Weve had two cases in which the reporting is evolving. Only last night did the public learn that, in fact, it was far worse or at least somewhat worst on september 19th only recently has it been revealed and you said you wanted to correct the record. Makes it clear. On november 11th of 2011, shots were fired, the asalant left. The secret Service Supervisor shut down the response of people who believe rightfully there have been shots fired and in fact the followup did not discover the damage to the white house and the actual shots in real time. Additionally Ortega Hernandez would not have been apprehended except he had a car accident, and even when he was it was not immediately linked to his criminal activity. That in fact the system at the white house did not detect the actual shots fired and begin the purs pursuit is that correct . You were chief of staff at that time. Is that roughly correct. If it isnt, i allow you whatever time you need to properly explain what really happened on november 11th, 2011. So the American People can understand that september 19th is not the first time there has been considerable lapse, as i see it, and in fact during a long period of time during your chief of staff time, now during your director time we have had the kinds of things we should be concerned about for protecting the president so please tell us whatever time you need about november 11th, 2011, where the Washington Post is right or wrong. This is your chance. Thank you, mr. Chairman. As youre aware my assignment of chief of staff. Could you get the microphone a little closer . Thank you very much. As youre aware in 2008 my assignment with the United States secret service was chief of staff. My primary responsibilities at that time were business transformation and i. T. Transformation for the organization. My focus was on the operations of the organization. To my knowledge, and based on the briefings i have received of the 3yearold investigation that occurred in november of 2011 that a peered in the Washington Post on sunday, i had been aware that representative asked for a data inquiry. We responded back on september 12th and provided detailed information of the secret Services Activities on that weekend. Shots were reported by the United States secret Service Officers in the area of constitution avenue and 15th. There were witness accounts of a black vehicle that had fired shots. There was confusion at the time by the part of the witnesses as to what they had witnessed and what they had saw. Several of the witnesses put out twitter accounts of what they had witnessed. They were subsequently located and interviewed and recanted the statements. The actual shots that were fired in proximity to constitution avenue and 16th, the vehicle sped away and went westbound on constitution erratically driving and struck a light post in the area of 23rd and constitution. Mr. Ortega then fled the vehicle. Park Police Officers and uniform division Police Officers ultimately responded to the scene where the vehicle was left with the ak 47 in the front seat. Park police have jurisdiction and assumed responsibility for the official faphases. The answer is where are the inconsistencies with what we know from the whats post. You said they were got the story wrong. They were misstating it. I would like to hear the inis t inconsistencies. So far youre corroborating the real time to protect the white house are in fact correct according to the Washington Post. Please tell wrus theyre not correct, please. Throughout the course there was a command post established down at constitution avenue and 23rd street. Metropolitan police department, the park police, and secret service were there attempting to resolve or understand what happened along constitution avenue. At the white house, individuals had heard what they believed to be shots. The secret service, according to the record i have been able to locate on the 3yearold investigation did respond properly. The Emergency Response teams and other officers did a protective sweep of the area to make sure that we did not have any intruders. To make sure there no injuries and obvious signs of anything that had been damaged. Further investigation with the park police they were unable to resolve at that time as to whether or not these were shots being fired at other vehicles or the white house. That took some time to understand. It wasnt until the ushers office was preparing for the return of the president and first lady they identified damage on the truman balcony. That lead to further investigation and that lead to us contacting the federal bureau of investigation to initiate their full investigation. Thank you. Mr. Cummings, thank you. In washington, d. C. , and around the country there are number of systems we know. Baltimore, i believe, has it too. Theyre basically microphones that hear gunshots, can identify the direction, can quickly, without human intervention, figure out whether or not a real shot has been fired, confirm it, and often give an accurate conviction. That technology isnt so odd that we dont see it in our city. I think thats the reason i went on so long with this question. Miss norton i know knows this. The district has a sophisticated system. I think the committee wants to make sure not only does the white house have a higher level of awareness of the system but the district system be enhanced, if necessary, to make sure that Something Like this never happens again. I thank the gentleman for his patience. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Director piereson, i have thought about all of this long and hard i think my major concern goes to the culture. It is very disturbing to know that secret Service Agent s age the most elite protective agency in the world feel more comfortable apparently, what im hearing, coming to members of this committee and telling things and coming to you and members in the agency. That, im telling you, when i pull all of this down, that, to me, is dangerous. It has to go against morale. I dont even see how good decisions can be made if your own people dont feel a level of confident or they feel fear or theyre going to be able to talk about things that concern them. I want to go through some questions. I want you to give you a chance to address that. To me, that when all the dust settles, thats a problem. And so going back to the november 11th, 2011 incident, and i know you were not the director. I understand that. A lot of people talk about the culture problem with the secret service and the press reports of all the press reports the one that concerned me is that back then in fwvn. I quote one of the officers from the scene who thought gunfire had probably hit the house that night were largely ignored. Some were afraid to dispute the conclusions. Did you see that record on this issue . Ranking member, i read that newspaper article. I was troubled by accounts. I asked my office of professional responsibility to retrieve the file and records of what we know and when we knew it if the young officer had made such a statement. I found a statement where the young officer alleges they were reluctant to report to the supervisor to be criticized. That troubles me as well. Thats a major problem. Im going ask my office of professional responsibility reinterview the office. They remain on the job today to determine whether the office would be more competent today or what were some of the problems she felt that night. That extremely troubles me. If she heard shots, and i quote, she heard shots and what she thought was debris falling overhead. She drew her handgun and took cover and heard a radio call reporting possible shots fired near the south lawn. She called the joint Operations Center to report she was breaking into the gun box near her post pulling out a shotgun. According to this article, and i quote, she replaced the buck shot inside with a more powerful slug in case she needed to engage an attacker. But thin the call came over the radio to stand down. And the next day, the office, i quote, listened during roll call before her shift saturday afternoon as supervisors explained that the gunshots from were from people and two cars shooting at each other. The report is that she, and i quote, told several Senior Officers friday night she thought the house had been hit. Son saturday she if not challenge her supervisors for fear of being criticized. She later told investigators. As a former agent and head of the agency, that has to concern you tremendously, is that right . Yes, sir. It does. Its unacceptable. Does it trouble you that some of your own agents, apparently dont feel comfortable raising security concerns . And this is just one person there are others, again, would rather be whistle blowers, and again, i have no problem with whistle blowers. We do everything in our power to protect them. But this agency if they would rather be a whistle blower than to bring their concerns to you. You started off by saying youre going to make sure this never happens again. Let me tell you what the problem is here. If youre heading an agency where the folks are not providing you with the information to do the right thing to make the change change do you know what the problems are . Are you following me . Help me with this. Yes, sir, if i may. Any time any organization you start to make significant changes, some people will have resistance. Some will push back. However, i will continue to lead and transform the secret service to ensure were prepared for our mission and ensure we can restore our reputation in the american public. What i will tell you over the last 18 months ive been serving as director, and over the last six months i have met personally with over 1500 of our supervisors and employees. Ive had a number of engagement sessions and spent over an hour with each of them advising them of my expectations, what their performance requirements are, what personal accountability is, how to manage this work force, how to ensure that we are performing at the highest levels in everything we do. That were operationally ready, that were training, that were evaluating each other, and that were constantly looking at our mission to make sure that were being effective at everything we do. Cant speak for what happened in the past, but i can tell you as were moving forward into the future and while im as director, i will not tolerate personnel missteps where people failed to act or do not support the work force or do not work in un unis unison. I would expect there are many people pushing back, im going continue to lead forward. The problem is that officer, she was right. And that was the morning after the shooting. Yet it took four days for the house keepers to discover the bullets direction. In other words, the officer was right. Yes, ultimately the officer was right. The Washington Post story says that this agent subsequently reported her concerns to investigators. There was an after action report about the 2011 shooting. It did include recommendations without fear being criticized . Do you know . I dont know but i would say that the officers statement to our interviews with secret Service Employees are different than the officers statement to the fbi and the investigators conducting the investigation. Thats why i asked my office of professional responsibility to go back and have a robust conversation with that employee to ensure that she feels supported, knows we want her to come forward with any information, and that we understand what some of the impediments may be with the Management Team where we feel we can make improvements to ensure it never happens again. Let me say this then ill close. Former director sullivan invited me a few years ago, you may have been there, to speak before your top agents after the colombia situation with the prostitutes. One of the things that i said to them back then, i expressed my tremendous respect and appreciation but i