opportunity to serve and i want to thank the united states the united states of america who enables people like me to follow her dream and i hope in getting this award i continue to make my pledge to be of service. mr. president, i thank you. >> mr. prez-- you're watching c-span 2 and we will show you attorney general beretta lynches testimony before the house committee. later, congressional hearing looking at how terror organizations are financed. >> on the next washington journal, we look at how congress is reacting to the syrian refugee crisis with congressman earl bloom and how her and then on the paris attacks in us strategies against isis. then, a discussion about treatment for ptsd, with psychologist deborah by don't. washington journal's live with your phone call, tweets and facebook comments at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. stephen k signatures beecher of c-span 2 book tv is coverage of book fairs and festivals. with nonfiction author talks, interviews and view are calling segments are coming up, we will be live from the 32nd annual miami book fair and it starts saturday with authors represented in john lewis discussing his book, march, and like with "wall street journal" columnist and journalist peggy noonan. journalist judith miller joins us to discuss her book, the story, a reporter's journey. news man ted koppel and his book, lights out a cyber attack a nation unprepared. on sunday, speak with the author's life. burst, p.j. o'rourke takes calls. then, msnbc host, joy and read will take calls about her book, fracture, barack obama, clinton's and racial divide. join us live from miami on c-span twos book tv and following tweet us your questions, apple tv and c-span on twitter. >> next, attorney general loretto lish talks about the vetting a potential syrian refugee seeking asylum in the united states. justice department efforts to combat them as to gun violence and the investigation into political targeting by the internal revenue service. she testified at an oversight hearing held by the house judiciary committee and this is about four hours. >> the judiciary committee will come to order and without objection the chairs authorized to declare recess at any time and we look into everyone to the oversight of the us department of justice and i will begin by recognizing myself for an opening statement. welcome, attorney general lynch to your first appearance since your confirmation earlier this year. we are pleased to have you here with us. last week we witnessed horrific terrorist attacks in paris, which claimed the lives of our 120 innocent civilians and for which isis has taken credit. our thoughts and prayers remain with the french people and we mourn with them. at the same time, these terrorists attacks are a stark reminder that isis poses a threat to our allies in america yet, this reality is not clearly seen by our presidents. just hours before the attack, president obama boasted that isis is contained. isis is not contain in syria pure it is not contained in europe and we know isis is continuing its campaign of propaganda here in the us. we know from the paris attacks that at least one of the perpetrators was registered as a refugee from syria in the countries through which he traveled on his way to france. just last month fbi director told this committee that the us refugee betting process is not adequate to guarantee syrians referred for resettlement in the us are not terrorists who plan to harm us. yet, the president presses on with his plan to resettle at least 10000 syrian refugees during this fiscal year alone. i look forward to hearing your thoughts on this issue, considering the top counterterrorism investigator in the us consistently states that the databases and law enforcement resources are not available to properly vet syrians. furthermore, reports indicate that despite repeated congressional action to the contrary, this administration thinks terrorists at guantánamo bay who are cut from the same cloth as the paris attackers and many of whom are deemed too dangerous for release to foreign countries should be brought to the united states. transferring these competitive to the united states will only increase their odds of being release inside the us. these public and national security concerns coupled with unanswered questions about the cost and logistics of bringing detainees into the us, should cause the administration to hit pause on his reckless decision to close wonton alone detention facility. any combatants should remain outside of the united states with a can be detained away from our communities and without needlessly jeopardizing the state-- safety and security of the american people. in addition to the mounting national security threats facing the department justice, i would also like to focus on the need for impartial justice department americans have become more and more suspicious that the government agencies are biased and 20 stand this one need look no further than the well-founded allegations of the irs targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny. after numerous appeals to appoint a special counsel to investigate this, last month the justice department announced that no criminal prosecution would be brought against irs personnel in connection with this matter. it is not difficult to understand why a special counsel was needed given that only the zero's realizations opposed to the president overreaching agenda were targeted by high-ranking irs officials. , officials of the irs share secretary clinton's apparent notion that republicans are quote the enemy. i am profoundly disturbed by the ministrations handling of this matter. at every turn, president obama and administration officials repeatedly and publicly undermine the investigation. when the house of representatives took the response will step of calling for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the matter, our concern and those of the individuals targeted by the irs went unresolved by the administration. madam attorney general, now that your department has concluded its investigation i look forward to discussing the department's decision with you in greater detail. given the controversy surrounding the administration's handling of the irs targeting scandal, it is critical that the justice department clearly demonstrate to the american people that it will handle with impartiality its investigation surrounding former secretary of state hillary clinton's use of a private e-mail server for official purposes. earlier this year, two inspectors general reported that classified information was contained within the private e-mails of former secretary of state hillary clinton and have referred the matter to the justice department. during his appearance before the committee last month, fbi director komi now this investigation will be conducted quote probably, professionally and independently. rest assured congress and the mayor can people will hold both the bureau and department to this standard. the committee also means concern that the the part is subverting commerce's budget authority by using settlements to funnel money to third-party interest groups and the concern is-- institute and nonpartisan, but