someone accusing atf agents of actually watching suspected gun traffickers just drive away was special agent dotson on cbs. and i didn't believe him and i was very vocal about that. i didn't become aware until it started coming out little by little talking to fellow agents, and then mid-april i saw some documents and that commits me that would special agent dotson was alleging wasn't that correct. >> thank you and the other special agents that are here, mr. gil, mr. subdo in your experience is as the first time you have seen and atf operate this way? >> i recently retired after going on 23 plus years. it is inconceivable and again i didn't believe it even after seeing mr. dodson as well and i still didn't believe it until after i talked to mr. dodson and others that i became convinced that perhaps atf did use. >> has a as i stated in my opening remarks, yes. is the first time i've ever seen it and i was very skeptical. i believe mr. dodson wasn't alone. >> part of my duty is to look at the southwest border cases, all of them and this is the first one i have seen. i would like to add something that the panel was asking earlier. now you asked when we first became aware that mr. acosta was involved as the leader of the straw purchasing ring and some of the other issues as to mr. pitino. that was in 2009. and it was early on. i briefed it to my senior directors january of 2010. and we know this in one of the driving forces behind how we know that these were going to mexico, and there were mexico people involved, is because or other law-enforcement partners provided us with information, specific information that allowed us to know exactly what was going on and to what cartel it was going to. this was not a mystery. we knew this in december of 2009. i briefed it in 2010. january. >> thank you, sir. special agent newell, and mr. mcmahon we will get to you because you are the supervisor. so at some point, based on the ig's report in doj, they said we are going to try something different here. i'm assuming because that is the way things work in government and maybe i'm wrong, if someone says we need to have this operation and we are going to make a determination that for for the first-time atf is going to conduct business this way. we are going to let these guns walk. they maybe didn't say it but in essence that is really what happened. it is a different way of conducting business with atf. where would that plan have come from? i know you sat down with this group mr. noel, but somebody higher up than you made a determination that for the first time atf is going to run this. we have heard from this panel and we have heard from the panel prior today that this is a complete aberration to the way atf has done things. where would that have come from? >> well maam, importing the strategy together for this case the strategy came from several places. the department adjusted originated a draft in january 2010 about how to combat southwest border drug trafficking by mexican drug cartels and one of them dealt with firearms trafficking that said three tzipi located strike forces a mere interdiction is not the answer. you have to go after the structure and the organization of whatever it be, firearms, human drug trafficking to make the biggest impact. >> and who would that memo have come from? >> i do believe that memo came down from the deputy attorney general's office. >> and then, so now we are going to change the strategy. it is going to be a different way to conduct an operation. so you get your directives from them and these groups you talk about, you sat down and it came up with a plan noted that plan come from. >> the plan figured into come or the memo figured into how we were going to address when we first looked at it in november 2009 was already a prolific firearms trafficking organization. in my 23 years we have never seen an organization that was this prolific in buying firearms in such a short terry mac of time so we felt at that time in conjunction with the strike wars for this group seven was located that the best way to attack this organization was through the use of a multiagency conspiratorial type investigation to dismantle the moral organization. >> the b. gentlelady's time is expired and we now go to the gentleman from michigan, mr. ahmad should. >> i'm going to yield my time to mr. gowdy. >> i thank the gentleman from michigan. mr. leadman for those who are perhaps watching and not familiar with the full panoply of investigative techniques surveillance is a tried and true investigative technique, correct? what about consensual encounters where you just walk up to someone and ask them? there is a reason dostoevsky wrote -- and edgar allen poe wrote the telltale heart. >> there are several tools in the toolbox as they say when you are faced with the fact that we know that these weapons are going to be used in such carnage in mexico and the united states. we should have pulled every tool out of the toolbox. not just to make her case. r. k. should not prior to hear. there is a flow of firearms -- it up in the number one priority and we should've reached and that toolbox. we should have conducted interviews and we should have done interviews with surrounding people. we should have tracked these weapons better. we should have followed everything by the letter to stop them. >> have you ever heard of a law enforcement officer stopping someone for speeding when really they may have had another purpose in mind? >> i have heard that it happens. >> crossing the yellow line? >> sooner or later you are going to make a mistake. >> exactly and when you do a lawful non-contextual car stop also opens up the full panoply of other search options like searching the vehicle or a pat-down. how about a proffer? is that in your toolbox to go to a united states attorney and say i would like to proffer this person? i would like to send a grand jury subpoena? it is the same week you conduct every other investigation other than this one, right? from shoplifting to murder. we do it all the same way except this one. >> correct. >> special agent newell, i happen to think this was ill-conceived from it's inception. you have testified repeatedly that purpose was to destroy, dismantle drug cartels. so i'm going to ask you again. how would this ever have succeeded? what was your purpose? how would we have known, hey this was a great investigation? >> surya said the purpose of this investigation was to disrupt and dismantle of firearms trafficking organization. >> in mexico? >> in united states. not only straw purchasers the middlemen and transporters and financiers. >> the