also told them that i dont want anyone to imagine, imagine, imagining that they can pierce the protective vshs veil of the secret service. Belis so very, very, very important. I just, again, the culture thing is an issue. Im sure others will question you about that, by just thank you for your testimony. I yield back. Thank you. Ill recognize myself. Following up on Ranking Member cummings. I sent you a letter, director, specifically asking about details on 2011. Sky consent to enter it into the record. The unclassified spot report on the incidents in november of 2011. Hearing no objection so ordered. Director, why is it that when i look at this report there isnt even a mention of johnson. Yet the Washington Post report details about her calling into the secret service headquarters. Why isnt her name mentioned in the spot report . The spot report reflects the active investigation. I dont know what information you have relative to officers johnsons reporting well, you gave us this report. I asked you for all the details and information. This is minute by minute of the situation. Are you telling me the Washington Post is wrong she didnt call into the headquarters. Did she not do that. Im con feufused about your into the report it. She reported she was opening a box, getting out a shotgun, all the details. Thats the confusion i have with the Washington Post article. Typically when there is an emergency happening around the white house where reports are made, much like the shots being fired on november 11th, i would expect officers to react according to their security protocols. She said in the Washington Post it says she called into the headquarters. Theres no mention of that. Other officers are mentioning it but shes not. Well follow up on that. Its unacceptable to not mention that. The Washington Post could get that and the congress couldnt. Lets go back to the fence jumping. The state Police Detained a person had a map in the car, the weapons that the congressman talked about, suspicious behavior. My understanding three officers had spotted him that day and not reported it. Not reported it. And i want to know if thats true as we go along. The fence fail officers chased him, didnt catch him. Sniper in position. No shots fired. Dogs werent released. Counter surveillance, im understanding is understaffed. There was no shoot nobody shot anything. There was nobody intercepted. The doors were unlocked, an officer was overwhelmed, a crash box was silenced. The secret service said they offered tremendous restraint and discipline. End quote. My question to you is do those officers have your authority to use lethal force to prevent somebody from entering the white house . Those officers have the authority to use independent judgment to leverage lethal force when appropriate. Isnt that when somebody is trying to get at the president . Thats always true. Theyre Law Enforcement officer. Always true when somebody is trying to penetrate the white house. As appropriate, confines of the law. Explain the details of that. Somebody approaching the white house, making a white house. No apparent weapon, can they take that person down . The law requirements that Law Enforcement officers ensure they are in imminent dangers or others are imminent danger before they can leverage lethal force. If the person is running at the white house they can or cannot use leathal force . Those are going to be independent decisions made by the officer based on the totality of the circumstances. How does the officer know if they have a dirty bomb or if its a terrorist . How do they know that . Shouldnt they assume this person has ill intention . Law enforcement officers are trained and observation skill i think its confusing. This is part of what they have to deal with to make a split second decision. I want to be crystal clear. You make a run and a dash at the white house were going to take you down. I want overwhelming force. Would you disagree with me . I do want our officers and agents to execute appropriate force for anyone attempting to challenge or breach the white house. Are we going to explore this further . The secret service put out a statement according to the talked to the Associated Press. They reported that on september 20th, at 1 24 a. M. Eastern time donnavan, spokesperson, said the man appeared unarmed to officers who spotted him climbing the fence in search of the subject turned up no weapon. Why would he say theres no weapon . Ill have to ask mr. Donnavan that question. You havent done that since the incident happened . I know when mr. Gonzalez was placed into custody he was found to have a folded knife. You consider that a weapon . That is a weapon. Why would the secret service put out a statement to the Associated Press. Did you correct the Associated Press . Did you call them back and say you got that wrong . I have no knowledge of that. You let it linger there was no weapon. That was wrong. It was inaccurate, correct . I know there has been a lot of information in this case, and thats why we are doing a robust review. I cant speak for conversations that i was not part of or the press interest. Did you read the press release before it went out . I have read the press release before it went out. Do you agree the officers showed tremendous restraint and discipline. You agreed with that comment . I do think based on the totality of the circumstances and from mr. Gonzalezs arrest that these officers did use restraint in making a difficult decision as to employ lethal force or subdue and arrest. Do you think they responded appropriately . I do not think the security plan was properly. Thank you. I have gone well past my time. I recognize the gentlewoman from the District Of Columbia. Pardon me, were going to recognize go ahead. Recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank director piereson for her 30 years of service in the secret service for rising to the ranks to become the first woman. Director, and im aware