twice? icl of the people around with automatic weapons, safeguarding -- i see all of these people around with automatic weapons, safeguarding their lives. i shudder to think what would have happened 48 hours earlier if that guy decided to shut -- jump the fence with the president waiting behind the clothesline rope. i appreciate you being here. with that, i yield back. >> i think the gentleman -- i would second his point that i have seen senators wait two

hours after the salon he -- , waiting in the heat to get into the white house. but someone can just jump the fence and be inside in a matter of seconds. that is what this hearing is all about. i thank the gentleman. the gentlelady from texas, miss sheila jackson lee. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much for your courtesy, and the ranking member, mr. cummings. thank you for acknowledging that homeland security and this committee have worked together on a number of issues. before i start i want to put into the record by reading it the words expressed by mr. obama, our president, just last as, madam director, you made it very clear that the

general assembly you protected not only the president, but 140 heads of state. and the president said, the secret service does a great job. i'm grateful for all of the sacrifices they make on my behalf and all my family's behalf. i wanted to just add that, because the president has confidence. i also want to it knowledge that your storied history equates to thethe storied history of secret service starting in 1865. that it has continued in that service. our hope with this hearing, as my colleagues have said, between the publicans and democrats, that we would alter this headline that i hold up that says "the secret service opens door to ridicule." i disagree with that and i say, it opens the door to restructuring and revamping. because i think you have been very honest with us today. hold, since it was

mentioned, documents that i would ask if i'm able to put into the record with unanimous consent. >> without objection. but thank you. the list of assassinated -- >> thank you. the list of assassinated president. attempted --six four dead and six attempted. that is too many. headlinesare three that i will read from the general report. points.hree policies and procedures for proposing and issuing discipline are insufficient. the united states secret service is not only in compliance with disciplinary rules, internal controls are insufficient to ensure discipline is aligned with agency. you will probably say that a lot of this has been corrected. i look forward to those. let me go specifically to my

concern. on july 19, the state virginia police found a man that had any number of indictable things. when i say that, sawed-off shotguns, rifles, a number of items that are not the normal course, even though he is under the second amendment. and then on august 25, our officers stopped this gentleman. i will say to the american president hasthis documented -- maybe because he is different, maybe because of he had more -- that threats than others. maybe his family should have reported him, the dome and that jump the fence. others should have known. but it was unacceptable that he was stopped on august 25 with an formation and there could not have in some basis upon which this shaman could have been referred to an institutional

gentleman could have been referred to an institutional hold to address the question. my question to you is, why was who jumped on september the 19th stopped on august 25 with a background of enormous amount of guns and other threatening items, why wasn't he taken into custody --o let's not say the lot taken into custody? let's not say the law doesn't allow us. he could have been held. his family could have been called. kenexa officer of the military could not have been called? officer -- an e x-officer of the military could not have been called? the other thing that i find particularly egregious is in 2011, it was supposed that it a carcar back --

backfiring or gang fights. i've never heard of gang fights outside the white house. the most egregious that i can ever think is that the individuals serving the white house on that date failed to stop him. one,here is a picture of two, 3, 4, 5, 6 uniformed officers. i wonder if there is a fitness problem here. they are chasing the settlement and all six of them pictured could not capture him. my question is, what in the open from gettingd them him before he jumped the fence? this is on september 19. what stops them from getting him when he jumped over the fence with six or more officers chasing him, uniformed officers? the 2011 event, why did you think that was a gang fight instead of a more serious investigation into the fact that

there was gunfire? >> we are looking into why mr. gonzalez was not stopped when he came over the fence. i have stated publicly and i will continue to work with my workforce to understand why he was allowed to make access to the mansion and why he wasn't detained earlier as soon as he jumped the fence. i need you to understand why he was not recognized earlier in the day, and further surveillance put on him as to further analysis why he was there and why he had returned to the white house. i cannot explain those questions today. with regard to the shooting in adviser, 2011, all i can is that in collaboration with the metropolitan police department and the secret service, a conflicting witness statement said there was confusion about whether there was shot at the white house or from car to car. it appears to me those are also

documented in police reports. i regret the incursion that occurred three years ago. we have learned from that incident and the secret service would react differently today than it did three years ago. but let me conclude by saying, sil withight of iso--- i direct commitment to attacking the united states, and maybe the president, i think this hearing highlights the serious need for revamping and restructuring that is so key will we are all working together for the ultimate goal would -- the ultimate good of protecting the first family's life. i hope you would agree with me. >> yes, ma'am. >> i yield back. >> pursuant to agreement, chairman and ranking member will divide five minutes equally. i will yield four of those minutes to the gentleman from utah, mr. chafee is.