guns were going into mexico and you should have known this was an abject failure because that is not what you wanted, right? >> absolutely. >> so when he found out the first and went to mexico why did you not abort the investigation? because we were still putting the facts together. >> when is the very first time you knew or should have known that firearms were going to mexico? >> i believe it when we got the first traces i would advise the first traces which i believe was in november 2009. >> when did you abort the investigation? >> the investigation is ongoing. >> that is my point. you knew the weapons were going to mexico. were you at some point going to bat special agent canino know about it? >> mr. canino knew about a. >> he knew that weapons were going into mexico? >> absolutely, yes. >> when you read going to let their mexican counterparts know about it? >> i am assuming they knew. one of the issues about that is there is only one field of vision in this country come only one that has a pgr representative and it and that is the mexican department of justice. in all my years of working with mexico i spent four years in bogotá colombia representing atf. i am very keen on the fact that we need to share information with their foreign law-enforcement. >> you testified earlier that you are going to turn the information over to mexican prosecutors and let them prosecute because i asked you where you also going to allow u.s. law enforcement officers to be extradited to mexico for breaking their law and he said no. my question to you is this. how in the world are you going to get our brothers and sisters and law enforcement to trust -- why would you trust the prosecution if you don't trust the investigation? >> to answer your question about the drug cartel, the kingpin -- we did not have information until late in this case who that individual was and i abided with mr. canino we invited in december of 2010 as well as january mexican prosecutors to comment. i don't think that is ever been done before and i'm the one that requested it. >> digi debrief them on "fast and furious"? did you tell them the guns were going into mexico? >> well, yes. >> you told them when? >> my pgr representative i had in my office who has been there for two years new about this case. >> when the first gun showed up in mexico that you knew was from phoenix. the first one. did you go interview the. >> no sir murray didn't. >> why not? >> again our strategy was that when going from years of experience you take out one straw purchaser. you are not having an effect on the greater organization. >> heavy over flipped a corporate in windows before? how do you do it without asking them? how do you do without undergoing them? >> it depends on a goal of the investigation. speier goal is to bring down an investigation. [inaudible] why didn't you go, why didn't you approach him? >> approach who? >> the straw purchaser. >> the goelzer in this case was to take out the organization we felt by just trying to flip one straw purchaser if in fact he did flip it would not affect the overall goal. >> the gentleman's time has expired. expired. we will have a second round. we now go to the gentleman from idaho, mr. labrador. >> special agent canino i think i heard special agent newell say that you knew about this gun walking. can you please. >> i want to make it perfectly clear to you and the american people and mexican government, my family and my friends. at no time ever did i know that atf agents were following known, suspected gun traffickers one of which bought 700 guns and we knew about his gun showing up in mexico six weeks after we opened up that investigation. never, ever what i imagine that we were letting that happen. we have 4000 best occasions plus or minus with mexico u.s. nexus. there are guns coming in. that is trafficking. the guns are coming into mexico. i have no clue that we were allowing these guns to go out there like this. like mr. gowdy said, there was no one -- interdiction to start any case. you have a toolbox. we have classes. jose teaches those trafficking classes. i have been to them. it is like building a house. you started the bottom and you try to work your way up. at one point you will only reach so far and then you come in and you have a meeting and you say okay how can we advance this? you meet with the u.s. attorney. from what i see here, none of this was done or if it was, it wasn't very effective. >> so when did you first realize the gun walking allegations which are? >> april. >> this year? >> yes, i mean i was starting to lean that way and then i was that atf your headquarters for mating and i sat down with mr. levin and he convinced me. >> did you come across any specific evidence to prove atf had taken part in these actions? >> one more time? >> did you come across any specific evidence to prove atf had taken part in these actions? >> from the totality of circumstances and speaking with different agents yeah. the guns were showing up in mexico. >> did you review any documents? >> you know, sarah, i visited mr. leadman and i saw, took a look at the management line. if i read it correctly, there were three instances in the first two pages where we walk away from guns. at that point i was so disgusted i didn't want to look at the case filing any more. >> when was that? >> that was in mid-april. of this year. >> why were you so upset with this information? >> because it goes against everything we have taught. like i was explaining earlier, you don't do that. we are not taught to do that. from the first day we walk into the academy all the way until you leave this job, like aron said, it is not a recognized investigative technique. this is not a special case. this just a trafficking case that we do. this is what we do. amongst other things trafficking is what we do especially on the southwest border. this wasn't a one of. this wasn't a whodunit. this was you know, this was the. >> it was a basic case? >> yeah. >> like you do everyday? >> exactly. >> special agent newell, do you know who kevin o'reilly is? >> yes, sir. >> what is the nature of your relationship with him? bif known kevin for probably 10 or 12 years. >> how often do you communicate with him? >> i haven't communicated with him in a while but probably three or four times a year, something like that. may be more with him reaching out to me. >> isn't that a bit unusual having direct e-mail contact with a national security -- of the white house? >> how many times did you talk to him about this case? >> the specifics of this case? .. >> so, mcmahon, you took responsibility this morning here