the phoenix office of the atf said we're not doing any gun locking. they gave that information to the department of justice and that letter went to mr. grassley. now you would think, you would think if we were pursuing the truth we might call the folks from the phoenix office of the atf before this committee and have them answer to why they gave that false information. here's where the selective -- i would say the willful decision to ignore where the facts lead. that's where they come into play. we have never asked ken nelson, the former head of the atf, who was part of this decision. we have never asked him to come before this committee, and i think the reason is because in his internal testimony with investigators, he has already said that he never informed the department of justice seniors to him regarding gun locking because he was unaware of it himself because the information that he would be providing if he was brought before this committee would be exonerating to the attorney general so we didn't bring it forward. we didn't want to hear the fac

atf hasn't had a permanent director in six years. why? political obstruction in the other body because they don't want -- they don't want tough gun enforcement. they want weak leadership. so, yes, we're brought to this moment to believe that this is all about really a rogue attorney general who is uncooperative with this branch of government and he needs to be reasoned in and the ultimate penalty we have besides impeachment, content for the first time ever needs to be meted out to a man who is seen as an honorable man who has put himself into this job, who is fighting all kinds of things on our behalf from voter suppression to, yes, the drug cartels in the south and we are going demean him. we are going to tarnish his reputation and that's how we get to the president of the united states. and you can forgive the public for the contempt that this body has held poll after poll when we behaved this way when we could have behaved this way and gotten so much more done. i yield back. the gentleman yields back. who with else seeks recognition? t

melson, who's the acting director of the atf in washington, d.c. is the one -- >> the transfer, but during this program, he was down there. >> would the yes man yield? >> go ahead. >> for the record, he was in washington, he did not run this program, it was an osdef program, he said in his testimony when he read the very wiretaps that you all have had an opportunity to read, he became sick to his stomach and that was when he realized they had been gun walking. >> which program, the wide receiver? >> fast and furious. >> reclaiming my time. it was because of his concern that we are also should be concerned because he gave us this system some 11 months ago. i think it is important to get to everyone, as mr. goudy has cited. gun walking was wrong, it's still wrong, it was always wrong t attorney general said this was fundamentally flawed. doesn't that beg the question why in february of 2011 we were sent under the department of justice letter head, something that was totally an completely false, something the department of justice pulled back some 10

he's out there bashing atf agents for not seizing enough guns. these were guns deemed to be legally transferred by prosecutors. so what's the alternative? should they be going out and illegally seizing guns? this was a clash and a conflict that occurred repeatedly between the agents and the prosecutors. >> you end your article with a look at who really was part of fast and furious. the cartel and mexican nationals using their money to purchase those guns that were ultimately traced back to the fbi? >> that's right. >> they were being funded by the fbi. they were being paid by the fbi. >> that's right. this is the theory that nothing went as planned and expected. but the top two targets turned out to be on the fbi payroll. >> why has no one from the department of justice said in fast and furious there was no gun running. gun walking, excuse me. why has no one from the department of justice said in fast and furious, there was no gun walking? period. send of story. that's what your article says .but they have not said that. why not? >> i don't know

no police or atf agents were hurt.g up at six, we will hear from a woman who works and saw what happened. we will hear that at six. one person shot, a suspect shot. six taken in to custody after a raid. live, abc 2news. >> thank you. we have new developments in the jerry sandusky trial. a man testify that sandusky called himself the tickle monster and embraced the then 11-year-old boy in a penn state shower. the alleged encounter sparked an investigation but ended without charges being field. the now 25-year-old alleged victim said that sandusky embraced him in the shower, lathered him up and then lifted him to rinse out his hair. the first three days kind of painted sandusky as a man who use his position to gain control over boys. >>> you know when we think about strokes we normally think about older people. ahead you will hear from a college freshman who was walking across campus when her life changed forever. . >>> stroke is the leading cause of death here in the united states. while age does play a role, it can hap

