Transcripts For CSPAN2 Hearing On Incident With U.S.Park Police Protesters 20240712

Hearing record if there submitted to the court by piping today or at the close of hearing, whichever comes first. Hearing no objections comes order. Without objection the chevy also declare a recess subject to the call of the chair. As described in the notice statement and documents or motions as described in the notice, statement, documents or motions must be submitted to the electronic repository at additionally, please note that as with our fully inperson meeting members are responsible for the own microphones. As with our fold in person meetings members can be muted by staff only to avoid inadvertent background noise. Anyone present at the hearing today must wear a mask covering their mouth and nose. The speaker of the house and the sergeant at arms acting upon the recommendations of the attending physician require face coverings from all indoor gatherings over 15 minutes in length such as committee meetings. Accordingly, to maintain decorum and protect the safety of members and staff the chair will not recognize any member in this hearing room to speak who was not wearing a mask. According to house rule 17, Committee Rule 3d the chair retains the right of recognition of any number who wishes to speak or offer a motion. The right includes the responsible to maintain decorum. As permitted by the sergeant at arms, titans, the chair will make exceptions for members briefly removing the masks to facilitate lipreading by user death or hard of hearing as im doing at present. Finally, members or witnesses are experienced technical problems should inform Committee Staff immediately. With that i recognize myself for the Opening Statement here Minneapolis Police officer pressed his knee on the neck of the george floyd for eight minutes and 46 seconds. For eight minutes and 46 seconds we all have witnessed the slow and painful death of mr. Floyd. And it has created a demanding anguished cry for action to do with the legacy of racism in this country, and it is that cry that is risen all across the nation. Thousands of americans have taken to the street to offer a strong declaration that is really a plea for basic humanity that black lives matter. They protest to honor the all too many black men, women, and children whose lives have been affected, cut short at the hands of racism and brutality. They protest to demand change and to demand that their Constitutional Rights be upheld and call upon government for systemic response to the systemic racism that in success as a legacy. Astonishingly instead of honoring this outcry for justice this administration answer demands to End Police Brutality with more Police Brutality. On the afternoon of june 1, President Trump called state governors and paraded them for not being aggressive enough, saying, quote, you have to dominate. If you dont dominate you are wasting our time. He made clear this is a war, us against the protesters. Of course he was probably a special anger after all found out that he had been treated to the white house bunker the night before. That same afternoon overwhelmingly Peaceful Protesters gathered at Lafayette Square park, at lafayette where this the other Law Enforcement, like the perimeter of the party band around 6 30 p. M. No half half hour before d. C. Curfew, we take into effect, the park police and the Law Enforcement partner suddenly moved in on the protesters, Peaceful Protesters, bystanders and members of the press wolcott up in a chaotic barrage of shields, batons, horses, projectiles and tear gas. The militarized assault even had people from the historic st. Johns church. Neighbor to the widest and a friend of president for many years. Clergy and church staff who were handing out water were reportedly pushed off their own patio by officers. Once everybody had been forcibly expelled from the socalled battle space, the world witnessed something even more incredible. President trump accompanied by the attorney general and other white house advisers, and should be at a top military brass, strolled through the park to std with a bible for a brief photo op, and st. Johns had no idea the president was going to do this. Peaceful protesters, church and press all fell victim to this administrations violet and senseless operation. Remarkably, these victims also embody our three free main st. Is protected by the First Amendment, freedom of speech, freedom of the some become a freedom of freedom of the press. The Trump Administration is discriminate to explain how this happen, often contradicting itself. Sample Video Evidence and the accounts of people at the scene, people who felt the batons hit their bodies and amoco munitions burnt their eyes. What fortunate to have some of those people here as Witnesses Today as well as the bishop who presides over saint john itself i want to thank all of you for giving it time to help us answer the many questions still surrounding this indefensible attack on our own people and our basic freedoms. I now would like to turn to the Ranking Member, mr. Bishop, for his Opening Statements. You are recognized. Thank you for wherever you are. I know that when democrats were in the minority they used to object to some of the titles i which we have gave our hearings. You guys have learned very well from that. I appreciate that. Not only is that better . Not only have you come up with new titles that are unique for yourselves but this one is especially inflammatory and pejorative so congratulations all that. There are issues that need to be discussed. That said, we have serious issues to address in that the president and we would be selling our society very short were we to ensure without ensuring their full truth as to what is going on that is recorded in our history, not just a topic and biased view. And, unfortunately, that means that this is hearing as far as understanding the truth of what went on and coming up with a good history is going to be invalid. To the witnesses will be hearing today are involved in litigation or investigations and a few even before any of that started which may be legal but its quite highly questionable. And invitation was given to some in the park service who volunteered to come in later after the litigation. Back had at least begun but that was rejected and instead we decided to move ahead with what can only be described as really good political theater. I mean, there are questions that need to be answered. Theres a question of why the police moved prior to the curfew actually existing. There are questions of why the d. C. Mayor decide to put a curfew on in the first place. There are questions was this part of the plan that was established 48 hours prior to the event, or not . There are questions of why three warnings with the decibel level that is equivalent to a jet aircraft taking off were not heard by people or with actually there and when were they . Theres a question about the amount of violence that took place. Protest as we all know our legal, but arson is not. Destruction of property is not. Attacking police is not. We do know that in the park Service Place within a period of two weeks there were 50 policeman that were attacked, that were harmed that were injured. Police went to hospital prison was to conduct surgery at the time. All of those are legitimate questions and all of those legitimate questions are not going to be addressed in this Committee Hearing today. Its simply the structure is not designed to do that. The structure is not designed to come up with a historical statement. The structure is designed to come up with good drama. Like on the flight back here, i was able to watch three movies, two of the more historical dramas. Historical fiction. They were well done and what we are attempting to do today would fit nicely into that genre of activities. The other was a musical. I wish you could do that when. That win was more enjoyable. But the democrats here have never do something that will not be substantiated, that is not going to be historical, that is really a distraction. It is political theater as an attempt to do the trick so mr. Grijalva, for you and what consumer this job very well. I would urge you to become producers of movies. You can do extremely well in that area. But please dont try to write a textbook because you are leaving too many questions out that need to be part of endured and need to be part of the answers. With that i yield back. The gentleman yields back, and now i will introduce the witnesses. Let me begin with keyshawn mcdonald, d. C. Resident and was peaceful protester on the day of the event. Let me remind the witnesses that under our Committee Rules they must limit their oral statements to five minutes, but their entire statement will appear in the hearing record. When you begin the timer will begin and i will turn orange when you have one minute, remain at a recommended members and witnesses joining remotely use active speaker thumbnail view so they may pin the timer on your screen and see members in the room. With that, mr. Mcdonald, welcome. The time is yours, sir. Chairman grijalva, Ranking Member bishop, and members of this committee on national resources, my name is Kishon Mcdonald and 03 nine euros resident of North Eastern washington, d. C. Have been a resident here for the past five years and is one reason and ohio. I honorably serve my country in the u. S. Navy on the uss as a human third class. Im a plate with United Airlines as mechanic at the airport appreciate invitation to share my experience with you today. On june 1 i decided to join in a peaceful protest against Racial Injustice. I know there was a curfew imposed for that evening so with that as part of my usual run and planned to run back home by the curfew time of 7 p. M. I arrived around 6 00 p. M. I observed military vehicles come uniform soldiers have blocked off street and huge police present i begin recording [inaudible] mr. Mcdonald, try to continue again if you dont mind. Thank you. Okay. I arrived around 16 and observed blocked off street and huge police present i begin recording the scene for my sink is allowed to record this moment in history. Secondly from a safety because trump had made threats of vicious dogs to be use used on protesters. I walked from 16th directly towards Lafayette Park and observed a huge group of diverse Peaceful Protesters chanting for george floyd and for change. It was an overwhelming experience and it was powerful to be part of it. The chanting continued around 6 00, 6 25 p. M. When officers started approaching us as we stood on the north side of Lafayette Park along the fencing. The officers stopped for a few minutes about ten or 15 george weah and they moved closer as if we are posing a threat, which we were not. They got directly in front of us to the point we could have a conversation with them. They got very close to us in the threatening kind of way. They give no instructions and just a show of force. We stood our grantor we told him we are peaceful and wanted no trouble. We were met with silence. At no time dedicate any instructions to move and we did your instructions, i wouldve moved onto the crowd on to the crowd would have mood because you are very peaceful during the entire time before we were attacked. Right before 6 30 30 p. M. I observed a light a police in riot cop to coming in for my love. At this point the soldiers were communicating but it was yelling move move. They were not walking. There were pushing and running towards us with their shields and people started to panic. It was confusion. I could not understand what was going on, why the respondent in the matter seemed was way before curfew, 30 minutes before curfew. I enter a black male fall to the grant. A protester circle the police to stop somatic could assist him. The officer stopped brief on the south side of st. Johns church. We grabbed the mail and started to retreat. Police started throwing tear gas and flash grenades at us for no reason. We were retreating. We did need any help retreating. Using weapons on us was ridiculous. This just made the situation dangerous. Even before the officers charged us or fired their weapons it had been peaceful. This is most important like in the world. We are in front of those powerful governing has in the world its citizens are being attacked by their own government just for asking to protest for change, i was scared, confused and angry. I did this group of demonstrators were not soldiers. This wasnt a battle station test but are similar to a boot camp to. It is unacceptable to treat protest that way and unsteady and nation. Once i got home i reviewed my footing and pictures to them was that i noticed use park police as an office for would force us up from the left as listed along the fence in Lafayette Park. I joined a loss of choice the attack on the and of demonstrators so, so what would be held accountable in this moment is a forgotten history. The dogs and Water Cannons from 60 center to teargas and flash banks today. It hurts as a black man to see as 2020 we saw the government that would do this over again or something seem so right to protest about. The damage was done committed the president decide to violent a First Amendment right. How was at the kk can hold a rally in d. C. Be protected but when a black minister we put this innovative and we are attacked . How could you not receive this attack on the black lives Matter Movement . I served his country of one could enjoy the freedoms granted to us under this constitution. If he has a right to be there was me. I should not have been forced to move and attack with tear gas and flash banks as i was i was peacefully protesting for change. