Were behaving peacefully thank you very much. The committee on Natural Resources will come to order. The committee is meeting to hear testimony on the questions of the u. S. Park police june 1 attack on the Peaceful Protesters at Lafayette Square. Under Committee Rules, oral Opening Statements and the ranking minority member or his designee. This will allow us to hear from the witnesses sooner and helps members ge keep to the schedule. Therefore i ask unanimous consent of the members o memberg statements be made a part of this hearing records submitted by 5 p. M. Today. Hearing no objection, so ordered. Without objection the chair will also declare a recess subject to the call of the chair. As described in the notice of documents and motions will be submitted to the electronic. Additionally please note members are responsible for their own microphones and as with the in person meetings members can be muted only to avoid inadvertent background noise. Anyone present in the hearing room today must wear a mask covering their mouth and nose. The speaker of the house and sergeantatarms acting upon the recommendation require face coverings for old indoor gatherings over 15 minutes in length such as this committee meeting. Accordingly to maintain decorum and protect the safety of members and staff, the chair will not recognize any member in the room to speak who is not wearing a mask. According to the house rule 17 and Committee Rule three the chairman has the rights to give recognition to remember that wishes to speak or offer a motion. This includes the responsibility to maintain decorum. It should be noted that is permitted by the sergeantatarms through his guidance exceptions for the members facilitate lipreading for those that are deaf or hard of hearing. If those that experienced technical problems should inform the staff immediately and with that i will now recognize myself for the Opening Statements. Today we continue examining the park police to remove protesters around the area of Lafayette Square. In a hearing last month witnesses told us Law Enforcement officers saw Peaceful Protesters and journalists without warning. We heard that the clergy forced their own property in the photo op calling a sacrilege. Many questions remain unanswer unanswered. Who gave the order and why, who authorized the police to assault nonviolent protesters, was a premeditated plan as the officials described it, was there a plan. Meaning if they refuse to testify, so im very glad the acting chief of the u. S. Park service is here with us today. We are also fortunate to welcome major demarco to the police on july 1. I think you for your service to the country which includes the participation here today. As the events have shown it was a test run for the crackdown by the chavez administration. It did occur on june first with was from the administration is doubling down its response to unarmed civilians in cities like portland and despite the demand what we saw with civilians being tucked up without probable cause and in albuquerque new mexico where the president has threatened to use similar tactics. This raises a crucial question motivated by partisan hostile to be directed from above to those demanding justice for george floyd and so many other black men, women and children and a very Diverse Group of people in the First Amendment rights from washington, d. C. Featuring. My friend made fu one of his lat public appearances at the scene of the park Police Protesters only six days before the june 1 incident. He spent his life doing what most of u us that was the right thing fighting for fair and equal treatment so i believe it is our duty as americans and human beings to ensure others fighting do not suffer the same brutality mr. Lewis have to indooendor in the quest for fais for all people. I think we can do better and we can be better and that is what we are here to do. Even in todays title park Police AttackedPeaceful Protesters included chris. The assertion these were Peaceful Protesters completely ignoring the facts and there is vandalism and assaults on Police Officers in the days leading up to june 1. This is even acknowledged by the second panel with ms. And written testimony that states the witness learned federal Law Enforcement officers and secret service had sustained injuries. However, todays hearing title. I was confident these would remain because the one witness who might be able to answer them wasnt at a previous hearing into the minority knew that and continued with the hearing for show. Im glad to see you here today. We are honored to have you and appreciate the testimony for the committee. You might not have all the answers today, but we will probably be able to provide some of the facts that we were missing from the previous hearing on the topic. So we are grateful for that. My hope is they will be able to see beyond the scope the democrats are bearing these actions and establish the truthful history of what happened on that day. For example we need more details about the warnings that were provided and the opportunity to protesters were given to disperse in the last hearing they the witness claimed there were no warnings indicate when collins said park police is now warning protesters to leave. Theyve given three warnings over a loudspeaker and that was 6 32 on june 1. So who are we to believe. We cant talk about the events in a vacuum. It