an atf special agent in phoenix called existing gun laws toothless. so, mr. chairman, when do we put forward some teeth and the law to help our enforcement officers combat crime? efforts to simply discuss reforms have not been welcomed by this committee. when i attempted to question the atf agents about defects with the current laws to combat gun trafficking, mr. chairman, you cut me off and specifically instructed the atf agents not to answer my question. so i tried to act on reforms with many members of this committee including ranking member cummings. we tried to help law enforcement officers fight gun trafficking along the southwest border and we did not get any support from the other side of the aisle, and mr. issa has rebuffed requests by ranking member cummings to address reforms at the department of justice and declare need for legislation to fight illegal gun trafficking along the southwest border including a request for a hearing on the topic, just a hearing, and the chairman has also demanded that the department of justice produce a wiretap applica

private meeting and that will be enough on it apparently is not enough with the acting director of atf that we're dealing with. >> will the gentleman yield? >> it still goes back to the issue of what it does -- yes i would yield to the chairman. >> the 24 interviews, effectively depositions were by partisan and all members are able to come to them in general members are not choose to go to thome, they are done by career staff attorneys on both sides. but i would commend to all of you that if you read those 24 interviews, you'll find out, our staff asked tougher and more exhaustive questions of those witnesses that i have ever soon asked from medaeus. i thank the gentleman. the gentle lady from new york. >> this this narrative, i would like to point out that the attorney general was called before this committee and this congress nine times to testify, but the head of the atf wasn't called once and possibly because it doesn't fit into the narrative, because what he had to say is that he didn't know anything about it and he didn't tell anybody about it at the justice tent. i think the at

here's what we thought we knew about the atf operation known as fast and furious. so-called straw buyers from mexican drug cartels were allowed to buy guns in the southwest. then those guns, thousands of them, were allowed to walk or be smuggled into mexico with an eye toward tracing their way through the cartels. instead, as we, the house oversight committee and other organizations were led to believe, the atf lost track of those weapons. some were brought back into the country. two were found at the scene were border agent brian terry was gunned down. that was the story as we and nearly everyone thought we knew. now, tonight though, after six months of reporting, "fortune" magazine reveals a very different fast and furious. the bottom line, letting guns walk was not -- i repeat, not part of the plan. she writes, five law enforcement agents directly involved in fast and furious tell fortune that the atf had no such tactic. she goes on to say, they insist they never purposefully allowed guns to be illegally trafficked. just the opposite. they say they seized weapon

atf makes every effort to have weapons that were there illegally. we now know that multiple people were involved in the drafting of this letter. we know that their statement was false. march 22 the president spoke to univision. he said there may be a situation where serious mistakes were made. if that is the mistake we will hold someone accountable. made the second, doj stated that atf's operation did not knowingly prevent them from taking guns into mexico. the next month the president had mistakes. then he told congress is not permit these. the deputy attorney claimed they contained inaccuracies. we need to answer the following questions. who authorized this action? thes in charge of oversight? why were they allowed to continue? when the department of justice refuses to provide the answers, the house is forced to collect them. this committee was united to get their to walk through the process of atf. now that it is with the doj, they say not atf was ok to a investigated coition not investigate inaccurate statements. why is this important? truth and

these are the same atf officials you now refuse to call for public hearing. this morning, we were informed that the administration is now asserting executive privilege over and you're right, a narrow subset. it is indeed narrow, of documents that remain at issue. as i understand it, the assertion does not cover everything in this category such as whistle blower documents, and the administration has indicated that it remains and i emphasize remains willing to try to come to a mutual resolution despite its formal legal assertion. as a member of congress, i treat assertions of executive privilege very seriously and i believe they should be used only sparingly. in this case, it seems clear that the administration was forced into a position by the committee's unreasonable insistence on pressing forward with contempt despite the attorney general's good faith offer. mr. chairman, it did not have to be this way. it really didn't. we could have postponed today's vote, accepted the attorney general's offer and worked with the department to obtain additional documents a