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, and let me ask amelia brace, correspondent, seven news australia, time is yours, please. Thank you, chairman grijalva, Ranking Member bishop, and members of the committee for the opportunity to speak today. For more than three years ive been the u. S. Corresponded to seven does come one of australias largest commercial broadcasters. I have been called to testify about my experience covering protests in Lafayette Square park, particularly the incident in which my cameramen tim myers and i were physically assaulted by park police on june 1 while we are broadcasting live to australia with hundreds of thousands of people watching including our families. This video which formed a part of the coverage and australia shows the incident from multiple angles. Police begin the attack. Runabout a block and police moved in with rubber bullets to my cameramen has been hit. Weve also seen teargas being used. Here we go. They are moving through again. This is exactly what it looks like. Exactly what it looks like. [shouting] hit with a shield in the stomach, a punch to the leg, another officer lashes out with a batter as we run trying to get out of an early surge. We were media but they dont care. They have been and is come. They chases down the street as you can see. They were firing these rubber bullets iw1. Theres teargas now. Were really surrounded by the police and you saw the way they dealt with my cameraman. Quite violent. They did not care who their target at the moment. We begin our coverage went five for fib. The atmosphere with passion of the peaceful. In fact, it was far less tense than the night before. As we prepared for 6 30 p. M. Live broadcast broadcast we noticed white police line speaking to four people are not alarmed by the site as it initially resembled the enforcement of curfew the night before and we still had more than half an hour before this curfew was due to take effect, regardless, members of the needy were exempt from curfew restrictions. We did not hear any warning from Law Enforcement that the area was to be cleared or that the curfew would be enforced early. Suddenly the police line searched forward. We would back along with many protesters. Police lining of the park use automatic weapons to fire nonlethal rounds. Tim was hit with a projectile at the back of the neck and our equipment was damaged. After this first surge we took cover behind a tree stm try to get the net damaged life transmitter working. We saw the line the police start walk towards us at a walking pace. To ensure we were completely t of the way of both lisa and protesters we moved to the fence line where we are sheltered by a concrete wall and off the sidewalk. We were clearly a news crew. Most notably tim was holding a large television camera. We were also surrounded by other members of the bead and given no directive by police to move on. As a begin reporting live align the police suddenly and without warning begin charging forward at a sprinting pace knocking protesters to the ground. A park Police Officer who was passing us stopped, turned towards ten and granted in the chest and stomach with the edge of his right shield, causing ten to keel over and drop to the officer then took a a step bac, pause, then punched his aunt directly into the front of tims camera grabbing the lens. As this have tim and i were both repeatedly shouting the word media. A second officer appeared to intervene giving us the opportunity to move. As i was running away, a third officer pushed through the group going out of his way to strike me with the truncheon. As we tried once again to put the advancing lines of police, loud flash banks boomed around us and some sort of chemical irritant and plumes of smoke filled the air. I can be heard screaming as i was struck by nonlethal projectiles directly to my legs and backside. The incident prompted australias Prime Minister direct our ambassador to the United States to seek a full investigation. As a reporter i have no interest in becoming the story but over recent weeks many of us have been left with no choice. Ive been shocked to see how many journalists have been attacked, beaten and detained just for doing their jobs. Covering protests that scary unavoidable risk of the medias role is essential. We dont just have a right to be there. We have an obligation to as australian journalists we are the eyes of the ears of our people. In this case witnessing civil unrest in the capital of our most powerful and closest ally. It is crucial to democracy that journalist be about to do their job freely and safely and that is certainly something we should expect in the world latest democracy. The worlds greatest democracy. [inaudible] Public Interest what George Washington university. Professor, time is yours. Taking mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee for the honor to appear before you today about the controversy of the clearing of Lafayette Park. For roughly 14 years i was one of the league counsels in the world bank protest litigation produced the guidelines and case law currently applied in mass demonstration events like the one in Lafayette Park. Much of that Litigation Center on the mass arrests of hundreds of individuals in Pershing Park which is not far from Lafayette Park in 2002. I appear today in the hopes of offering some legal perspective on the governing standards that apply in these cases and also the facts that court would likely look at in reviewing these allegations which are quite serious. In appearing i should disclose that i prettily discuss this matter. I criticize the level of force used to remove the protesters from the area and called for a congressional investigation into the operation. Also stated that night that i thought the attack on the australian journalists appeared entirely unjustified and unlawful. I continue to hold those opinions as i discuss in my written testimony. My written test my looks at the motivation, the authority and the means used in the operation. Two points on nomenclature i referred to the operation as a clearing operation to establish the perimeter to create the fence line. This process appeared to take about 2226 minutes from the timeline that i reviewed, but as this committee has entitled appearing as a java did in his Opening Statement, were all referring to Lafayette Park Lafayette Square park. Obviously were not talking about just the park itself. The protesters were removed from the park. There was a temporary fence line. Most of the activity occurred on h st. And said the protesters were pushed back to i believe i street. The park police argued they were creating this perimeter so they could establish the fence line but obviously we talk about Lafayette Park as was a fight of this year he will talk about a larger area. And by the way, that is an area of what i think would work congressional review of how far those protesters were pushed back and wide. As to the photo op allegation, that goes to the motivation behind this operation. I wont dwell on it that much. Advertisement indicates this may be case where a correlation does not mean causation. There is been a number of statements in timelines present that indicate that the plan to clear the park, create the fence line was, in fact, propose two days earlier. It was submitted on sunday night i believe. It was approved in some form on monday morning. Order went out around two. The National Guard apparently was delayed in arriving at pushed that operation past five and it was a delay in the fencing material. So whether all of that is true or not is exactly why we need a congressional inquiry, and that is an area that i would encourage the committee to look at. In terms of order itself, just because there was damage and there was violence the day before does not mean that an order is per se lawful or that was done in a lawful way. In the world bank protest litigation and of the cases weve established guidelines that you must have three audible warnings that are spaced apart. You must also give ample opportunity for dispersal. In the world bank case we had the encirclement of everyone in Pershing Park, freedom plaza. Even if they had to give those warnings given that of inevitability themselves. In this case it does appear that three warnings were given but that is based on the governments account and once again that is an issue for you to look at. Also does appear that protesters could remove themselves because the were not in circle. However, if you look at these films there was a very rapid approach of the line to the perimeter line which is beyond the fence line. That line was brought back to the fence lines later. That rapid pushing forward is something that is a legitimate question for the street to ask, was there enough time . Was it necessary to use level of force that it did . On the level of force as a testimony goes through in detail, courts have largely deferred to an objective reasonable officer in determining what force should be used. This comes out of the grand case, called the grand analysis. I point out that the of District Courts have ruled recently against the use of tear gas and pepper spray it as a semitestimony that distinction between tear gas and pepper spray is really not that essential. Because courts tend to group them together. Important question is was there a reasonable use of those devices. My summary ultimately concludes that the order through the park is probably going to be held as lawful, that the government does have the right to clear the park. Whether the means used to play the park were lawfully something that this committee and other committees may be able to shed some light on. Many courts would express concern over the rapid escalation of force, particularly in a protest involving police abuse allegations. And for that reason i cant commit congresspeople to get this. I do have to answer any questions on the legal aspects should members have those. Thank you. Thank you very much, and let me now, our last witness, the right reverend Mariann Budde, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of washington. Bishop, the time is yours. Thank you. Thank you, chairman grijalva, Ranking Member bishop and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. As you said my name is Mariann Budde tick i serve as bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of washington which counts among its parishes st. Johns Lafayette Square. I appear today to express my deep concern about the events of june 1 when our government resorted to acts of violence against Peaceful Protesters, and prevent clergy and lay members of the church from exercising their ministry on the grounds of st. Johns. We in the Episcopal Church believe that the issues of racial and social justice are core tenets of the christian faith. The bible teaches all human beings are created in the likeness and image of god. As children of god, all are to be treated with equal dignity and respect. Embedded in our nations history and institutions is a shameful abuse of black americans and other persons of color justified by the sinful notion of white supremacy, that whiteness is the human standard from which all other human beings deviate and are somehow less human, less worthy of equal treatment. And as christians we are called by god to rectify that injustice. Our faith compels us to join those around the country and the globe who have engaged in nonviolent protests to call for an end to racist policies and practices, and is a clearly, with one voice, that black lives matter. Now for episcopalians the issue of Racial Justice is a shameful part of our history, or we were once the church of slaveholders. And like the white house, st. Johns Lafayette Square was built with enslaved labor. Yet, throughout our history, our noblest members have fought for the liberation of the enslaved, all human and civil rights for all people and to be a church that welcomes all. We have continued to struggle to come to terms with the racist past and legacy and that of American Society as a whole we strive strive to be a voice for peace and the fundamental dignity of all human beings, knowing that at our most faithful we stand on the site of justice. And so we stand today at this article moment. When nonviolent protesters began to gather a Lafayette Square as a church we decided to be present to you at our voice to the call for justice come to stand with an minister to all other Peaceful Protesters gathered there. This was and is for us an act of faith. Our ministry was suddenly and forcefully interrupted by government officials. First on june 1 when the government violently did protesters and clergy alike from the area surrounding st. Johns, and then in the coming days when the government denied as access to the church to conduct the vigil. These actions, and in particular the use of violence against Peaceful Protesters, were antithetical to the teachings of the bible and what we stand for as a as a church. When our government announced its intention to use military force against american citizens in the rose garden that day, t struck me as an escalation of violence that could cause unnecessary suffering. Then to see the government carried out that threat moments later, i was horrified. It was dehumanizing and in violation of the protesters right to be in that space. Then when the president held up a bible outside our church, as if to claim the mantle of Spiritual Authority over what had just transpired, i knew that i had to speak. Nowhere does the bible condone the use of violence against the innocent, especially those who are standing up for justice. It was a misappropriation of scripture, and a usurpation of our sacred space. I raise these issues to call attention to an abuse of power on the part of our government. Which is also at the heart of the larger struggle for Racial Justice. While it is true there are the instances of vandalism at st. Johns in recent weeks, we cannot let those events and others overshadowed the fundamental cause of justice. People across our nation are united as never before. In recognizing that way we police our communities need to change. The way we treat people of color in this country needs to change. Yes, we care deeply about our churches and buildings, but in the end buildings can be replaced, windows can be replaced. Pillars can be repainted. We can never bring back the lives that have been lost due to horrific police violence. These deaths are the true outrage here george floyd, Breonna Taylor, elijah mclean, and so many more. I dont want anything that is happened at st. Johns either before the protest or in the weeks since to distract us from that fact. Black lives matter and our faith compels us to seek equal justice for all people. Thank you. I look forward to answering any questions you might have. [inaudible] the testimony. Let me now turn to the questions and recognize mr. Huffman for any questions he might have. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman, thanks so much to the witnesses for great testimony. I want to begin by taking issue respectfully with the Ranking Members mocking of the title of this hearing. The hearing is titled the u. S. Park Police Attack on Peaceful Protesters at Lafayette Square. That is not dramatization. That is fact. That is exactly what happened. If there was a shred of evidence to support the gas lighting counter narrative that weve heard from this administration, i would think that the gentleman across the aisle wouldve called a fact witness to offer that narrative. We got a very thoughtful explanation of the Legal Framework from professor turley. Thank you, professor for that. We didnt get in fact, witnesses to support this gas lighting and think that speaks volumes. Before we get into further questions i want to express my disappointment that at least so far our friends across the aisle, apparently no longer have the same concerns about heavyhanded Police Tactics, militarization and other police abuse by department of the interior agencies. Concerns that used to speak compassionately about when barack obama was president. Apparently those concerned disappeared when donald trump became president but some of us are old enough to remember the hearings that republican majority held in 201314 entitled now were talking about those incendiary titles were used to see, entitled threats, intimidation and bullying by federal land managing agencies. And at the time one of our republican colleagues described, i quote, these type of very have it handed swat like teams with nondoj agencies being used as a tip of the spear for federal Law Enforcement. He called it heavyhanded, intimidating to the American People, and said that threatened the trust that is so important between american citizens and their government. That was 2014 after an all white armed militia gathered to stop federal land agency Law Enforcement from confiscating climbing bank is cattle which had been illegally bracing for 20 years. Law enforcement back down because of the heavily armed militia are testing but at the time and then again in 2016 during the armed occupation of the National Wildlife refuge in oregon i similar group, an angry white heavily armed group of protesters we heard it very different tune about federal policing tactics from congressional republicans. Some of them introduce legislation to eliminate Law Enforcement authorities from the blm and the force service on the grounds that these agencies were quote armed to the teeth. They described Armed Police Department to cheer agencies as quote dangers come unnecessary and sending the wrong message pick some of our republican colleagues on this committee were cosponsors to that bill. Talk about defund the police. Republicans in congress were eager to do exactly that to make sure that folks like bundy could continue breaking the law with impunity. Fastforward to the peaceful protests for Racial Justice at Lafayette Square. Peaceful, and on the protests come protesters were met with a response for more aggressive, former militarize and far less necessary and anything used against those white militias in 2014 and 2016. 2016. As our witnesses confirm as any objective person doing the video knows, heavily armed u. S. Park police carried out orders to use chemical agent at other forceful means to clear protesters so the donald trump could have a weird photo op with someones bible. Most people would consider this heavyhanded, intimidating, dangers, and misses her the wrong message, all those exact terms that our republican colleagues used to describe the Police Tactics against white militias when they were defending lawbreaking ranchers in 2014 and 2016. I am disappointed that we dont have the same level of concern from our colleagues across the aisle but we havent heard from many of them so maybe we will hear it. Support they not be silent or openly supportive of this heavyhanded militarized police abuse directed at black people, and those supporting them the work peacefully protesting for Racial Justice. Whats so different about the situation today . The president , the people protesting, and their cost. For our Witnesses Today please note our many members of cogs of people across this country who stand with you and support your rights to protest injustice. This should not have happened to you and were committed to exercising oversight authority, even if some of our colleagues are not sanguine, content with a double standard, standing with President Trump to the bitter end. I yield back. Gentleman yields. Chair recognizes mr. Mcclintock. Sir, the time is short. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I think we need to make a distinction between the right to peaceable assembly, which is sacred and protected under our First Amendment, and violence, arson and vandalism which is not so protected it i think we have got a video of damage done in washington, d. C. In the days leading up to this. I wonder if we could play that . [shouting] protesters have lit a fire. These were the events leading up to the incident on june 1. The secretary of the interior described the situation they were facing thusly, beginning on saturday may 30, the park police wonder state of siege, and regina subject to attack by violent crowds. The incidence are numerous and include u. S. Park Police Officers having their police cars vandalized, being subject to bombardment by lida flares, while tough coccus, rocks, bricks, models and other projectiles and physical assault so violent that today over the area Law Enforcement officers have been injured to include one u. S. Park Police Officer so violently attacked that he required emergency surgery. To describe what happened in washington, d. C. As mostly peaceful protests i think is a lot like describing Scott Peterson as a mostly faithful husband, or al capone as a mostly lawabiding businessman. Professor turley, what are the responsibilities of Peaceful Protesters when a protest turns violent . Thank you, congressman. The way that the courts have addressed this is that they recognize that these protests are, in fact, the display of a First Amendment right, free speech. However, the court has said that areas can be cleared for unpermitted demonstrations if warnings are given and they are not heated, as long as the demonstrators have an avenue by which to exit, which didnt occur. What are the responsibilities of a truly Peaceful Protesters went and assume has been declared unlawful . At that point when theyre asked to leave an area they are required by law to leave. That doesnt go to the means by which you can move them but it certainly means that the order itself to disperse is likely to be held as lawful. Court also do allow for that perimeter to be pushed back if you are assembling Something Like offense, how far that perimeter should be established, the courts look at. The often look at for example, the park police and that would be a legal question to be examined by the courts. What course of action would you recommend to congress . Im sorry . What recommendations would you make to congress . I think that Congress Needs to ask a number of questions. I have listed ten that are standard questions that are used in protest cases, including the essential evidence that we often look to, things like running resumes, to determine what orders were given and when. I encourage congress to do that. They also should take a look as the court will at the level of damage and violence on the other side. The government has argued 100 officers in the area had been injured in the park police say that 50 of their own officers have been injured. Thats a very high level of injury rate for Law Enforcement. Thank you. Thank you. Let me ask chairman of the subcommittee mr. Lowenthal. Thank thank you, mr. Chair. And i want to thank all the witnesses for attending, taking their time to share their experiences while they were there. You know, i worked before again to congress and was an elected official as a Community Organizer and also as an activist in my community. And i know that theres a certain about of risk thats always involved when you stand up in what you believe is right, while protesting or speaking out. So my question is to each of the panelists, first to mr. Mcdonald. Why did you feel that it was worth that risk to be at Lafayette Square that day . Why was it important to you to be there . Well, george floyd was just 46, 47. I am 39. I will be 40 this year so i believe him dine was affecting my life i wanted to make sure i was down there to be part of a peaceful protest to voice inequity and injustice against like people. I followed my duty to be down there and had a chance to be down there. I never had a chance to be at another protest ever saw took it upon my duty to go down and make sure i was protesting for george floyd. Thank you. Ms. Brace, as a reporter why did you feel that it was important to for you to be there that day . As i mentioned in my Opening Statement, its imperative to democracy it journalist be on the ground. Journalists cant work remotely. We cant see whats happening on the frontline of an incident if were standing a block away. So in order to fulfill a role in democracy we have to be standing right in the middle. So i think that we were it was incredibly important in terms of telling the story of what happened that day. Thank you. And bishop, bishop budde, while you were not physically present, you are supportive of people in your diocese who were there and you spoken out here today and publicly about it. Why was it important for them to be there and why was it so important for you to speak out . The issues of Racial Equity and justice are fundamental to the christian faith, and they are of primary importance now in our country. With the inequities, particularly in policing, have become so blatant. To be honest i couldnt have stopped my members from coming because they were so determined to add their voice and the presence to the gathering of nonviolent protest. What we wanted to do as well was to acknowledge our presence, to stand with people, and also to offer whatever we could to ensure greater safety, providing Hand Sanitizer and water and masks even to make sure that whatever we did contributed to the public good while we were making our statement in support of a change in racist practices and policies. Well, i want to thank all of you. Appreciate hearing your stories of why you were there. You know, and your motivation for being there, all of this which is protected under the constitution. I have also a very important question about the events for the administration and im very concerned that no one in the administration has shown up today to answer the questions. But mr. Mcdonald, ms. Brace, they shut bad, i want to thank you for standing up for what is your constitutional right to stand up for, and for standing up for just what is right and just today. And im glad that you spoke out on june 1 and that your speaking out today. I really appreciate your testimony. With that i yield back. The gentleman yields back. Let me turn to the Ranking Member, mr. Bishop. Thank you, thank you, and iso see mr. Lowenthal by video there, and comments that i was doing, unless you are trying out for the role of grizzly athens come i expect you to be without a beard when you come back here. Deal . Almost a deal. Whatever. I would ask you, ask you to grow a beard. [laughing] you would be enthralled with it. [laughing] solo, in light of the statements that were made by mr. Lowenthal, mr. Huffington us will come even though the administration was willing to come and testify but was not necessarily allowed in the timeline that the democrats decide to do let me ask at least but in the record to get some element of dallas to this. First a statement by the park police. This is by chief monahan beginning what he was doing into which includes almost the fact, includes the fact that d. C. Police were injured and that verifies there the were three s that were issued at the time. Also statement by the Natural Parks Service that goes into the memorial and statues that a been in recent weeks, especially her and the district of columbia. And if i could ask unanimous consent to have those placed in the record. Without objection, so ordered. Thank you. I also appreciate, i would appreciate the questions of mr. Huntington but there were no questions. The two issues he mention that took place back in the west were dismissed legally because of excesses by the prosecution of the park service is at that time. I admit that come which is a question we have at hand here, which unfortunately this hearing will not go to because we do not have any of the administration witnesses allowed to be of which could answer those. We do love you, mr. Turley and appreciate your willingness of short notice to come here and try and be an impartial voice policed a voice that is that aside from personal involvement within this particular situation. I think you would only doing that. Let me just go about the concepts of protesters we know the First Amendment guarantees every citizen the right to Peaceful Assembly. Can you define what that Peaceful Assembly would look like . Very briefly. Well, Peaceful Assembly means that you cannot be stopped from appearing in in a demonstratio, protest, gathering, particularly in speaking against the government as long as you comply with the federal and state laws here it does that give you a license to violate laws and obviously doesnt get a license commit arson or any other crime. It also does that give you license to be in an unpermitted space if you are given warnings an opportunity to leave. Thats the position of cases like barnum and chang that i go through in testimony. What you did is to simply elaborated weathers constitutional limits thickly placed on those particular rights. Well, there are limits. Theyre so absolute rights in the constitution, and the courts actually have headed down some really i think quite profound opinions on this. The Supreme Court has talked about how important it is to give breathing room to free speech and protests but is also said that this is not an absolute right. This is a bright it is enjoyed within the confines of federal and state law right. In like 15 seconds or so can you just identify the facts, the conditions that would legally permit Law Enforcement to disperse and Assembly Like happened on h street . Right. The park actually, the day before the park police had already cleared the immediate park area when we talk about Lafayette Park, were talking about a larger area now. And the question was can they push forward that perimeter in order to establish a fence line . In my view the court is likely to find that order to be lawful because of the degree of Property Damage, the injuries to the officers here that order is likely to be upheld. The question is the means used. Was this done properly . Let me go into that specifically because there is the allegation floating out there that this was done for a photo op. I think you mentioned something, can you make a firm connection between the actions and the php opportunity . Or where they the things that t happen to be in a similar time frame . Well, on the Current Record this appears to be a case of correlation without causation, that the attorney general and the head of the park police and others have said that this plan was actually approved 48 hours in advance. They presented evidence that the operation itself was delayed because of the fencing and reinforcements that were brought forward, and they have denied knowledge of the photo op when these orders were given. Three seconds and you did that very well. Thank you, sir. There may be of the question prayer for the record. My time is up. Thank you. Let me recognize the chairman of the subcommittee. Thank you, mr. Chairman. For the record i actually have been pepper spray. Military training by the way. Pepper sprayed, gascony, gas mask training numerous times probably eight times in my life as well as ive had trained with the United States marine corps. So i do have some experience both in the uses of the batons, formations as well as the most important thing, deescalation. What was your position in the navy . I was a human. Say again. A yeoman. What type of training did you receive in terms of if any, in terms of dealing with civilian