of what she has inherited and her many accomplishments. Districte e director i want t ask you about the rumors about what the secret service may do. When pennsylvania avenue was closed down after oklahoma city, there was a example of how Public Access can remain. I was heart broken. Both sides of the white house were closed down. I have worked with the Clinton Administration to open e street on the backside of the white house. That, not only but because its a major thorough fare and effected the entire region. That was closed down but as was testified, in front of the white house cars can no longer go there but people can go there. Essentially it was a made a park. A walk away, and i none of my constituents, no one say it is should be reopened. My concern is whether or not people will continue to have access around the white house. I walked to the white house yesterday. I was pleased to find not only tourists but protesters, as usual, there. I ask you i noticed on about your testimony and you testified 16 jump eers in only five years. Theres been an increase in fence jumpers. I want to know where you have considered before today simply asking that a higher fence be built one that, could, for example curve, still the brought iron fence but the curve coming out ward maybe you damage one of your body part if you try to get over it. Or even, these are off the top of my head. Multilayered glass behind the fence that could resist guns or bombs been 16 in five years at least many more over the years. Have you considered such common sense so that the public would have access but the president of the United States and his family would be protected. Have you ever recommended that . We want to work in partnership to ensure that the people have access in promise s proximity to the white house. I look forward to continuing to work with you and the administration and the department to look at what additional security features can be put in place not only for white house fence jumpers but other challenges that face us in securing public areas. I recognize most of the fence jumpers are harmless. I am worried about multiple fence jumpers. And whether you have the resources and the staff if five or six of them come across the fence. By my calculations youre down almost 300 agents in the uniform services. Is that the case . Yes, representative norton. The secret service had a reduction in staffing as a result of sequestration. Were close to 550 employees below our optimal level. Do you have i understand staff had to report in from other units who may not have been as familiar with the white house because of the sort age of staff. Is that the case . Ier this summe decision to bring in special agents from around the country to support some of the uniform decision posting assignment in proximity to the white house door. It provided some relief. Mr. Chairman, i realize my time is gone. I think congress has to take some responsibility where the sequester went across the board including the agencies like the secret service. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Rim a big fan of Law Enforcement. And i dont take any delight in asking the questions im going ask you. Law enforcement are given unique powers in our society. With those responsibilities i cant think of any responsibility greater than guarding the safety and security of our president and his family. So send it, several agents believe that shots were fired and supervisor concluded it was a vehicle backfiring. Even if that were true, given the very small investment of resources why not investigate the shot the fired . Representative, i think that is where some of the confusion starts to come out as the story in the Washington Post. Im not asking about a Washington Post story. Im asking why a house keeper who doesnt go spend 14 woks in training, who doesnt have 18 weeks of training thereafter found glass and your agents did not. That didnt come from the Washington Post. Is that true . Did a housekeeper find evidence of the shooting and your agents did not . The housekeeper was able to locate fragments of glass on the truman balcony which is not an area frequented by security personnel. I didnt ask you that. I asked you there was a spontaneous conclusion that shots were fired. There were officers who believed they smelled gun powder. Your officers drew their weapons, director. Thats how seriously they took it. So im not interested in cursory searches. When did your agency find evidence of the shooting . I believe it was on the 15th or 14th of november. How many days after the shooting . Three to four days later. All right. You have an officer contemporaneous with the shooting believing there were shots fired. You have officers taking cover because they believe shots were fired. You have officers at the white house drawing their weapons because they believe shots were fired. Give me all the evidence to support a vehicle backfire. Representative, im sure your familiarity of the Law Enforcement in downtown areas there is sound in ive never heard a car backfire six to eight times . Ive heard car backfires. Six to eight times . I think its undisputed there were witnesses that sovereigned shots being fired. Its undisputed that a house keeper who doesnt train who doesnt have 18 weeks of intensive training found the evidence of the shooting and your agency did not. I will give you credit, you didnt bring it up. It was brought up by a colleague. I have some colleagues who are just obsessed with sequestration. We cant have any hearing without it coming up. But youre not going to sit there and tell us that sequestration is the reason your agency did not find out, are you . No, i am not. Pookay. Ly give you credit for that. I was stunned one of my colleagues would try to conflate sques wrags with the fact that a Law Enforcement agency waited four or five days to find evidence of a shooting that a house keeper found. Give me all the evidence to back the vehicle backfiring