the atf is in town searching for three possible suspects. cheryl hurd joins us from west oakland tonight. >> reporter: we know that atf officials have been asked to come in by oakland fire, to help with this investigation. that means that this fire is suspicious and that oakland fire needs help. meanwhile, this building has been red-tagged. and security guards are here, making sure no one tamps with possible evidence. >> one of our missions is to investigate arson. >> reporter: atf special agent helen dunkle says, it's too early to tell if someone intentionally set this fire in oakland. but oakland fire crews felt the blaze was suspicious enough to have the feds come in to investigate. >> the fire was about a city-long block. and due to the dollar loss and that b.a.r.t. was shut down and such. >> reporter: atf agents have access to resources that can accurately determine what started the fire. >> we have access to accelerant detection canines should we need them. we have access to a team of individuals within atf that have worked fire scenes

grassley seems to come back with proof that the atf had in fact walked guns. but he's talking about a different case. that there was a different case. >> how would we know? >> how would we know? >> agent john dodson, the whistle blower in this case, is it true that he walked guns in a totally different case is that true or not? >> again, this is not rocket science, we have an agency of the united states government. this is a prosecutorial arm. this is the buying weapons. they won't give us the information. this is so indefensible, it's beyond comprehension. >> if it's not fast and furious and the guy -- you're investigating it. this reporter has been doing it for six months. >> when you don't have the information and they try to keep the evidence from you? >> this reporter has been investigating it for six months and you would be -- >> i don't give a hill of beans about that reporter. >> and you've been investigating as well. >> investigative staff charged by law and this committee under the constitution of the united states has a responsibility. taxpayers' mo

atf had no such tactic. they said they seized weapons whenever they could but they were hamstrung by prosecutors and weak laws that stymied them at every turn. the nra are the ones who had the weak laws passed in the first place. in arizona to buy a gun you just have to be 18 and pass a background check. you can buy not just one gun but 10 guns or 100 guns. here are these agents saying, oh my gosh, this is going to the drug cartels. they go to the prosecutors, and the prosecutors say the law says you can't bother anyone with a gun even if ten minutes later they change their mind and they sell it to someone else, they can take all that. those weak laws passed by republicans and the nra to make sure that you could sell as many guns as you want and take them wherever you want. you know who did a sorry on this back in october of 2011? our very own vanguard on current television. it's not like nobody knew about it. >> our problem is resources. my agency has been at the same amount of manpower since 1972. >> same

atf did not agree. there is copious evidence that atf agents demanded we want to seize these guns.o make these arrests, but prosecutors blocked them. we're a nation of laws. atf agents can under decide that they're going to make arrests or seize guns without prosecutors' okay. if they have asked and prosecutors have answered and the answer is no, that's it. >> is this a prosecutor scandal? were the prosecutors' decisions in these cases wild departures from the law?ç were they making prosecutorial discretion decisions that were wildly incompatible with what had previously bun done or are the gun laws really, really lax. >> that's a hard time to answer and i spend a lot of time and energy in my reporting trying to determine just that. that's enormous differences in prosecution styles and prosecutorial interpretation of laws in each jurisdiction. now, dave vogt, the group's supervisor of phoenix group seven in his frustration and despair was actually writing in prosecutors in other jurisdictions. they were going as far as new york to see if they could find prosecutors who would take

some people in the atf that said it happened and others that didn't. >> some people in the atf and united states government under this administration, under its campaign of fast and furious, they were sending guns into mexico hoping to somehow trap -- by the way -- i don't know how that traps anybody. illegal to buy the guns in this country. nra and darrell issa are working togethering on this and say the fast and furious operation is a white house conspiracy to crack down on gun rights here in the u.s. here is issa on fox in december. let's listen. >> very clearly, they made a crisis and they are using this crisis as somehow to take away or limit people's second amendment rights. >> absolutely pandering there. crazy pandering. conspiracy theory cooked up by issa and nra so far-fetched colbert, the insanity with this explanation. let's listen. >> very clearly, they made a crisis and they are using this crisis to somehow take away or limit people's second amendment rights. >> yes. very clearly. obama started this gun tracking program in 2006 when he h hypnotized george bush and had holder