situations . We never really dealt with the escalation. This was 99. Thank you for your service and thank you participating in the black lives matter protest because it does matter. Mr. Turley, you talk about the legality of the park police being able to clear the area. Do your background in the necessity for the requirement of deescalation . There is training. My background is counsel on protest case. I dont have your experience of dealing directly with things like these chemicals but all departments that in no, the ones ive encountered, supposed be trained in the escalation and that goes to the means. The area that he think that would be useful for the committee to make an inquiry on really was captured in the video when you see the line move rapidly forward. If i was counsel i would look at that as to why the line moved, and also at what point was the last warning given before the line moved forward at the rapid pace . All come back to that. Ms. Brace, did you hear any warnings . None. When you were attacked by this Police Officer, were you resisting . No. Was your cameraman resisting . No. You had your back to them in front member and you were fling. Thats correct. Mr. Turley, as a lawyer what was that park Police Officer doing when he was attacking a fleeting protester. Was as i i think that attack was unlawful. From the video it seems clear to me that any officer could have seen that the australian journalists were, in fact, journalist. They identified themselves quickly as little. I thought i saw Media Credentials on that. But also they knew there were journalists in the area, so this one doesnt strike me as a very close call. This was im not trying to pass out what makes regular question. Mr. Mcdonald, did you hear any warning sounds . No. Ms. Brace, in the day before had you heard warnings before one in the protest zone . Not that i can recall. One of the things, mr. Chairman i would like the training manual for these Police Officers. When i was in the marine corps when i did controlled training i would never have been told to rush forward with the baton swinging. I wasnt it could create a stampede of people, its very dangerous. Number two, it is tactically stupid to do that. Because your lines are exposed. The only reason youd actually move in that manner is pure intimidation which is not the purpose of a deterrent front. Youre trying to keep people away. The way to have done it is got it online and move slowly and slowly and slowly that would have allowed the protesters time to realize whats going on they would have had the opportunity to escape, and would not have made this illegal there is a purpose to this and it was law and order for the president before he came out to hold his photo op. With that, youll back my time. The gentleman yields, you are recognize her. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I was listening to the testimony and watching the video thus far, it appears like there is note monopoly on blame here. I would like to be absently certain we get the entire story. I think weve got a video that shows some assaults on Law Enforcement. If we have that could be played that please . [background noises] [inaudible] [inaudible] [background noises] [background noises] [inaudible] telling you to back off, back off im telling you to back off. [inaudible] and hopefully we can solve this. [inaudible] in the remaining time first of all had the opportunity to travel, work be in a lot of nations around this world, a lot of then roll of lives is not enjoyed. Generally speaking the lack of prosperity reflects that. That is why this entire situation is incredibly troubling to me. I like to ask mr. Turley, as unfortunate as it is, from a legal perspective, can you define what Peaceful Assembly looks like . What are the parameters of that . And where does that cross the line from not being legal . This is on the earlier question work courts tend to define what constitute peaceful is often determining qualified immunity decisions. Was the officer correct in the use of the level of force in the case . And the courts have said this deferred officers because of what the court referred to as making split second judgments that are unasserted and rapidly evolving. That is how the Supreme Court referred to it. So with the courts look at is whether the protesters ignored orders to disperse and whether they were obstructive or violence not this committee will have to look at the period after warnings were given, before the line moved forward, what were those officers facing . That is what a court will do. It will demand very clear evidence on both sides to determine whether that is a peaceful situation where this is not warranted and the police escalated it or wait whether they were responding to a threat to their safety and the fate safety of others. Thank you for that and theres one of the things id like you to address if you could assuming we can get some good peaceful dialogue here, what step is through very quickly the Legal Process for how should we be doing this . If we want to change some of these monuments how should we be doing that . There been great suggestions in both houses on Police Reform including the National Database and the issue many of us have raised in the past. In terms of this incident, i gave ten questions ob a useful start for this committee. It would get to the base information you need including actual contemporary calls made by officers, the socalled running resume evidence. In a protest case that is the first thing we ask for is the running resume. Also, you have objective sources injuries for protesters, those things can be acquired. The other thing i would encourage you to get up very quickly is non u. S. Park police and their agencies and roles. I can tell you in terms of evidence thats the stuff im most concerned with. It is the stuff thats most difficult to get. You may be able to get a lead on that for what are called ml use. These are memorandums of understanding are often cut with non federal agencies or non part police personnel. Those may give you an indication of who was involved at that scene. I can tell you in the purging park case, we started out with the park police, the d. C. Police, the secret service and ended up with a long list of units that we had no idea were present. Steve x thank you, mr. Chairman i yield back. The gentleman yields. Chairman of the subcommittee you are recognize sir. Thank you chairman and thank you for all the witnesses for being here today. I want to say reverend thank you so much for your testimony, i think you may have turned a catholic to an episcopalian today. [laughter] i will tell you what i am certainly here as a role in the member of congress is my faith, as he said so eloquently, is to seek equal justice for all people so thank you so much for that. I want to apologize you were called a vandal, arsonist or other. Likewise, mr. Mcdonald and ms. Brace as well. You are there at Lafayette Square on june 1. Mr. Mcdonald i want to thank you for your service to the United States navy. Im sure when you enlisted you took a very similar oath of office that we did. When we took the oath of office to be a member of congress to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. And in that first article on the congress will make the law with the freedom of speech or of the press or the right for people to peacefully assemble, if you could say why you were there that day to peacefully assemble . I share the same views as a black lives Matter Movements and everyone is down there. On june 1 it was peaceful protest when the middle i got down in the middle we were attacked. We were chanting for injustice we did not hear warnings to move i was there to strictly priestly unchecked peacefully protest. You are exercising your rights, your Constitutional Rights as a citizen they had sworn previously to upheld. And you feel those were a bridge that day . Can you say that again . Do you feel those rights were infringed upon that day . Yes, absolutely most definitely. As an objective citizen from another country, ms. Brace, sally sells well . Yes it is. I guess, professor turley, i also sit on the agate committee, and i have been taught that if something looks like a duck count sounds like a duck walks like a duck it probably is a duck alright . The idea that the white house had no idea that day that the park had to be cleared, is beyond. Just all the sudden the president is making his speech and amended use of the greater way behold the park is cleared. He have gone out there to have his photo of the park hadnt been cleared . What i suggested my testimony is first about i do think you need to establish that. And you can establish that. The account from the attorney general and others is that the order like the plan was improved in the morning on monday there is a delay on fencing with National Guardsmen all that can be confirmed by this committee. That does not necessarily answer the question that i raise in my testimony and the of those are lies, would be was there any last minute discussion whether this to be delayed. In my view it should have been delayed it should have been delayed until the following morning. But it is at that juncture that twilight moment if i was counsel that is what i would be looking at. I would also be looking at whether the perimeter size pushed to i street was impacted all that should be attainable by the committee. And we will look at that thank you so much. We have seen video from los angeles and new york and chicago on may 31 and june 26, is that all relevant the peaceful protest that was going on on june 1 . The court would issue it happened in Lafayette Park the day before. Two have out the day of . The day of his most important criteria the court will be looking. There were clergy offering medical support. Okay . So it was a kumbaya moment it was a Peaceful Assembly. What happened the day before justify the order to clear the park and establish the fencing including the wider perimeter. Then i think it would focus on what was actually happening at that moment as to whether the level of force deployed was lawful and reasonable. That is where your point is a salient one. I think that is where this committee could make some Real Progress in defining for. Thank you so much. I do have another question about the secret police but we will get to those another day, a yield. The gentleman yields let me recognize, you are recognize or pursue my you mr. Chairman i appreciate all the witnesses nobody could say the video of george floyd being killed and not be moved. Theres no question about that i greatly appreciate the floyd family, urging peaceful protests and not violence, that is not what they wanted for georges legacy. So there are important issues that need to be addressed here. Mr. Mcdonald, thank you for your service in the navy to our country. I have seen from your statement how long we in the navy . Nine months. Nine months could you run into prejudice in the navy, racial prejudice . No i did not. In your statement you mentioned that the Police Stopped pushing forward at the urging of protesters when the man had fallen there and was be in trent began using less lethal force. In chung with a black man that fell in my statement . Yes he fell me asked the police to stop. It took us a minute to get him up and move them as soon as we got them up and militant they started running at us. They did not stop to help us. Stu met what force of the using at that time . Severe neck their batons and shield. Nesbitt had been rather traumatic i was the you in your cameraman came prepared with the goggles with your experience youve been in a lot of protest around the world, we appreciate your coverage, just looking back through june 8, apparently just through june 8 there are 17 people died and incident stemming from the unrest from George Floyds death, including these people. I dont how anyone could not beat move since she wasnt shot by the police it was one of you it was one of the protesters, when protest get out of hand people get hurt is there a point you can tell this is about to turn violent . You couldnt never be certain obviously can certainly feel tension rising i have never had any reason to expect violence from the police. You cant be sure when you see bricks being thrown at the police recently if you are civilian in the way, you may be hit by a protesters brick. Its got to be hard to tell. I sought nothing on june 1 that made me feel any way alarmed before the police surged forward. We out at the protest the night st. Johns had a fire started . Yes the night of may 31. Did you see how anybody got into the church to start the fires . No i did not. Could you understand why Law Enforcement might be concerned about others getting into the church either legally or illegally to cause more damage . I cannot speak to the motivation of the police but as they pointed out there is the importance of distinction. I have said in my on june 1 that question at the moment i did not see anything that would warrant the movement of police. And bishop, i appreciate her efforts at social justice. What you think is the hope for those in washington d. C. s protesting . I cannot speak for all protesters, i think black lives matter is the way we are expressing a collective cry that we have equity in our policing, black and brown persons can expect the same level of treatment and safety when they are encountering police this amana for all practices to cause black and brown people to cheat fear for their lives when encountering the very people who are meant to keep you safe . Thank you, mr. Chairman theres africanamerican minister who set our hope is in jesus christ, i yield back. The gentleman yields, let me recognize the gentle lady from new mexico. You are recognize. Thank you mr. Chair, thank you for convening today thank you to all of the witnesses for being here today our colleagues have said it already the events of june 1 will go down is one of the darkest days of this presidency. That is saying something for a president who is put children in cages, protected his friends from prosecution and opened our election to foreign interference. Attacks on the constitution are not new for this president but clearing a peaceful demonstration for a photo up with his cabinet is an unbelievably new low. We will rightly focus on the actions of june 1 but we cannot lose sight of the larger moments we are all in. Todays hearing is also about a larger trend of systemic racism in which militarized police inseminate and kill and committees of colors while defendant from prosecution for the president s recent actions brought that Excessive Force to the fore in a new and unconstitutional way. This is by no means an isolated incident. While i respect the work federal Civil Servants do every single day, there are times they do things our nation is not proud of. In november, 2017 the u. S. Park police murdered just over the river in arlington while he drove his car, still, sam is not had justice. Earlier this year in my