for the actions of and i appreciate that. who at the highest level -- i can't imagine this is something you decided to do on your own. did you communicate with the highest level about this case? >> i communicated to my chin of command within atf. we are all very much aware of the investigation and what was going on. >> who was aware of this investigation was occurring and that the guns were being blocked to mexico if you can answer that question time is expired but go ahead. >> no one was aware guns or walking. my level or above me we are getting caught up in the definition of walking but whatever the definitions are no one from my level of know of any gun walking. >> i thank the gentleman. we go to the gentleman from florida, mr. ross, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. mcmahon, i had the opportunity to read your opening statement. i've been out of here and first fully appreciate your service and of her stand your remorse with what is going on here but got to talk to you a little about the interview you had. and i would like to review some if i could get slight six brought up this is a transcript of the interview that you had and when you were asked whether you read the lawyer to applications for the fast and furious and you responded no, i did not; do you recall that question and answer? >> i do. >> when you were asked if it was your job to sign off on the wiretap applications, you stated no, i never signed off on a memo for the wiretap publication; and it was your statement then and still today? >> yes, it is. >> slide seven, if we can show slight seven. okay. this is a memorandum dated february 5th, 2005, that addressed to you from the group supervisor, phoenix group seven. the first line states this memorandum serves to request authorization to initiate a title three cellular telephone intercept. it's addressed to you. do you recall that memorandum? >> i recall seeing it recently, yes. >> you don't recall seeing it before? >> i do not. >> okay. >> slide eight, if we can get that up there and this is a and the e-mail from william newell to you on february, 2010. attached to this e-mail was an e-mail with a memo as we saw them pass the slide and the e-mail states attaches the covered memo requesting authorization to conduct the intercept on the suspect strike force firearm out of the phoenix and tunnell the fast and furious im fedex and that to you. do you recall receiving that? >> i don't recall that i obviously received that, yes. i don't specifically recall receiving this e-mail, nope. >> do you recall seeing the attachment? >> no, i do not, and i think the e-mail records show they were not able to scan the attachment because it was large and they said they were going to fedex it. >> who said that to you? >> it says that in the e-mail. >> it tells you it was too large? >> it says i could not stand the actual affidavit deutsch to its size so i am sending it so scanning it means attaching it to this e-mail. >> this is the request for a wiretap? >> this has the request for a wiretap attached to the e-mail. >> it's actually an affidavit prepared at the u.s. attorney's office. >> okay. this is an affidavit by the special agent mcalister in support of the application for authorization to intercept wired communications and attached for your review. the signature block is for schaefer but there's someone else's signature. do you recognize that? that's my signature. >> so you were aware of this request for the wiretap? >> absolutely. >> having seen these documents now is their anything would you like to clarify in your testimony or interview at all? >> i know that we forwarded the application for the wiretap through the legal counsel process to get their approval before i went back to the oeo and meen justice. >> but you just testified minutes ago that you were not -- don't recall ever requesting authorization for the center said. >> i said i never recalled receiving this request. i did get the actual application for the wiretaps and then they were forwarded. >> in one of those requests did you authorize? >> the last slide you put up from mark, that would transmit the actual application for the wiretap, yes. >> okay. >> in your interview were you asked about this? >> not this specifically, nope. >> did you volunteer? >> nope. >> any reason why not? >> i'm trying to figure out what i need to volunteer. i told the staff i don't recall -- i did recall receiving applications but did not -- >> you don't play to mr. kumar door knowledge about any of this? >> i iran played mr. kumar my knowledge? that's not correct. i told them everything i knew about this. >> was that in march of 2010? >> it was throughout this investigation. >> i see my time is expired. >> i ask the gentleman have an additional 30 seconds. >> with the gentleman yield 30 seconds? >> yes, sir. >> i am one of the mom lawyers appears that's why i introduce the qualified people early on. but as a layperson, it looks like you had an intimate part in the wiretap request. your signature was part of a request process, yet when we ask about your being involved in them, you did not volunteer to tell about this part. you simply relied on you didn't actually sign the affidavit; is that what you're saying? the truth was you didn't sign the affidavit even though you signed this document and all other documents and worse and other documents that you may not remember? >> i signed this document that transmit the application for the wiretap to the counsel's office for that mistake is not doing a faeroe review of the documents that were coming across my desk. i accept full responsibility for that. >> with the gentle lady from new york like to have a round of questions? >> the gentlelady is recognized. >> thank you very much. i thank you and the ranking member for holding this hearing and all of you for your service to our country. we appreciate it. we've had a series of hearings and i regret i was also in a hearing we are having in the financial services that i am the ranking member on so i had to be there. so i wasn't here for most of it. but mr. cummings is going to brief me completely on everything that happened. on one of our prior hearings, we had a special agents that basically testified that the enforcement was not strong enough without was one of the problems of the border that there wasn't an expressed wall against trafficking and guns, and that a lot of times were to use the terms of one of the agency called him to phyllis, that you couldn't do anything with it and they said that the penalties even in trafficking guns and serious offenses and straw purchases and all ki