atf will go through the rubble in just a few hours.ir involvement does indicate it is possible they are considering arson as the cause for this fire. of course there is the security guard who was working overnight last thursday when this fire broke out he has told authorities that he saw three people around the back of the building and that one of them may possibly had something in their hand. the oakland fire department is assisting the atf with this investigation. oakland police department will take on a larger role if the cause of this fire is determined to be criminal. this fire forced shutdown of bart between east bay and san francisco almost all day thursday. it did not reopen until 3:45 that afternoon a lot of long lines for buses and crowded ferries. also plenty of traffic on the highway filled with cars who otherwise with drivers who would have otherwise been taking bart. the commute is look since back to normal but this fire investigation just beginning this morning when atf gets on scene 9:00. katie marzullo, abc7 news. >>>

could you talk about the problems the atf is facing?een a poor stepchild first with the treasury department and then moved in homeland security under the justice department. it has not have permanent leadership for six years. there is no comprehensive real time data base of gun purchases in the united states, which would be absolutely easy to have. i mean, we certainly have the technology to do it. consequently, the only way atf agents can know if there are mass purchases of guns is through this archeological exercise. >> and why is there no database? >> the nra has fought against it. it is prohibited. >> katherine eban, tells with the house republicans are, a handful of democrats who are going to vote against holders today, hold him in contempt, what is their theory of what happened? >> i cannot say what is in their head and the theory has changed as it has been promulgated over months, one of the theories is somehow there was a justice department cover-up of this operation and that they are withholding documents to conceal this from c

colson's statements, we were not aware that dea agents in arizona were aware of the tactics that atf was using. so the investigation is being done by oig. that should answer. we made all our people available. that should answer the question about who knew what for my agency. in the meantime -- >> did mr. colson explain why he made the statements in the first place if he later recanted them? >> i have not had any discussions with mr. colson. i just know that right after there was a reporting of what he had said, he called our headquarters to say he did not say those things and that he recanted his statement. >> so he denied saying them. he didn't say them and take them back. is that what you're telling us? >> i heard both. hopefully the oig is going to interview him -- >> so you're relying on the office of the inspector general to investigate his statements and whether or not it's true that agents working under him were aware of the fact that gun rung was taking place. because we know it was taking place, so it's not all that surprising that some dea agents might know what was going o

sniffing out accelerants, detecting accelerants, i should say, so 22 of those special agents from the atf, special national response team, is actually on scene. they've been combing through the scene for the last couple of hours. you can see just the debris here at the west oakland b.a.r.t. station, what was the senior housing complex under construction went up in flames. that was last thursday. so what they're going to do today is sift through the evidence from the top down, and the goal in all of this is to pinpoint the origin of this fire in hopes of determining whether this was a case of arson. flames shot into the sky burning down an unfinished senior housing complex early thursday morning. the question a week later remains -- did somebody ignite this mass of flames on purpose? the security guard on duty at the time says he was chased away by young men right before the fire. federal investigators confirm they've already interviewed him as well as other witnesses. but a separate case of 22 special agents from atf from across the country have been called in to process the scene. now ju

attorneys office and the atf office there. the inspector general in the process of examining the -- >> to your knowledge, who was the highest ranking official in the administration who knew about the tactics? >> at this point, i could say it started in arizona and i'm not at all certain beyond that who can be said to have been involved with regard to the use -- the knowledge of it, but with regard to the tactics. >> no one other than atf officials in arizona you're saying knew about the tactics used in operation fast and furious before december 15th, 2010, is that right? >> i think that in terms of knowledge of the tactics as opposed to the operations itself, i don't think anybody in washington knew about those tactics until the beginning -- >> speaking of those tactics, when were you first -- when were you first told or became knowledgeable about u.s. officials allowing firearms to be sold to the drug cartels in mexico? and i'd like a specific day if you can give it to us? >> i don't have a specific day. i got a letter from s

dozens of atf agents and

these are the same atf officials you now refuse to call for a public hearing. this morning, we were informed that the demonstration is now asserting executive privilege over a narrow subset. it is indeed a matter of, of documents that remain at issue. as i understand it, the assertion does not cover everything in this category such as a whistle blower documents. the administration has indicated it remains, and i emphasize, remains willing to try to come to a mutual resolution despite its formal legal assertion. i treat assertions of executive privilege very seriously and i believe they should be used only sparingly. in this case, it seems clear the administration was forced into a position by the committees on reasonable assistance on pressing forward with contempt despite the attorney general + good faith offer. mr. chairman, it did not have to be this way. it really didn't. we could have postponed today's vote and accepted the attorney general's offer and obtained additional documents and information. instead, by not honoring the constitution to seek accommod