must be viewed on a larger context. What plans were made prior about expanding the perimeter. How did the levels of violence and destruction we should also compare the scenarios of Lafayette Park to other protests that have occurred in the city. We have a number of examples from the march just to name a few. The difference between those events and that of Lafayette Square are the acts of violence and destruction. While the predetermined narratives and other events occurring throughout the nation outlines the story of the Law Enforcement squashing rights, the reality of the situation is quite different. The agents act to secure the area and restore peace thinking reactive measures after the acts of violence and destruction. The true culprits responsible for performing the peaceful protests are vandals and rioters and benefactors that hijacked an Important National conversation to push their agenda of violence and disorder. And those who should cast as the villains in the plot. Those that ignore the mall and create an unsafe environment for Peaceful Protesters and Law Enforcement alike. They are responsible for limiting the ability of others to express their thoughts and opinions. Although i did not believe that this is the closing act of the political drama. Perhaps this is the story of the plot or the committee focuses on the facts instead of political points. And to answer questions about the decisions that are made on june 1 and with that, i will yield. Now we will turn to the first panel hes been with the park police and Law Enforcement from over 22 years. Thank you very much for being here today. I was reminded of this under the Committee Rules you must limit your statement to five minutes, but your entire statement will appear in the hearing record. The chair thinking the chief for being here with us today recognizes mr. Monahan for his testimony. The floor is yours. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member bishop and members of the committee, my name is Gregory Monahan and im the acting chief for the park police. The United States park police is the oldest uniform federal Law Enforcement in the United States and provides Law EnforcementServices Including the protection of visitors and resources to designated National Park service areas. Primarily in washington, d. C. , new york city, and San Francisco metropolitan areas. Here in washington, that includes the National Mall and Lafayette Park on the north side of the white house and between 15th and 17th street northwest. Each year the United States park police facilitates demonstrations and special events in and around the district. To ensure the safety of the public peace demonstrations of partners and coordinates with numerous Public Safety and Protection Agencies within a National Capital area. In the days following the death of george floyd, videos from witnesses and tv became public and ultimately led to protesting cities throughout the United States and abroad. The district became a focal point for demonstrators and one of the most highly concentrated areas of protest was in and around Lafayette Park which is recognized as a public forum for speech and assembly. The park police is accustomed to managing unruly public demonstrations and spontaneous events as well as throughout the National Capital area. In these instances we have an obligation to protect the safety of the demonstrators, maintain law and order and keep Law Enforcement officers safe. Public use of Lafayette Park became a danger to Public Safety and was inconsistent with the preservation of National Park service resources. Violent demonstrations occurred between may 29 of june 1 and included project files aimed at Law Enforcement officers and putting bricks, rocks, substances, frozen Water Bottles, fireworks and two by four sections of lumber. Protesters were physically combated with Law Enforcement. The violent protesters injured 50 officers in the park police alone. The length of my officers were transported to area hospitals and three of them are ultimately admitted. The unprecedented and sustained nature of violence and destruction associated with the activities and Lafayette Park required and later saturday evening in may 31 the park police in consultation with their partners and secret service decided to temporarily restrict access to the park and the adjacent streets by ordering and installing fencing across the north side of Lafayette Park. Once we made the decision the installation was dependent on two factors. First w they are required to hae sufficient resources. Once it arrives on the ground assessment presented by the crowd and the installation. The park police face a significant amount of criticism on the heels of the observation however the installation on the nortnorth side of lafayette pars the key tactic that serves to deescalate the violent behavior of the ba actors. The violence dropped dramatically in that area the United States park police acted with restraint the decision to install as the furtherance of the commitment. Thank you and i look forward to answering questions the committee may have. Reminding the members of kabul with the limited question. The timeframe from George Floyds murder until june 1 and talked with Lafayette Park about the period between, your words, between 1890 and june 1. This committee is focused on the chronology matters. Are you suggesting some