>> i think the chairman. -- i thank the chairman. director, anytime there is a or theof protocol president's personal security or then jeopardized, white house security permit or has been breached, is there an internal review? >> yes. >> and can you assure the committee that you are informed anytime those things happen? >> i am expected to be informed, yes. >> is the president of the united states informed? >> i would assume that the president of the united states is informed. i don't know. >> you are the head of the secret service. explain to me why you would not know that. >> your question was objective

as to whether or not i would know. >> do you brief the president or no? >> if your question is when there are incidents that involve the president of the united states or the first family in security concerns, yes. >> then you do brief the president. >> yes. >> do you brief the president if there has been improvement or breach -- has been a premature breach at the white house echo >> i have conversations with the president. ifdo you brief the president his own personal security has in any way been jeopardized? >> i have confidential conversations with the president. those would be the topic that we would cover in addition to other things. >> what percentage of the time do you inform the president whether his personal security has been breached? i would say in proximity to the incident. >> i asked you what percentage

of the time do you inform the president if his personal security is in any way, shape, or form been breached? i advise thee time president. >> you advise the president. >> yes. >> in calendar year 2014, how many times has that happened? --i have not briefed him with the exception of one occasion, the september 19 occasion, incident. thelen time you have briefed the president on perimeter security, the president's personal security, the first family security, has been one time in 2014. >> that is correct. we kind ofrman, as wrap up here, i think there is a bipartisan call for change. i would like to ask for an independent review. i think there needs to be a top-down review of not only security, but also the culture.

refer my colleagues to this. madame director, i don't understand why special agent basic classes, in 2012, there were zero. and in 2013 there was one. in the uniform division basic classes, and 2012 there was one ended 2013 there was one. i don't understand that. go back to the inspector general's report. i think there is a serious problem here. let me read some questions about how the secret service agents themselves responded. "if a senior manager engages in illegal conduct or activity, he or she is less -- is held responsible. -- held responsible. less than half of the respondents said that was true. again, secret service agents themselves in a confidential , "if theen asked

secret service disciplinary process is fair," only 43% said yes -- 40.3% said yes. disciplinary actions within the secret service are at the appropriate level of severity given the offense, only 36.6. this demands an independent investigation and review team by the fbi, the military, whatever it takes. they need to look at the management, the leadership, the culture, and the security. >> i thank the gentleman. the entire ig report will be included in the supplemental of the hearing. i'm going to reserve that last-minute and yield to the ranking member. --miss pierson, i just director pierson, i just want to follow-up on some of miss .ackson lee's questions youg back to mr. gonzalez,

can confirm that the secret service did an extensive interview of him. is that right? >> yes, sir. >> and i believe you testified that you requested is that profile, which documented his mental illness. and he agreed that you could have them both up is that what you told us? >> our procedures are in consultation with the individual, mr. gonzalez, which included the comprehensive medical records, and he complied, yes. >> you have access to his medical files. is that right? >> yes, as part of the investigation. >> federal law prohibits certain people with mental illnesses from possessing firearms. usc, 922 g.ute 18, those who have been adjudicated as mentally defective or who have been

committed to an institution for mental illness. are you aware of that sanction? >> yes, i am. >> according to press reports, he presents with mental illness. with severeosed mental illnesses. and his family confirmed the same thing. what steps did the secret service take to her this individual from possessing i've -- possessing firearms when he was arrested in july after he was interviewed. -- interviewed? >> he was interviewed by the virginia state police, who , alcohol, andco firearms. many federal agencies have been in contact with mr. gonzalez. >> you consulted with the atf? >> the atf were the initial investigators that first responded to the virginia state police over the weapons.

>> didn't his family also said that he had mental illness and needed help? >> the family concurred that he exhibited signs of the tsc. -- of ptsd. though to think the statute someone who isr a danger to himself or others, don't you think that applies here? >> it would appear to, yes. >> the question has come up, and every time i step out in the hall for just a minute, i have reporters coming up to me and asking me, do you think that director pierson can correct this situation? and what i have said is that the jury is still out. and let me tell you why i say that. you were talking about internal