they send a prosecutor from washington to go to the atf. that prosecutor begins to revisit all the tactics, sending a subtle message -- in fact, a direct message, that not only are we overruling the determination made by the then- u.s. attorney, which suggests this is improper. we are suggesting move it more directly. we have direct language from the prosecutor, that sent memos back to the main justice department, explicitly stating there were over 300 guns that are part of this. we have the knowledge that they know now that guns have been walked. notwithstanding, the effort is made in multiple meetings that go all the way up to continue this kind of operation, with knowledge in the record. i think we can spend a lot of time going down a path in which the fact of the matter is we are going to get there is a distinction. in many ways, and irrelevant distinction. the question was the conduct that took place with the oversight at the highest levels of the justice department, in which we have information, clearly, that there were decisions bein

so it's not all that surprising that some dea agents might know what was going on with regard to atf activity, it was in the same reason, but at the same time, our greater concern is, why supervisors might have told the agents to "back off" when they raised concerns about the wisdom of sending guns to drug dealers and others in mexico that ultimately resulted in the death of a border patrol agent? so you will report back to this committee once you flare the oig, and let us know what actions have been taken to make sure that when people find out that wrongdoing is taking place, that they're freely able to report it to their superiors, and then have some inner agency discussions between atf and dea to say, hey, guys, what are you doing here? giving guns to people that we're trying to stop from smuggling drugs into the united states is not a good idea. >> the oig report will answer the questions about what our folks knew. the oig was given the unilateral authority to invoeft gate. >> we will welcome that. my last minute here, i want to get into the another area of interest. what assista

what we never had a hearing about, we are talking about atf, atf hasn't had a permanent director in six years. why? political obstruction from the other body because they don't want -- they don't want tough gun -- they want weak leadership so yes we are brought to this moment to believe that this is all about really a rogue attorney general who was uncooperative with this branch of government and he needs to be reined in and the ultimate penalty we have available besides impeachment, contempt for the first time ever needs to be meted out. to a man who is otherwise seen broadly as an honorable man who has put himself into this job, who is fighting all kinds of things on our behalf from voter suppression to guess, the drug cartels themselves. and we are going to demean him. we are going to tarnish his reputation access that is how we get the president of the jena. and you can forgive the public for the contempt in which this body is held in poll after poll when we behave this way and when we could have behaved so much differently and gotten so much more done on a bipartisan basis. i yield

let's talk to the people from the atf and the agents and talk to the past attorney general. they're not offering to do that. >> how unusual is it, katherine, that the head of a committee has banned people from coming in to talk about this that have information? >> it's unusual. remember the death of the border agent was in december of 2010. the letter from the ag went out february 4th going i didn't really know, and now he backed up and said i've heard the program. i didn't know. >> the truth is if they didn't also warrant, lie to or misled originally, they wouldn't have gotten to this situation. >> in less than two months -- >> five months before the election. >> over christmas is when this con stern nation and the only thing being debated in the contempt issue is surrounding what happened creating that february 4th letter, which was less than two months after the instigating event. >> keith, what about that? what about the timing of this, and, of course, nancy pelosi says today she thinks it's because he did a good job going after the voter purge? >> this is about getting

the atf says this could be wrapped up by the end of the week and we may get some answers. the heavy equipment moved in as crews start to clear away the mangled mess that was the building's scaffolding. >> some of it is collapsed in. some of it is collapsed out. >> reporter: the atf says this is like a puzzle, one of the most complex it tackles. >> we're gonna take it apart. and we're gonna put it back together. >> reporter: this morning crews began working from the least damaged area to the most damaged. if yesterday was about surveying and mapping, today, tomorrow and the next day will be about heavy lifting and once investigators get past the mess, they will start sifting through what's mex. the investigation is expect to wrap up by sunday and monday and the atf says it's possible we could have some answers. >> the straight answer is we could have an answer. the reason i tell you that way is because there's three determinations in the fire community -- one is arson, the other accidental and the third -- and the thin one is undetermined and sometimes we -- and the third o