of these incidents by protesters occur on june 1 fax debate go . Yes sir, i am. We sustained violence from a number of ba factors in lafayete park and on eighth street. Can you provide the committee with documentation of that because that contradicts the firsthand evidence that they have including video evidence. Any request for any documents im happy to. We want to see everything youve got on that. Now did that happen before or after 6 35 p. M. When you are officers and others began advancing on the protesters . The level of violence we were suggested subjected to, the level of violence did it happen before 6 35 p. M. . I understand. The violenc violence we were sud to was that the entire operation. We really do want to see that evidence. You have been with the park police for a long time to you are surely familiar with the settlement your agency entered into after 13 years of litigation you ended up paying millions of dollars to almost 400 Peaceful Protesters that you had advanced on with forceful means and as a part of the legal settlement of Service Police was required to make very specific policy changes. Are you familiar with that settlement . I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record that settlement agreement. And the top of page eight, that requires the park police to update its procedure to provide all of the warnings to protesters to disperse, and there are for significant parts to that, legally enforceable commitment that your agency made. First, officers must be positioned in the rear of the crowd so they can hear the warnings are given before the police advanced. Second is the need to use sound amplification as needed, and a third, the need to warn the protesters they are in violation of the specific flaw. There is a substantive requirement is a part of that warning. Fourth, maybe most significantly for june 1, the arresting officers positioned in the rear of the crowd are required to give a verbal and or physical indication to the officers in the front who were giving the warning so that your officers can confirm that it was audible and that it had been heard by the protesters. For all owere all of these procs followed on june 1 . [inaudible] i just want to get your direct answer. You see every one of those procedures was followed. Im going to ask to play a video that we believe suggests otherwise, mr. Chief, so id like to ask the staff to play the clip entitled warning number one. On the loud speaker a voice cuts through the noise. The announcement appears to come from the southeast part of the park even on the frontlines of f the protest in footage refuted a post, the words are drowned out. Protesters turn to one another in confusion. Could you understand the warning recorded in the video, wasnt audible to you . [inaudible] you must have super human hearing because i dont think any of us could hear it and wouldnt you agree from our own eyes because he protesters who were clearly confused who didnt appear to be told that they were about to be advanced on and didnt appear to be told they were in violation of a specific law as the settlement indicates. Do you feel it is evidenced in the video footage . I think when you take into account video footage, this context, and based on other video that ive viewed from june 1, and specifically around this time frame when the first warning was given, throughout the first warning through the third morning, you can see a number of demonstrators leave the area and he had the warning that was given. We do look forward to getting the evidence that backs up your account of this. But from everything we have heard in everything w and everye seen, it sure appears as if the park Police Ignored their own legal requirements in the settlement to follow these procedures, almost as if they wanted the crowd to be confused so they could go in with maximum force, and perhaps appease a president who just hours earlier had urged to act that way. I yield back. But they recognize you for five minutes, sir. Thank you mr. Chairman and mr. Monahan for your testimony. This is about politics, and i apologize to you in the res andf the officers in the United States park police for having to endure a political attack. This i isnt the first hearing weve had on this and it probably wont be the last. If my colleagues across the aisle were concerned about police reform, i dont think that their colleagues in the senate would have described under tim scottsville as a token note. I dont think the speaker would have dismissed it as attempted murder or whatever word she used about senator scottsville. We are here today to find out the facts, not to play politics with a serious situation. My colleagues are supporting the funding the police and seem to have no problem with defacing public property. Wed all agree that americans are allowed to protest peacefully like the constitution says. So the question is were these peaceful protests or violent protests. Youve testified that 50 of your officers were injured. Can you describe some of those injuries . Yes, sir. Like i said in my Opening Statement, the officers were injured between may 29 and jun june 1. May 29 we had 13 officers were injured during violent protests at Lafayette Park in 1600 pennsylvania avenue. 11 of those were trauma related, to the head, upper body and lower body. One of those was sustained from the united is per Police Wearing his helmet