state of new mexico, charles engaged lawrence was driving back to his home in colorado when he was murdered by u. S. Park ranger on one of our National Park spray spoke to his mothers attorney recently but i could not explain why that killer still patrolled one of our National Parks and why he had not been brought to justice. Today, we are here to talk about the president and his illegal and unconstitutional actions. We also need to discuss power, to discuss fear, to discuss unequal treatment under the law. We did not choose to live in a society where the president wields the power of our government to break up peoples protest anymore and communities of color across the nation choose to live in fear of unequal policing. Try to what breakdown and norms lets try to understand what went on with the clearing and law fails park and lets look at the systemic oppression is same fear and power to control and killing communities across our country. Because i have stated, this is not an isolated incident. Mr. Mcdonald and ms. Bryce, mr. Mcdonald you can go first. At any time did you see any park police or Law Enforcement officers stop or double back to provide medical assistance or facilitate medical assistance when somebody was clearly injured . Ms. Bryce . No i did not. And again, mr. Mcdonald and ms. Bryce do you expect Law Enforcement to provide basic care and or call call medical assistance when someone is hurt . Yes, i do. Why do you have that expectation . Im sorry . Again i would expect the police to protect civilians and also working. Thank you so much part of the mission part of the National Park police is to protect lives. It is to protect lives its part of their mission is to protect lives. I appreciate all of you being here today. Bishop marianne thank you for your columnists, for your heart, and for your leadership in this troubled time, i appreciate it very much. In chairman i yield. We recognize mr. Westerman for your comments and questions . [inaudible] thank you, mr. Chairman. A couple of my friends and colleagues on the other side of the aisle have talked about how the park police were not here to present any statement or facts. And yet i have been led to believe they were constrained from being here because, like assistant chief said to you mr. Chairman that to be on the same panel with a person who is suing them, and a case of active litigation would make him legally constrained and not able to testify at the same time. So i wish you could have structured this hearing today for that was not an impediment to hearing from the park police. To think that wouldve been very helpful. And so that is what i ascribed their absence too, the legal constraints. Mr. Mcdonald you have filed suit against the department of materials and other seeking money damages . President trump violator for cement rights. So that includes the department of interior. Aclu has a lawsuit i am part of for violation of first memo it writes. Okay said mr. Chairman i wish you could have structured things we could have heard from all of the Interested Party sees here today. Second i like to ask unanimous consent to have inserted into the record a letter from the paternal order of police, park police dated june 19, this letter was sent to the letter of the Washington Post that they have not seen fit to print this letter but it explain some things from the perspective of the police on the park Police Comments of chairman like to insert this in the record. Without objection so ordered. And so thirdly i went to Journalism School myself whether its from police or protesters, journalist should be able to do my job. Someone to talk abut assaults on journalism. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] protesters is something that should not be part of a peaceful protest, ms. Bryce . So yes of course. Mr. Turley . Yes. Mr. Mcdonald customer. Mr. Turley or journalists are being attacked by protesters turned into rioters. Effectively to disperse the protesters. Any violence of Lafayette Squares is going to be considered by a court as a justification for expanding the perimeter, for setting up the fence, for clearing the area. There was a high level of violence that was being reported by the park police. If the officers, a lot of officers are injured in a protest case. And if its as high as 100 thats pretty high. Theres obviously some arson and some Property Damage brita court would conclude through this three day. Were not entirely peaceful. Let Law Enforcement facing threats. As a alluded earlier the courts used to push back the line i look specifically at the violence at that time her and think the court is going to consider both, the whole context in other words. So times i might also insert into the record the letter dated the 24th to you from the department of interior explaining mr. Monahans ability to testify or not. Let me recognize her questions. Stomach thank you, mr. Chairman. Ms. Brace did you have anything identifying you as media . So im sorry to repeat the question. To do have an identification when the front with a lanyard identify you as media . So no we do not like to wear press passes around our next for safety reasons. Okay. Did you hear them use a bullhorn to disperse people . No i did not. Reverend buddy the squares adjacent to your church is that correct very so yes that is correct. Have you seen that or sibley cleared like it was on june 1 . No i have not. You have an idea why your church was focused to focus on Racial Injustice in particular . My sense was st. Johns Lafayette Square has been used of protest historically the Nations Capital for many years. It is in close proximity to the white house. Public space of the actual park where people have been allowed. Your church side to champion Racial Injustice, why do you feel this is important to the people because of the proximity to the white house . So we took advantage of the proximity with the protests that are there all of our congregation lost their city. [inaudible] there committed to Racial Injustice. I commend you for that it is very important. All lives matter. Important we recognize that just as to all people of color the injustice has been going on for many generations nothing is going to stop in the change and words must come from the top and apparently we dont have the will the top to do that. And then as President Trump stood for his photo in front of the Church Holding the bible what was going through your mind when you saw that i was outraged that is a misuse of both the space and the bible what was said what was said in the rose garden is what we witnessed in the park. Has he issued a memo letter or anything to apologize and . So its important for us to recognize this is not the first time and probably not the last time we will have injustice with people of color. What do you think the government must do to anybody to start the motion to rectify this with officers at the top level for a change in attempting to deal with racial issues . Stomach thank you for asking and its not mind that i should be able to talk about how that happens there should be responsible for legal acts. [inaudible] no matter who is at fault and that are black and brown fellow citizens should be able to have a degree of security. [inaudible] so again i dont presume to come here and tell the American People to run their police force or their government i would expect so protest to be allowed but i expect media to be able to safely cover events. Mr. Mcdonald. So at think the bottom line is respect the constitution heard how it was drafted up and i dont think would have a problem with overall policing for it i was here to talk about june 1. They dishonored our rights to peacefully protest and freedom of assembly, there wouldnt of been an issue at all. Stomach thank you offer testifying in a yield back. Gentle lady yields sir you are recognize. Stomach thank you, mr. Chairman into the witnesses that are being here today and said heard personal testimony it angers me to think what happened to you in your firsthand account of the things that went on part of the function of oversight is to make sure that the laws are being carried out that justice it administered m if not we rectify that. Its important to have oversight hearings like that. I also realize that your firsthand accounts for bits and pieces of a bigger story. I think there is more for us to learn that we cant learn from the meeting here today. And i think there are voices that are not being heard and we need to hear all voices and find out where the real problems are. I have a letter hear from the federal Law Enforcement officers association. It says while other Peaceful Protesters were corrupted by radical groups on construction federal Law Enforcement officer were forced into roles of protecting and preserving the safety of not only city streets but also our nations monuments and history we all hold dear. I would on to further say no clear was that rolled in here in washington d. C. Where lafayette part was besieged by radical and violent groups of individuals. These are the same individuals that set fire and vandalize st. Johns church, attacked and vandalized monuments in and around our Nations Capital including the world war ii memorial. Attribution entire generation of americans that kept our world free. Then attack the very Law Enforcement officers that were originally sent there to monitor and ensure the safety of the individuals peacefully assembled. Much of this work fell to the officers the u. S. Park police, these brave men and women came at her daily and most hourly attacks among peaceful and violent were constantly pelted with frozen bottles of urine, fireworks, bricks, stones, street pavers in all manners of unknown substances. Those are federal Law Enforcement offers including the secret service, different entities in the metropolitan Police Department joined the S Park Police at times to try to quell the violence, stop the instruction and allow the voices of the Peaceful Protesters to be heard. Chairman, i like to submit this to the record. Mr. Lamborn referred to the fraternal order of police that was denied publishing in the Washington Post to counter an article that the poster put out. They said here for over the weekend 51 u. S. Park police have industry sustained on duties and it goes on and not what im saying is theres another side of the story we need to hear all of that. As investigation been taken on by the internal affairs of the park police and also by the Inspector General and department of interior. I wish we could have waited until we had that evidence of a could have gotten more witnesses here. That being said, i have no reason to doubt what you are saying. I think we have to take an open look at these things going forward. Mr. Charlie, if indeed those members of the park police were injured, transported to hospitals, all these things going on, in your opinion was it legal for the park Police Declare Lafayette Park . So i think a court would say its a lawful order to clear the park. As i say in my testimony, they had all of the elements particularly if they gave the morning and the opportunity to disperse. That does not answer the secondary question of the levels or means used. Im also to say when i saw the figures of the 50 injured with park Police Officers the claim of 100 injured federal officers i was quite surprised that is a very high number of injuries. So i think a court would approach this question without saying this was an entirely peaceful protest to the contrary think they would recognize there were Security Issues that were valid for even the administration i think the court would likely say the order was lawful and then focus in the critical. What concerns me the most is that the line moved. We have to move on here. So finally, we talk about the christian thing to do certainly to work for justice and equality, i believe that and try to practice with the bible teaches, but it also talks about being subjected to governing authorities, paul said that peter said to submit yourself for the lords sake to every Human Institution even jesus when he was prodded to rebel against the government said what is caesars. I would just like to ask the bishop, do you believe the christians duty when working for justice and equality to follow the law and submit to those in authority and condemn violence and unlawful acts such as rioting . So i absolutely believe it is necessary to condemn violence and arson. I would also take issue at interpretation of scripture that does not include the long legacy of the struggle for liberation and freedom and the opportunity when given time and time again the scripture tells us. [inaudible] man especially when theyre on just so particularly in the democracy we have a fundamental responsibility to ensure the laws are just and they are justly enforced by those who were entrusted with the responsibility of overseeing the governance of our people. So are you saying laws against violence in our center unjust . So i am not. I yield back. Gentlemen yields, let me recognize for his questions for stomach thank you and thank you to todays witnesses in particular i want to thank you for your testimony. My family attends church in california its very meaningful to have you here today. I would like to ask for unanimous consent Washington Post article contributed by reverend at st. Johns Episcopal Church in georgetown. Bishop body as you know the reverend was at st. Johns church in Lafayette Square the evening of june 1 for the description of the scene is powerful. She wrote she got to the church around 4 00 p. M. That day as she said to offer peaceful and prayerful support to the protesters she describes is seen as upbeat and peaceful, she wrote quote my colleagues and i passed out water and snacks. People exchange prayers and elbow bumps, things were so called that by 6 00 p. M. Most of my colleagues had left. Bishop to have any reason to believe that the raven was not being truthful in her description . Absolutely none. So mr. Mcdonald has this description generally align with the scene you saw as well . Yes it does. Student mr. Mcdonald that mr. Brace to any that videos my republicans colleagues played look like Lafayette Square on june 1 before Police Attacked . No they did not. So know they did not. In fact as a raven writes on bc the scene of peace and calm roderick dramatically changes around 6 15 p. M. As the officers move from Lafayette Park into the streets. After hearing the first loud bang of a flash grenade she describes and i quote yelling and panic. And then she says on a quote i could not believe my eyes, a wall of police in full riot gear is physically pushing people off the st. Johns patio maybe 15 feet away from me. So we have a firsthand account of u. S. Park police entering peaceful protests with brutality which was the subject of the protest to begin with. Bishop buddy when you heard that the reverend and her colleagues are being physically pushed off st. Johns patio, what went through your mind . I was