there. We already know all the evidence is for the shooting. Give me all the evidence that made your department so sure that it was a vehicle backfiring that you didnt even search the white house. The secret service was actively engaged with the United States park police in an effort to determine where and what direction the shots were fired on constitution avenue. Madam director, you reached the conclusion that it was a vehicle backfiring as opposed to shots fired. This is the third time ive asked. Give me all the evidence to support the supervisors conclusion that it was not shots fired despite all the contemporaneous claims it was. Give me all the evidence to support the thur i are it was a vehicle backfire. And then tell me why not invest a very minimal resources required to exhaustively search the white house. Representative, oftentimes in these cases there are a number of people that make different statements. What i can tell you is uniform Division Officers on constitution avenue heard gunfire or reported gunfire. I cant speak to the spes thinksthinks can you speak to why a housekeeper found it and your department did not. Housekeepers routinely work in the private residence of the first family. Even when theres overwhelming lets say suspicious shots were fired. We wont say overwhelming evidence. That would require you to search the premises. Overwhelming us is suspicion of shots fired. You dont go through every inch of the residence . I want you to imagine theres a prosecutor in front of the jury. You explain why a housekeeper found evidence of the shooting and your agency did not. Representative, again, this case has been prosecuted in federal court and those explanations were made before a federal thank the lord the explanations were sufficient for a jury. I want you to think of sufficient reconnoissance. The its difficult to see at night. How about hear . Can you hear at night . Officers heard the shots fired on constitution avenue. Officers swept the area looking for any type of intruder or injury. It was not known until days later that the shots had struck the upper level, the third floor level of the white house. Okay. Im going to end with the same question i began with. Why not search every inch of the white house given the small investment of resources. I went on your website and i saw you have training for psychology, you have training for survival skills. All of which im sure is important. This is processing a crime scene, director. In is not high math. Its the processing a crime scene. You dont need 18 weeks of training. You need to walk around. Why wasnt it done . There was a sweep done it wasnt as thorough as it needed to be. Evidently not. Now rerecognize mr. Director, i want to talk about prevention. If we look back in july, several months before the incident where the perimeter was breached and mr. Gonzalez went into the white house. Its our information he was stopped by the Virginia State police. They found a map in the car with a line directly to the white house. Is that your understanding as well . It was a regional map with a line pointed to the memorial area of the mall and the other historic monuments. Our reports that the Virginia State police and the atf then refer that matter to the secret service because presumably because of that line. Thats correct. Yes, the candidate was later referred to the secret service for an interview of mr. Gonzales. How to thorough would it have been . They had a thorough initial interview with mr. Gonzales and initiated contacts with his family members, Mental Health history. They determined he had a Mental Health history. He acknowledged he had a Mental Health history as a veteran with ptsd. Can you obtain his records . If the individual consents to the release of their medical records, we do pursue that. In this case, he consented the release of the records. You had the medical records to review. I assume your agents did review them . They were obtained over a period of time and we have received them and have been reviewed. Despite all of that, what happened. Didnt take any action, didnt have him arrested or continue to be under observation, did you . Representative, its a difficult thing dealing with disabilities and people dealing with Mental Illness when they dont exhibit any unusual direction of interest in our protectees. At the time he denied any interest or any intent to harm anyone. He indicate ed his information real toift map was given to him who recommended places in washington, d. C. , to sight see. He intended to go on camping trips and wanted to go to the valley forge pennsylvania area. Was the individual who gave him the map questioned . Not to my knowledge. How does that con format with your protocol and procedures . I know our investigators are as thorough as they can be to make sure we have a good understanding of your testimony of the individual wasnt available for some reason . I dont know the specific of that. I can get back with you. I think that would be an occasion whether or not they were as thorough as they should have been. Notwithstanding that there was a second decision before breached by mr. Gonzales where he was found walking in front of the white house with a hatchet in his belt. Is that correct . He was observed on august 25th on the south fence line. And interviewed by secret Service Agents . By uniform Division Officers. And his name was run against data base . Basically indicated it . Provided information of the original contact. Thats how they knew he had been arrested in virginia. Had a map pointing toward the area of the white house, and ammunition in his car. Found outside the white house walking with a hatchet. We knew he had Mental Health problems, his records had been reviewed. What happened then . They asked him about the hatchet he was carrying. He indicated he had been camping in the area around quantity koe. The officers and agents asked him for a consent search of his vehicle. He agreed