review a little bit earlier. and again, i go back to that whole culture question. if you're secret service members don't feel comfortable sharing information, i don't know how you get the information that you need to address the kinds of concerns that you might have, because you won't even have the information. and then it hit knee as i was thinking about this whole thing -- it hit me as i was thinking about this whole thing, if i have secret service agents who are more willing to the whistleblowers and come before congress, what that tells me that they don't trust each other. there is a problem of trust within an agency -- and correct me if i'm wrong on this point -- that really needs to have trust within it. is that right? wouldn't you agree with that he's? >> yes, we do need to have

confidence and trust with each other, correct. >> i think she answered to the negative of your question. i will restore the time. >> do you believe there is a lack of trust? >> no, i do believe the employees trust each other. >> them please help me with this. i think you have the greatest of intent. you have given us 30 years. and i appreciate it. pasthard for me to get that whole issue of folks not -- members of the secret service are coming to members of this committee, not to me, but to others, telling them things and they don't even seem to be discussing it with you all.

it goes back to the agent back in 2011we are promoting individd helping them become leaders and supervisors. we are holding them accountable and hold in the workforce accountable and providing more opportunities for training. we are spending time during engagement sessions with the workforces to figure out what the inherent problems are. >> you said earlier you would support new leadership. your possibly bringing in new are constantlyou bringing in new leadership, is that right? >> when i took this position, we had 70 supervisory positions will stop those have now been filled. >> thank you. i look forward to talking with

you in the classified briefing. >> i thank the judge -- the gentleman. one minute to mr. meadows. want to come back, because in testimony here you have been very specific. you said 500 to hot -- to 550 employees. chairman issa asked you that again and you continue to stay with that. i will ask what you are requesting this year. you should have a copy of that. and give that to the staff right there. how is it if you are down 550 full-time employees that you are only asking for 61 more? by would you not ask for 500? again, these are your numbers. find -- youing to know, in all of this, it's about trust and integrity, and some of your testimony doesn't seem to line up with the facts. is challenging when you start

to talk about operational positions. >> it's challenging from the standpoint of oversight to get to the truth, and that is what we are doing is giving you this opportunity. >> thank you, if you would. in thatrepresent 50% first year they would be hired. the challenge of what we have had an part of what i presented to the committee and asked for support on was from the chair -- both from the chair and ranking member was the authority for the secret service to pursue excepted service legislation. hiring is a challenge for me and trying to hire in a process that is cumbersome is more difficult. uniformed individuals require a robust background investigation. they require a lot of back security clearance. >> why don't you request the funds to do that? >> i have requested legislation to support me and to identify new efficiencies in hiring progress -- process. vacancy and special

we received 45,000 applications. and because of the cumbersome processes i have to comply with, we've only been able to onboard 72 this year. >> how long will it be before the president is safe? under your scenario, you've got to wait for an act of congress. that doesn't make sense. to identifyying every efficiency that we possibly can to assist us in being able to bring on this personnel that weekly -- we critically need. >> is the press -- the president safe today? >> the president is safe today. and we will monitor our resources to make sure that the president come his family, and those others that we can -- we protect our safe. >> i yield back. >> as promised, we will now recess and go into executive session. briefly before we do, i want to make sure that the director in understand, as do the witnesses that we will dismiss at this time, it is the considered view of the chair,

and i believe in concurrence with the ranking member, that an internal investigation by the secret service is not sufficient -- i repeat, is not sufficient to provide the kind of confidence back to the american people. working on a letter to center the department of homeland security asking for a more aggressive and greater independent investigation to bring back the kind of confidence the american people and the president deserved. we stand in recess and we will reconvene in this location. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> we'll talk more about security breaches at the white house on this morning's "washington journal," which begins in a moment. then a house panel holds a hearing on the u.s. marine being detained in a mexican prison after he was arrested in tee wanna for carrying three loaded firearms. that house foreign affairs subcommittee hearing is live at 10:00 a.m. later, the congressional hispanic caucus holds a panel discussion on immigration. that's live at 3:15 eastern. >> our campaign 2014 debate coverage continues. tonight at 8:00 on c-span, live coverage of the minnesota governor's debate between cumbent governor, mark day

tan, republican jeff johnson, and hannah nicollette. it's live coverage of the oklahoma governor's debate between state representative, democrat joe dornan, and the governor, mary fallin. also, the nebraska governor's debate between condemn hasselrock and pete ricketts. and we also have live coverage of the montana house debate etween john lewis and ryan z inke. more than 100 debates for the control of congress. >> coming up this hour --

the first case of ebola has been diagnosed in the united states. officials say they are confident they can contain and isolate the disease. more on those stories in a bit. first we want to pick your brain this morning about the candidates running for office this november. what influenced your decision making? how aru