stunned, horrified, concern for their safety and the safety of all of those who gathered. And like others who have expressed their civic response, i was outraged that the park police and others were acting in that manner. The reverend went on to describe President Trumps photooptical bible. She called it and i quote sacrilege. Would you agree with that statement . I thought about that and yes i would. Why . Because it was taking something sacred and using it and misapplying its message to justify something that was violent and that was an abuse of power. Theres nothing in this scripture to condone that behavior. So thank you bishop i would like to turn to you mr. Brace thank you for your testimony as you know the video of you and your cameraman being violently attacked speaks louder than words since being sworn into office and taking his oath to protect the constitution of United States, this president has repeatedly attacked the free press calling the media the enemy of the people. Limiting access to his press conferences filing level libel lawsuits and having ceaseanddesist letters about new stories he doesnt like the list goes on and on on june 1 park police violently attacked you in your cameraman as we saw despite you clearly identifying yourselves as members of the press and having newsgathering equipment. Do you believe the president s rhetoric and actions toward the free press has impacted the way the media has been treated by Law Enforcement . I cant speak to the motivation of members of Law Enforcement here in the United States. I can certainly say has been a noticeable trend in the treatment of the media by members of the police force post example of myself and my fiance was working in minneapolis with the press and he was arrested while working legally. We have seen a number of other instances across the country where the press has been targeted even during protests by members of the police a while i cant say why that is happening it is certainly what i see as a trend and that is very worrying for a free press. So to you believe this will have lasting impacts on journalism and the United States and abroad . I think anything that deters journalists from being able to do their job safely would deter people from becoming journalists are doing their jobs without fear or favor which is exactly what we are meant to be doing paid. Thank you in the words of my friends, the late elijah cummings, we are better than this. Thank you i yield back. Let me recognize gentle lady from puerto rico the time is yours. So thank you, mr. Chairman like to yield my time. Did she yield to . Me. I appreciate that. I appreciate, this is specifically for you. Oh good. But it is specifically for you. Find out. [inaudible] you can do that part ive two quick questions to ask those sitting here listening to the testimony i started reading, miss brace, some of the testimony said simply havent seen the nature of the protest, on may the first, you and your cameraman purchase protective equipment. Eyewear specifically is that accurate . Was that for one specific instance or for a series of events . Or was it simply a trend you saw . We purchased our eyewear on the 31st of may so before we were covering the protest that day. So was it for a specific incident or a trend . I would say was because of what wed seen in minneapolis earlier in the way. So i would sect that as a trend than class one of the question i found it interesting, if you are wearing a lanyard and you said no, did you indeed say you dont want to identify yourself as media . For fear of protection . No i did not say that so what did you actually say to her why did you not wear aquatic do not enter identify yourself with the landed what is your teller . So i did have my state a permit press identification i do not like to order on my neck for safe decreasing it can be pulled in a protest. Alright, im sorry that was just interesting and fascinating to me. Mr. Turley a moment last thing to ask you at the same time. As i was looking more at the stuff we put into the record from the interior department so according to the department the elrod used by the that Apartment Services and lx model help with that mean something to you doesnt mean anything to me. Means is 20 to 30decibel louder than a typical bullhorn or pa systems of the model used has a maximum range of about 2000 feet with a peak output of one had 40 decibels you compare that to a jet engine produces a hundred 40 decibels at a hundred feet, produces a hundred 40 decibels thus the size of the department inform the staff the script read as a forward this is major mark. [inaudible] with the park police for safety and security reasons Lafayette Park and eighth street are close to pedestrian spread your order to depart the area be diddly this is your first warning. And they said there were two more warnings like this when given. The last one said this was a final warning. According to legal standards that youve been talking about, is that warning sufficient to satisfy the warning requirement law before dispersing demonstrators like they did on june 1 . It is sufficient and in fact in my testimony i suggested it may have been used i noted in the testimony that they have the system. It is a huge improvement over prior years were they would use the pa system off of patrol car cars. This has a much broader range by the magnitude of dozens in terms of the penetration of that system. It doesnt mean you cant have canceling noise and a protest. Basically if they are objects around you. That is the Gold Standard for amplification in these types of situations. So it is much easier to hear than simply a bullhorn would have been . That is recommended system for many civil libertarians. It is a system that has a very significant penetration range. That does not mean once again you dont have circumstances where i entirely understand her people might not have heard it yet people around you they can be screaming in your ear, those are canceling noises. But this really is the Gold Standard in the use of applications. So ive got 30 seconds for this one. If someone heard a statement from a policeman saying move, move, is that the kind of legal qualification that would be used . When an officer tells you to move back after these warnings you are expected to comply. Schematics of someone in their written testimony said they heard the officers they move, move, will be legal justification or the expectation of a lawful citizen they would then move . Yes. You are expected to follow the orders of the officers particularly after the issuance of those warnings. Thank you, i think the gentle lady from puerto rico i hope things are going well for you down there, yielding, i yield back. The lady yields back. [inaudible] thank you, mr. Chairman for this committee and this congress to effectively fulfill her oversight duties we absolutely must have a detailed understanding of the events that unfolded earlier this month. I think each of the witnesses for appearing today and for your testimony. I want to ask a question of miss brace. He stated u. S. Pp offices and other assisting Law Enforcement officers did not use teargas or scout shells a close the area and Lafayette Park despite your experience been the opposite. I am not an expert in ballistics or the use of gas particularly what was he is but i am certain there is a chemical irritant used and i was hit by some non lethal projectiles thats completely opposite of my experience. So you have any concerns that have journalists and others who were there if they had not shared photos of mdoc and cs canisters and videos of what had occurred that we may not have known the truth . In that instance i will be relying on firsthand accounts. Also in our recording, in the video you can hear the use of automatic weapons that goes along with what i was saying. It certainly underscores bike hearing like this is so important why its important to hear from folks who have firsthand accounts. I also want to talk about my displeasure lack of witness from the branch testifying before a committee today. I read, with much respect to my good friend from colorado, i did read the letter that was sent to the chairman from the department of interior dated june 24, 2020. While this letter does intimate and expectation that the executive branch witness to be a separate panel that is not the reason for p this committee. Extensively what they purport is a justification to decline before this committee is timing there too busy and therefore they will consider appearing later in the month and mid late july. And so, i guess, i wonder whether the panel has any thoughts, perhaps professor turley do you think its reasonable for this committee to expect to hear from the assistant chief or other relevant witness from the executive branch . Absolutely. They should ascertain the facts few fact that the courts isolates. Its a number of these facts will be determinative in any view of this conduct. That includes what was used at the scene. This became a colloquial technical debate on what constitutes teargas in the park police later stated the impact on an individual is going to be much the same. Courts often group them together as to when you can use them. I personally believe that this committee drills down, its going to find itself more and more focused on that twilight. When you see that charge. Thats a charge, that is a line charging. The question is was that warranted in that circumstance . I agree with you, professor turley in the need for this committee to engage in that inquiry. Im less than optimistic will have as much success is perhaps the judicial system wellin deposing some of these administration witnesses because the track record of the 116th congress in terms of its ability to get the executive branch witnesses to appear before the congress is less than stellar. The secretary of defense is refusing to appear before the Armed Services committee to talk about this particular set of issues and the secretary of state who declines to go before the stately committee. We had an exchange previously eight, nine, some odd months ago before the Judiciary Committee during the impeachment process about obstruction of congress and the lack of any ability to again get these witnesses before the legislative branch. I fear, i must say because as i read this letter it is part and parcel to this pattern that the administration has pursued relentlessly since the days i was sworn into congress. I would hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would join us in our effort to again get to the bottom of and have folks in the administration testify. Because invariably and as of you have referenced in the past, the administration change. We have elections and at the end of the day, their very may well be another administration and congress hoping to seek witnesses from that administration i would hope they could treat these issues with the respect they deserve so with that i yield back mr. Chairman. So a gentleman yields. You are recognized for five minutes. Thank you so much mr. Chairman i have been here at the hearing since the very beginning its important to hear from our witnesses. Like all of us i have been shocked by the unrestrained use of force by federal Law Enforcement agencies. We are here today because one of those agencies, the park police violated the use of force policy and following President Trumps directive to clear Lafayette Square. Mr. Chairman your staff has a copy as the u. S. Park police with the policy general order 3615 updated november 2019 oh like to ask for unanimous consent to enter that into the record right now. Without objection so ordered. So thank you, mr. Chairman this policy governs the conditions of which the park police use of force is appropriate. Miss brace and mr. Mcdonald owing to ask you about this policy and whether they are consistent with what you saw on july 1. I would appreciate yes or no answers if you are able to read the policy which was dated his quote an officer is expected to employ the minimum level of force necessary to control a situation. I believe you testified that you have covered a number of demonstrations is that correct . Yes that is correct. So in your experience being at that protest the jute view of the u. S. Park police and other Law Enforcement officers employing only the minimum level reasonably necessary to control the situation . No i dont. The policy always a gent also says im sorry, sir, i cant hear you. I believe they use Excessive Force. Thank you. Now, mr. Mcdonald, did either of you see a situation where police force seem to be required and they they stopped it once it did not seem to be required . This brace, will start with you. Not that i saw. Mr. Mcdonald. Could you repeat the question . The policy says an officer shall or weight, my question is did either of you see a situation where they seemed to need to use the force and then they stopped it once it was required anymore . No, i did not. Okay. The policy also says an officer shall, if possible, first attempt to diffuse the situation through advice warning, verbals persuasion, Tactical Committee cajun and other and conflict negotiation techniques. Did you see the police doing anything like that . No, i did not connect mr. Mcdonald. No, i did not. Finally, the policy says the goal of deescalation tactics is to gain the voluntary compliance of a subject when appropriate and consistent with personal safety to reduce or eliminate the necessity to use force. Did you see the police doing that . No, i did not. How about you, mr. Mcdonald . No, i did not. Now, did you see anybody at that particular protestant not complain voluntarily . No, maam. Not from what i saw. Were each of you complain voluntarily . Yes, i was. Yes. Okay. Mr. Chairman, just looking at that u. S. Police use of force policy it seems to me that they were violating their very own policies which is what the purpose of this hearing is and i find it very telling the administration did not even show up to explain any of this today. I just want to take one more minute of personal privilege to tell you how proud i am of you as a woman of god to stand up for the rights of people peaceful protesting. Im a presbyterian in denver and my church is very involved with the black lives Matter Movement and we are involved in the protests. We think that is part of the very fabric of christianity and the very fabric of america. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Let me recognize mr. Clay. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for conducting this hearing. Thank you to the witnesses for your testimony and observance of what you saw that day. My wife and i happened to be in our living room watching incredulously, especially after attorneattorney general barr wet to the square to survey and then honored the clearing of that square. How outrageous and how unamerican . Just so someone could take a photocopy. Let me ask you, mr. Mcdonald. Let me first thank you for your service to this country and for your activism. Given your testimony from what you saw on that day did you see any protesters violating or any of the demonstrators throwing projectiles at lawenforcement . No, i did not see anyone throwing anything or acting violent. Thank you for that. For a black man who served this country when you hear this administration and president say time after time that he does a lot for the black community then to be treated like a hostile, what goes through your mind . If the rhetoric were black man feels always persecuted. And its not for a just reason. Its a government that is trying to clear me for exercising my First Amendment rights. Thank you for that. Lets put politics aside. Does the president narrative seem consistent if peaceful demonstrators cannot peacefully protest the Racial Injustices we see and face on a daily basis . I think for the last ten protests have been peaceful and we have demonstrated to the whole world that is seen as peacefully protesting when i think those rioters and stuff was an isolated incident. 90 of the protests i have been two or 100 is that have been positive but 90 i seen on tv have been positive. Having a military background do you consider the training of those Law Enforcement personnel that you came up against on juna warrior or guardian . Warrior. Thank you. Thank you for that. Have you covered other protests where you have experienced lawenforcement treating media in a similar manner to your experience in black lives matters . No, i have not. You have not. As has already been mentioned, this administrations story around what happened that and why it keeps changing and when you hear the administrations changing excavations what goes through your mind as a journalist . Obviously, im here to observe what is happening and not to speculate on why it is happy but all i can tell you is on that day on june 1 the plans seem to change because we were expecting the curfew to be enforced at 7 00 p. M. And it was enforced at 6 30 p. M. During your broadcast you mentioned that the police were being indiscriminate and did not seem to change their actions after you stated that you were members of the media and do you think at all that the treatment of you was intentionally directed at you due to your status as a journalist . I cant say whether we were targeted because we were working for the press but i feel it was clear that we were working press and even after my cameraman was assaulted and it was acknowledged clearly the i was pressed. I was hit across the back with a trenchant as i was trying to move away as directed. Did you say you got hit with a projectile . Yes. Rubber bullet. Im not sure whether it was a rubber bullet but it was a projectile. I see. Mr. Mcdonald, did you get hit yes, i got a plume of teargas one exploded below my feet and they threw a flash grenade right at my ankles to the point that it exploded and when i felt the pellets i asked the officer ought film and said what to do for me and i saw Something Like it was not correlated but never you through to the blowup on the ground and asphalt hit me and i thought it hit the loud sound because i was oblivious to what it was but it felt something hit me and i thought it was an asphalt and it was that powerful that blew the asphalt up. My time is up but this is not how civilians in this nation should be treated who are trying to exercise their constitutional right. I defy anyone on this panel to refute that. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you. Let me know recognize [inaudible] for your five minutes paid thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman and the Ranking Member who was always good to see. I want to thank you both for having these hearings. I think it is important to say as we start this, i dont think any person on either side of this ill thanks violence is ever okay at a protest. I dont think you see people here saying that. I want to say that to my republican colleagues. I have been the woman who could not be forced out of her house three weeks ago would have been at 17 marches and protests in the last two weeks because full of my communities organize them. Some of those that do them all the time and some are ones that do them none of the time. The first one that i went younger or that were almost more organized by young people in one of might Police Chiefs you need to be said to me what are you doing here and not because he was upset i was there but he thought i was going to city hall and people had just arrived and they were trying to not let the young people see with bricks or arrive and i know which organization they are with but throughout my Police Chiefs have walked with the young people and they had been alert and have worked together and i have had two bad incidences out of the 17, one were a woman in a car through us and the second where young people heard the word that they should never hear once and i was called a white not pleasant word. But our police chief handled them. I think that that is what we want to talk about today because i think americans have the right to peacefully assemble and protest. It is a fundamental right of our democracy. How these get handled is really important we got to ask these questions because we dont have a witness today. It has been said that we have to make sure that freedom of speech and that freedom im proud of some of the young people and y yet, i have seen out there but we dont want to see windows in these areas have deliberately been broken and might lawenforcement new that i was being targeted by some people and thats not me either but i want to ask some questions of both mr. Mcdonald and ms. Brace. Mr. Mcdonald, some of my colleagues across the aisle attempted to use the actions of a few protesters at a separate protest against Police Brutality to depict the peaceful protest that you were a part of. I want to be clear, mr. Mcdonald, did you personally witnessed violence arriving prior to the Police Attacking the protesters . Noman. Host ms. Brace, would you agree with mr. Mcdonald . To do witnessed violence activity or any sort of similar events prior to the Police Moving against the protesters on june 1 . No, i did not. Furthermore, during these attacks would invite yourself as them media, correct . When you did that, when you announced yourself did they refrain from violence and they went after your cameraman so even if they didnt see your media credential which people have raised questions, it was obvious that your cameraman was a member of the media, correct . Yes, absolutely. Could you tell about the injuries you sustained and the damage your equipment took . He suffered what i would describe as a harder hit as you saw in the video with the shield to his stomach and then he was the camera was punched which pushed it back into his face. He also was hit with a non lethal in the back of the neck. I was struck across the back with a trenchant and i was hit a few times in the leg by nonlethal bullets. I was hit quite directly in the backside and that would be my most significant injury. In terms of our the camera was damaged when it was punched and a separate lens in my backpack was damaged when i was hit and through our live transmission device we call it a tvu was significantly damaged. I want to ask you mr. Mcdonald, you mentioned in your testimony that you took pictures and video during the attack so why do you feel like it was important to document everything that was happening . I believe it was a Pivotal Point in history to be out there amongst those divers protesters and secondly for my safety because trump had made the threat of using weapons and dogs on us and i really took it literally so that was the second main reason i recorded it. Thank you. My time is up. I think all of you for being here in the bishop to. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, let me express my gratitude to all of our witnesses this morning and to the Ranking Member as well during this difficult moment in our history we are grieving more than senseless murder of george floyd, this is not new. The outrage is not new. We are greeting the 400 year legacy of intergenerational trauma from slavery, lynchings, jim crow era and Police Brutality. The Racial Injustice is rooted in our countrys history still costing us innocent lives. What we are seeing today is the result of historical injustices that have kept People Living in poverty, and communities schools have fewer resources and where people live last long due to lack of healthcare coupled with aggressive policing. Earlier this month protest participants were attacked while demonstrating against Police Brutality in dc and this hearing brings that out. They are facing protests over the useful force the Police Responded with more force. Mr. Mcdonald, thank you for being here. In your testimony you shared that you received training in teargas during a time. Could you describe the conditions under which you were instructed to use teargas during your training and how that compares to what you witnessed at Lafayette Square . First of all, it was controlled in boot camp. They had medics and personnel there that could do it in a safe environment. What i witnessed at Lafayette Square was Excessive Force, they did it without any kind of medical people around and they knew people would get injured. The navy did it a much better and safer way and was done because we were in boot camp and in a controlled environment that although they were protested i think we were not prepared for that they are not soldiers. Based on your training the u. S. Park police did not follow the proper protocols in your opinion . Yeah, that cant be a necessary way to remove people. Thank you. Black and brown communities are already being ravaged by the deadly virus and in an unprecedented economic crisis but now theyre being terrorized by militarized police, militarization of bomb enforcement and unjustified use of force against organizers and Community Members must end. Teargas is a chemical weapon banned in war and it should never again be used against demonstrators but especially not during a pandemic and for countless stories of organizers and protesters participants suffering dramatic injuries at the hand of Law Enforcement or like mr. Mcdonald who was quote, met with teargas and a flash bang which exploded with shrapnel. That is why my colleagues and i introduced a bill to stop the escalation of such Police Tactics against peaceful demonstrators and banned the use of chemical weapons in our streets. Bottom line is the rightful demonstrations that we are witnessing in the wake of the killing of george floyd, Breonna Taylor and other black lives taken by the police should never have been met with the deadly force from Law Enforcement and u. S. Park police and military forces forcibly removed, Peaceful Protesters with chemical irritants and for what . The president s photo op. I yield back, mr. Chairman. Let me recognize mr. Soto for his questions . Thank you, mr. Chairman. The whole nation witnessed videos showing President Trump, white house justice and defense officials, authorized use of force to remove Peaceful Protesters, Lafayette Square park and the adjacent pennsylvania avenue, an area in front of the white house is our nations Public Square and this is a traditional area for americans to express our First Amendment rights, infringement of which deserves heightened scrutiny. It was particularly disgraceful when these tactics were used so the president could engage in a photo ops. Many have testified that the incident occurred one hour before curfew. I do agree with other members of this committee that city officials should be wary about creating curfews of otherwise peaceful protests and these curfews often create unnecessary conduct between police and Peaceful Protesters. We know based on the testimony this was not the case in this instance. I want to welcome professor turley to the committee and i would be remiss if i did not say this harkens me back to 14 years ago in your Supreme Court class at gw law and i want to thank you for such a great teacher. Some evidence suggests the crowd was cleared for purposes of a photo op, other evidence suggests he wanted to display a show of strength after damaging coverage and retreating to a bunker a few days earlier but im concerned the president may have specific he intended to intimidate or silence political speech or simply that he did not care about the injuries that would occur as a result of these actions. Those last minutes that you focused on before they begin clearing the area if President Trump or other responsible officials harbored either specific intent to intimidate or silence political speech rather there was a reckless disregard for the safety and First Amendment rights of protesters would either of those states of mind be relevant in the violation of their First Amendment rights . Thank you very much for that question but this is my ideal to have a former student asking me a question, looking at two councils on either side of the chair that are both gw grads and a photographer that is a gw student. I cannot be in a happier spot but to answer your question most certainly the intent does matter and that is my testimony for starts out with the motivational question and that motivational question, i think, we will get more salient information with the inquiry of congress and one of the things that i would first look at is it seems to me that there is evidence that the plan was put into place 20, 48 hours before development and it was approved in the morning and in order when out it too but that does not mean however it answers even those facts are true whether the president s photo op played a role in the size of the perimeter and the decisions to move people all the way to high street for example and those are legitimate questions. As i said, if attorney general barr cleared that area for the purpose of the photo opt despite knowing him for many years and being a graduate of our law school i would immediately call for him to step down. That would be an outrageous use of power so the answer is yes, if this was done to intimidate people and this would be a serious problem but the Supreme Court said that protests are classically political speech and that is why the courts have been so protective. I think your question is a relevant one and more importantly we can get those answers as we get more of these facts confirmed from congress. And q, professor turley. Mr. Mcdonald, thank you for your service to our country and on behalf of the United States government i would like to apologize for your treatment you received by your own government. We recently passed the justice in policing act of 2020 and it stops militarization of police by stopping a federal program that gives local Police Surplus military equipment and as a veteran familiar with the differences between the objectives of military and police how important is it to stop the demilitarization of our police force. It is important for once you lose control the military is there for a certain reason. We have distinguished who does what and i think giving the city police and park police needs to act with a military unit isnt good for any protest on the floor. Thank you, ms. Brace on behalf of the United States government i would like to apologize for your brutal treatment by this government and im appalled on how you and mr. Mcdonald were treated. We seen an increasing level of violence against members of the press in the United States as of late. What do you suggest needs to happen to better protect members of the press and the United States . Again, i would not presume to tell the mega people how to run their government or their police force. I think basically the First Amendment needs to be enforced in that the media needs to be able to work freely and without fear, especially from lawenforcement. Finally, bishop, you are installed on november 12, 2011 so youve had a lot of extremes with Lafayette Square. How often do you see people protesting in Lafayette Square . I dont know that i can count but it is, as i said before, people gather and its a common sight to protest. I think they are there every day. Thank you. I yield back. Let me recognize mr. Hartfo hartford. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. I know all too well the pain and loss that the black community has faced because of Law Enforcements abuse of force. What took place in Lafayette Park stands against our nations ideals and Peaceful Protesters were exercising their First Amendment constitutional right but unfortunately the president in an effort to have an illadvised and unnecessary photoshop decided to upend the First Amendment right of Peaceful Protesters at Lafayette Park by using teargas and firing rubber pellets on them. It is important that lawmakers can look outside their windows and see and hear protesters. They are letting their Government Note that change must occur. Instead this president acted like an authoritarian dictator and used Excessive Force so he could stage a threeminute photo opt at the historic st. Johns Episcopal Church. This is simply wrong for it as a black man, as a father of three children, two young boys, i know we must find more Common Grounds and enact real reforms across this nation and for my home state in nevada. We need to continue to have honest dialogue about race and other injustices and more importantly act boldly for the change we need throughout our society. Unfortunately, those actions taken by the president at Lafayette Square to not bring us closer to solving these problems. In fact, they make it worse. Mr. Mcdonald, can you tell us what brought you to the protest and what was your general feeling about your fellow protesters . Where they peaceful . Did you see anybody doing anything different than exercising their First Amendment rights . My reason was there for my first moment right before in equity and justice and from the minute ice started recording until the minute it was peaceful and i did not see anything being thrown. Other than verbal things there was one attack those officers. Thank you. What was your first reaction when police in riot gear used teargas on you and your fellow Peaceful Protesters . Confusing at first because it was 30 minutes before the curfew and you wonder why are they doing this and what happened and you wouldve thought something drastically would happen for that to change from a peaceful protest to literally three seconds they switched in terms to a military unit and it was confusing. Ms. Brace, seen the way you treated in a video is shocking to say the least. You are clearly identified as a member of the press and you were in an area designated for members of the press and yet those officers were completely discriminated, indiscriminate in their attacks but in your years of experience as a reporter have you or your cameraman ever been tweeted this way before . No. When he set up to work that day did you assume you would be safe from violence at the hands of Law Enforcement . Yes, absolutely. Wide . Because its the First Amendment and the respect for media and democracy. Could you tell us what you observed as a reporter and what was it that happened that Lafayette Square the first time that you have experienced this. As you saw in the video we were there to report on what was happening because the curfew came into effect at 7 00 p. M. Then that line of police came through very early, very suddenly and very quickly. We moved right to decide where we were very much out of their way and there was nothing that wouldve prevented them from walking past us easily. That is when they turned on us and we were both physically assaulted. In terms of the protest itself i would say it was largely peaceful and very different before where we saw those fires and looting and there was nothing of the sort on the afternoon of june 1. And q. Reverend, could you please talk about the teachings of the episcopalian faith and whether those are in line with the current president s actions of using teargas by police in riot gear against Peaceful Protesters . What was your reaction when the current president used a bible as the sole purpose of a photo op . As i stated before, there is nothing in scripture or in the teachings of our church that would condone violent actions of state officials against innocent protesters and so, i would say its antithetical to the teachings of the church prayed when i saw the president hold the bible and try to i felt he had usurped the spiritual she was taking a spiritual message or claiming a Spiritual Authority that he did not have to justify or to bolster a message that was counter to our teachings and our test to follow jesus and his way of love. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. You are recognized. Mr. Chairman, can you hear me . Great. Thanks. To our witnesses thank you. Im devastated this hearing is needed and it is absolutely i see massive pain in this country. For many this pain comes from the nervous uncertainty of living in a world dominated by a deadly, highly contagious virus. The last four months have shown many of us what it is like to live in a society where you dont get right to rule so black americans have known [inaudible] the descendents of a people kidnapped into slavery and they are a product of a racial policies and systematic, not just southern jim crow laws but federal policy as well, black americans were forbidden from claiming land in the homestead and excluding him from the largest and most permanent way of growing wealth in our american history. They were effectively excluded from the new deal and the g. I. Bill which can be argued as the foundation for our american middle class. They were in many cases still legally allowed to be profiled against by a Police Officer who would use that power to investigate or intimidate far too often and now thanks to the compendium they are getting sick and dying from covid at a much higher rate than white americans. Black americans are sadly use to living in a society that where for the longest time they did not get the right to rule. I have a 70 yearold white man and i will never know what that feels like but i am broken hearted and as a member of our society i share some response ability for the pain black americans feel. Let me begin my questions to express them and bishop, did i pronounce your last name correctly . What does christianity [inaudible] spirit to seek restitution, forgiveness and at all times of mercy because we are all fall short of god. Thank you. June 1, repeatedly across the country they are begging for an end to this pain and as a fellow believer it seems this is the moment. We should be asking and doing what we can to eliminate pain into the future. Mr. Mcdonald, can you remind me again are these Peaceful Protesters [inaudible] . We were treated with weapons of war and treated like criminals and treated like we were breaking the law and we were excising our First Amendment right. I think that as we have learned today nothing is about this response sounds compassionate to me. Nothing about this response sounds like a teaching we have applied in any state that would guide anyone of us, nothing sounds forgiving to me. As one who has practice my faith i think that it is part of some of the fundamentals that we all share in making certain we are a just and loving society. So, i deeply implore our nations president and any of the leaders to refer to some of the scripture and certainly scriptures found in that book [inaudible] i would encourage him to revisit the verse from micah six eight which reads what does the lord require of you . Love justice, love kindness and to walk humbly with your god. I think that is instruction for all of us. Mr. Chair, we have got to do better. Let us heed the words of micah and as a nation let us resolve to build a fair nation and do the hard work of laboring destructive and denouncing violence, lovingkindness and most certainly walking humbly. To walk firmly on the path where we all respect a more perfect union. With that, i yield back. Again, i think our witnesses for being here today and adding what they did and providing that clarity that we are all looking for. I do yield back. Thank you, sir and i may say a profound and important comment you made. Thank you. I want to thank the witnesses and i appreciate it very much. My colleagues through a series of two half hours you have been here you have asked a lot of the questions that were important to me. I think that we heard a lot of Important Information today about the attack of the protesters at Lafayette Square and we did not hear of people from the administration we invited acting police chief monahan and we jumped through hoops as different requirements were presented to us in terms of his coming forward and then the latest one was that it was too busy and there would be a conflict because of potential litigation down the road. And it would have been very helpful to have him here or a representative of the department so we can understand which version of the truth they have offered and they have offered several since june 1 and to decide which is the correct one. Make no mistake so that nothing is hidden from the emergent people that it is out there and transparent to the American People. Our responsibility is to provide that oversight. One thing also as well is we look at what my colleagues said today and the analysis from my respected republican colleagues, the main witness, depends and the analysis as i got it depends on the administrations telling the truth. I think that would create skepticism and doubt among Many Americans at this point. We also heard from our colleagues about a lot of things that did not happen that day. The assumption is the protesters at Lafayette Square were dangerous by association and that is not true for the way it should have been approached. Prejudging a group of people on unrelated actions, actions separate from them of others might be the heart of the problem here may be the protesters and to deal with this in a bipartisan way, you no, i remember the calls for deescalation, restraint, extended patients when we were dealing with the takeover of parks facilities by armed individuals and when the struggle over the family and the actions of the federal government to redeem that. I hope that is a bipartisan attitude of restraint and not create a double standard in which because perhaps the message in this one is not what you wanted to hear and Lafayette Square that just like the message that they had when they refused to arm themselves i did not want to hear but that is what the police chose and thats what the u. S. Marshal chose and the fbi chose, restraint, patients or long patients i may add. I also want to talk about leading up to this hearing a lot of the discussion about issues having to do with what led up to this and thats why i made my point about people should not be associated with they been going on in that the protesters are the enemy and that they are not american citizens exercising their right under the First Amendment. That is about the statutes and about the isolated series of violence. Let me guarantee you, ive been around long enough to bend tuneup protests and arrested for civil disobedience myself to know and to be able to say that the tale is not wagging the dog on this movement going on in america right now. The dog is in charge and at the people and those outlier issues of opportunism whether appropriating the black lives movement for either a narrow ideological point or a criminal point should not be reflected onto what people are trying to say out in america. I also felt that this is opened up many things and the ironies of ironies, you have who trump has recommended to lead the other bureau of Land Management and he did an oped piece that said the black lives Matter Movement is built on terrible lies. And goes against to make those associations. He will be in charge of the biggest landmass agency that we have in this country. I think these contradictions and the fact that we are apt to believe and that the administration wont come forward and allow a full questioning and a full disclosure and transparency of all the information related to what happened june 1, i think these us to continue to press for the issue, not only of accountability but every form with our Service Police that has to change and hopefully this hearing and you as witnesses, thank you so much. Members thank you for asking questions and get plenty of time to return those as well. I appreciate your time. I appreciate, i appreciate all the Witnesses Today. Spirit i ask unanimous consent to add one more letter into the record which was sent by the secretary to you inviting you also to visit. I look forward to working with you on a bipartisan manner because the administration did have an option and a willingness to come here and talk about their point of view. You need to make sure that as they are that is accommodated in the future just one less thing. Be careful about when you talk about the experience in the west which was done in the nine violent way because it did leave one of the citizens of a state dead in the snow. On that uplifting note, not me adjourn the meeting and thank you very much. I appreciate it. We all do. Today the u. S. Senate will be back in session to start work on the National Defense authorization act. You can watch live coverage of the u. S. Senate floor starting at 3 00 p. M. Eastern. This is right here on cspan2. We do have isabel soto back with the American Action forum but can you hear us now okay . I can hear you now. H thank you for having me. Thank you. We did Start Talking but i wanted to get your sense and you are an analyst at the American Action forum of what the condition of childcare here in the u. S. Was before covid19 hit and how would you describe it today . So before covid19 we already had a childcare capacity probl problem. There werent enough centers and too many children, conditions were not good, and the quality was not up to par