and was going to return the hatchet to the vehicle. They looked through the vehicle and he was extremely cooperative. Dispelled the concerns. He appears to be living out of his car. Had camping gear in his car. They let him go . He vant violated any laws and had to be released. Did they have any followup . Did anybody talk to any other agencies in the Washington Area about observing this individual or making sure that somebody knew what the behavior was after the second incident . The second incident was passed into so it could be evaluated in contact with mr. Gonzalez in july. What happened at the end of the evaluation . What was the recommendation . He had not committed any violations. Nothing that no further action can be taken by the secret service other than to contour his behavior through the family. Is that the only way. There was no other indication there was any Law Enforcement activity that could monitor his behavior . He was currently on bond pending the charges from the state police and the incident that brought him to our attention. He was addressed and returning to the area. The case was still under evaluation as to what mr. Gonzales mental history was and whether or not he was going to come to our attention again. Your understanding that you thought it was appropriate that the secret service did not else to make surine the individual t monitored . Its difficult for the secret service when these come to our attention. As many as 300 a year or a day are being evaluated by our office of protective intelligence. Many of them will brought to our attention or making a direct threat against our protectees. Theyre mentally ill. Many have long pasts. Some are more cooperative than others. In this specific case he was being very cooperative. His family had been contacted by investigators. The family members indicated that he was cooperative. He did not have a violent past. His Mental Health records, to my understanding with ive been briefed did not reflect any of the Mental Health contacts refer to him as bag danger to himself or others. Thank you. Im going to follow up to that. My understanding people told us there were three different officers that had seen him and recognized him the day that the incident happened but did not report it. Is that true or not true . Its my understanding based on what ive been briefed two of the officers recognized mr. Gonzalez in the area of the white house on september 19th and observed him for some time. They remembered him from the contact they with him on august 25th. When he was on the south fence line. He wasnt acting inappropriately. Did not report that and did not approach him, correct . I think they noted that but did not approach him. And they didnt report it . Not to my knowledge. I recognize the agagentleman from georgia. Thank you. I think there are several concerns. One of the things i great whole heartedly is. Both republicans and democrats. Were talking about the white house. Its not a National Icon as you said. Its a world icon. You think of america and you think of the white house. One of the concerns about having weve been mentioning many of the issues here recently on different events. The issue is not the protocols that have been put in place and what is done. The issues of why are there so many instances on a foundational level. Where y there doesnt seem to be a willingness to report or exercise a willingness to say this is something i noticed. The officer said she didnt feel she could report it. If theres other issues where youre having the instances describedov ed overseas. We have to address these not frontal your perspective from hearings. There are several things i want to address. You made a statement i was curious. You said we get 300 suspicious people a year and 300 a day in the same sentence. Which is it . In talking to our protective intelligence division, as of yesterday they were directly overseeing 327 investigations. Okay. So in totality were looking at 327 at this point. The question i have youre making a review, but it is our understanding reported and very visual is my colleague from District Of Columbia pointed out has been the new fence or perimeter put in front of the white house, is that correct . We have put up a temporary rack to provide us withstand area to the fence while the investigation is underway. I thank you for the long answer to questiyes. You made several comments were doing an investigation. Were saying why the protocols were briefed. How they got there. But you said we dont want to change things but yet weve already started with putting a perimeter fence or a barrier now back from the fence currently. Im wondering here is the problem doesnt seem to be the fence. The problem seems to be the fact that someone jumped the fence, ran 70 yards, went into the white house with nobody stopping them. You made a comment. I have a background my father was in Law Enforcement. Its hard for me. You made an analogy im not sure should be accurate here. You talk about discretion and restraint. Discretion and restraint in the way as Police Officers do this all the time. They do so on the side of the road when you manade a stop. You protecting a National Understanding this person should not be here and an immediate understanding that there is not a restraining factor. This is not the cuddly secret service. Im having trouble how you correlate restraint and discretion in a traffic situation which is the way it came across to someone going after the president s home. I have stated that they did not properly execute the security protocols that are appropriate. You believe that is because of information or guidance that they have gotten from the top that they were not sure what to do. Have they been told they need to authorize discretion. They have the right to take action as individuals. I am conducting an investigation to find out what investigations were made and what are the facts and the totality of the situation that those