you had an instance where one atf agents testified at this hearing not long ago, a year ago. when you mention the issue of gun control as something that could be done to sort of stop this sort of cross-border issue, immediately congressman issa shut him down and told him that was not relevant testimony and refused to allow him to discuss that. how do you say you're concerned about stopping the problems if you're not willing to do something about it? of course it's political and skeptical. susan, you may agree with me. this may backfire against the republicans. >> it is political, and nancy pelosi's comments were highly political. this probably could have been decided several months ago, so you can't blame it all on issa for the timing of trying to plan it in june. he's been asking for this information for a long time. the administration's been dancing around it for a long time, but to go to keith's point, could this backfire? i think they're winning the headlines now, but this is a slippery road. this is something the republicans have to be very careful about. >> you think th

. >> i have a february 4th letter denying the atf ever walked guns. i don't have the letter, but that letter was formally withdrawn. i thank you. i take us back to this the pickford issue and that d discrimination issues. we discussed pickford then. i posed the question that in the farm bill of 2008 consistent with i believe your testimony and also statement made personally to me by secretary vilsack that the farm bill authorized the know goegss and agreements that lays out in term os of $1.25 billion to be distributed to black farmers who have claims of discrimination. the authorization is $100 million. that's to cap that for all of settlements there to there. now i see not only is it not capped at $100 million. it's been expanded to $1.25 billion. and we have three other cases out here since that period of time. garcia versus vilsack. love versus vilsack and when i total them up it's $1.33 billion in this order for garcia. for a total of all together $4.93 billion poised to having been distributed or to be distributed under these discrimination case

and the atf is looking through the evidence and sifting for gold. >> it is careful. methodical and it will take awhile. >> in the shadow of the bar tracks, they began their search. 22 members of the atf response team. >> they with local responders got their first up close look at the mangled mess this fire left behind. >> these are the best. the. >> the team you are looking at is trained in fire and detection. >> they are mappers. fire, and chemical engineers. even lyle la flew in for the job. accelerant dog who can detect up to 20 different types of chemicals. find out where and how the fire started. >> he will excavate the entire site. >> yes, if you know what the project looked like. it was four stories above the concrete slab. >> the four stories collapsed down on the concrete slab and now we have to sift through all floors to go through the origin. >> they will ease the financial and manpower told this type of investigation. can take object local agencies. when oakland called, they responded. >> unfortunately due to the instability of the building we had to wait

who is responsible for not informing atf agents in mexico about the program. who is responsible sponsor not informing the mexican government and approving the trafficking of guns across the border, questions like that. the problem is, the reason why eric holder ex-attorney general, was subpoenaed, was because in may 2011, about a year ago, testified before congress for the first time about fast and furious and was asked, at what point did you find out about operation fast and furious. at that point he said i probably learn about operation fast and furious a few weeks ago. we fast forward the fall and memos surface, five only them, showing he addressed directly to attorney general eric holder, talking about operation fast and fewer you dated july and august 2010, nearly a year before he claimed he knew for a few weeks. so,. >> host: is it clear he saw those memos? he claim his didn't. however they're addressed directly to the attorney general. >> host: any of his writing on them? >> guest: at this point there is not. >> host: that would be one way of proving he

you know, the atf director effectively reports to the deputy attorney general. this e-mail would have circulated to them. we would like to know not just where did he send it how about talked about it because that is a point at which shortly after february 4 they should have known that that february 4 letter was untrue. >> chris: congressman cummings we will get to the whole question of nelson because it is important in a little bit. let me just ask you in this overall question do you believe that the house is going to vote failing a.b. agreemen agree --g an agreement is going to vote holder in contempt and this would be the first time in history that either house has ever voted the attorney gener l general, the chief law enforcement officer of the land in contempt. what do you think of this kind of action? >> first of all, i think it is extremely unfortunate and i absolutely tonight think that we need to be at that place. you know, over a year ago chairman issa accused holder of authorizing these tactics and nothing could be further from the truth from the evide