officers saw. This issue of putting the fence line in front or at least a Police Barrier and looking at the area, we have again we are trying to make ourselves appear better as we are working on it. As hard as that is to say, his president and family deserve to be told even about the shooting until many days later. Thats mind boggling to me for the president and his wife especially when his daughter was in the residence that night. I have a question. Explain to me. It putting the fence the only fix. We have not heard from anybody else. Help me out. Is there a better way to go around this . Protecting embassies around the world as they pointed out, its a consent rick ring of layered security. The fence is one of the last things. Typically fences are meant to keep good people out. Bad people find ways over fences. You cant simply rely on a fence to be the last resort. I think the issue that has come as we go forward is the protection that it is a threat environment that we are in is concerning that we get half truths to start with and more truths. Its a leaking out when this is a group that you want to see what is the issue and why are we not doing it. We are doing something is not right. The foundation has to be laid and the secret service has a Foundational Program and thats the bigger issue along with protocols not being followed. As we go to mr. Lynch, i want to make sure one thing was clear. The failure to apprehend mr. Gonzales before he got well into the white house, the change of further set back or fence since you successfully stopped 16 jumpers in the last five years. We are listening into what has been a very interesting hour as these questions are directed at julia pearson, the head of the secret Service Since 2013. Let me bring in mark murray. Senior political editor. We are seeing similar questions from democrat, republicans and the same questions the American People have asked regarding these two major breeches in security. In early september. The other in 2011. It doesnt seem as if we are getting a lot of answers. Set aside issues that can be made public. Why it took so long to inform the president and the first lady regarding the gunshots. Whats your impression here . The investigations are ongoing and we are trying to get answers. They may ask why werent you able to have the answers right now . What strikes me about the hearing is the bipartisan nature of the grilling. We have been watching politics for quite sometime now and its normally one side that is outraged or the democrats or republicans. Its both parties and very tough questions for the secret service. It feeds into this lack of faith and american institutions where people are down on the congress and the presidency and they are down on the secret service and down on the media. One error is one problem, but when you end up having a second, a third, a fourth, you end up getting a hearing like todays. The official report from the secret service that he was unarmed when he had a knife, he read that report. No one ever corrected the information that was put out to the public. One of the things when you deal with Public Relations and the media, sometimes you need to get everything out as quick low as possible and as transparently as possible, the person was arm and was wheelding a knife, its another story after another story. One mistake turns into three or four. Or a situation where there is not transparency at some point. They knew how far this gentlemen got into the white house. They held on to that secret service and they know where he was stopped. At some point, they were aware he had a knife. There were questions as well, mark. The transparency is a fine line. As members of the media, we want as much transparency as possible. When you are at the white house and you are dealing with National Protocol issues that you may not want every person in the world to know about, particularly the bad guys. When there is a damaging problem, you need to get the information out as quickly as possible. You just dont want there to be more damaging stories where you could have cleaned it up the first or second day. We will continue to follow this House Oversight hearing. That does it for this edition of news nation. Thank you so much for joining us for the hour. We are back tomorrow. Up next, Andrea Mitchell reports. Introducing vicks qlearquil allergy morning hank. What a day, huh . Hey morning hank. For people who dont have allergies every day, just on allergy days. sneeze new qlearquil. The powerfully effective, take it only when you need it, so you can be you again, allergy medicine. Boo haha. All right, see you buddy and introducing qlearquil nighttime, the new allergy medicine for night. Qlearquil, powerful sinus and allergy medicine from the makers of vicks nyquil and dayquil. Fifteen percent or more fifon car insurance. D save you Everybody Knows that. Well, did you know certain cartoon characters should never have an energy drink . Action blahbechtblah blublublubblah geico®. Introducing the birds of america collection. Fifty stunning, handpainted plates, commemorating the state birds of our proud nation. Blahbechtblah blublublubblah geico®. Fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. Why are we just learning today that the intruder was tackled in the room of the white house. Were you lying to the American People . I look forward to having an open discussion with the committee. Were you led where the intruder was tackled. They are conducting an ongoing investigation. Right now, in the line of fire. Kristen welker sets the stage for the secret Service Director julia pearsons grilling on the hill. A bipartisan shelac over a series of secret service mishaps and failures and her own leadership. The secret service must show us how there is a clear path back to public trust. This, ladies and gentlemen, is not a democratic issue. This is not a republican issue. This is an american issue. Dont let somebody get close to the president. N