rather than suspend of the, doj has expanded it while quietly obstructing the committee's investigation. last week that apartment finally produced a small subset of relevant documents to committee-- that the committee requested 11 months ago. i would like to know, madam attorney general, what you as an experienced prosecutor would do if a large corporation behaved this way in an investigation. as we sit with you today, attorney general lynch, law-enforcement agencies across the country face profound challenges. thirty-one police officers have been shot to death this year alone. in many places, officers are understandably asking whether it is worth pursuing violent criminals or otherwise putting themselves in harms way, lest they be the targets of intentional violence or community backlash. force must be is appropriately and police officers must take proper steps to protect innocent civilians feared however, irresponsible anti- police activity from many in the advocacy community and the justice department ongoing effort to micromanage state and local police agencies have only served to exasperate the divide between police and citizens hearing this trend cannot continue. many american cities have seen a spike in violent crime. in baltimore, homicides are up 71% in august of this year the number of murders in washington dc already matched the number for all 2014. other cities have seen similar increases in violent crime. despite these grim statistics, however, the oh bahman ministration has continued to support initiatives that will only exacerbate this violence. on november 1, of this year, nearly 6000 federal drug offenders were released from prison pursuant to a 2014 sensing commission a moment, which the justice department supported. over the next two years some additional 10000 offenders will be released early. this ill-advised amendment applies without regard to an inmate's criminal history and will result in that release of dangerous violent criminals as well as the legal criminal aliens and as you know the committee has introduced bipartisan legislation to institute meaningful sentencing reform while preventing release of serious violent criminals fear speaking of releasing violent criminals, the murder of kate steinle in san francisco earlier this year is a tragic reminder that the lack of appropriate immigration enforcement in our nation today and the reckless sanctuary policies in many cities across the country can have deadly consequences. it is not enough for ministration officials to pay lip service to the problem presented by century cities. federal agencies including the justice department must take meaningful steps to ensure that criminal aliens released from federal custody are probably deported. attorney general lynch, i look forward to hearing your views on all of these important topics today as well as among other issues of significance to the justice department internation. thank you and now i'm pleased to recognize ranking member of the committee that joan and michigan, for his brief statement. >> thank you. your opening statement could be the basis of a hearing all of its own and i appreciate your views. madam attorney general, welcome to the house judiciary committee. nearly seven months ago after much delay in the senate, you took over the department justice with not one, but 22 hours of duty at the us attorney for the eastern district of new york. you are unquestionably the right leader at the right time for the important work of the department of justice. nowhere is your leadership more importance than in national security. the attacks on paris, france, leave no doubt that our most pressing mission, yours and ours remains protecting the american people and unfortunately, history shows that tragic events like these that are followed by calls for drastic action. already we have heard proposals to undo encryption, rollback surveillance reform and deport some of the most vulnerable among us. i urge restraint in these matters, madam attorney general. after this time we have very little information about how the attacks were carried out. rather than use these events as excuse to advance policies that otherwise betray our values, and urge the intelligence community, including the department justice to focus on the most effective tools in our toolbox. targeted surveillance, targeted investigations and smart policing. back at home, you have cultivated strong relationships in the police community, but you are not afraid to call out that behavior or to prosecute police officers when circumstances warrant. that experience will prove invaluable as the department along with this committee takes its next steps on criminal justice reform. under your leadership, the civil rights division continues its work with police departments around the country to ensure that state and local police practices comport with the constitution. the office of juvenile justice is also working hard to disrupt what you call the cycle of criminality and incarceration. i commend you for your work on this front and i look forward to our partnership as this committee moves forward. forward with its own package of criminal justice reforms. another area where we look to you for leadership is enforcement of voting rights. earlier this year, the observing the 50th anniversary of the voting rights act, you remarked it is the lesson of every generation that the price of freedom is constant vigilance. because opponents of free and fair access to the voting booth and neither retreated nor surrendered. the unfortunate troop of that statement plays out across the country today. no place more vividly than in the state of alabama, where officials plan to close 31 drivers licenses offices across the state including those in every county in which african-americans make up more than 75% of registered voters. coupled with alabama's strict new voter id law, these closings will make it even harder for many citizens to obtain the identification now required to cast the vote. the discriminatory impact of this plan plays out in other ways, also. imagine having to drive unders of miles across rural alabama, to renew your driver's license. we know that this burden will weigh heaviest on the state's poorest citizens. borrowing, again, from your words. it is incumbent on all of us to stand up to speak out and to make clear that no end is worth the means of disenfranchisement. no small minded policy is worth the cheapening of our democracy. finally, madam attorney general, i want to, on the virtue of your being a new leader at the department justice, ready to make a fresh start with this committee. today, you will hear questions, no doubt, about benghazi, planned parenthood, solyndra, operation fast and furious and lois lerner at the irs. these are not matters that affect a whole lot of our constituents, but you will hear questions about them and comments, anyway. my advice to you that you don't need is stick to the facts and the law and you will be fine. we know that some members are displeased with outcome of the department's investigation into the lois lerner matter, but we also know that your investigators whereas thorough as can be. they conducted over 100 interviews, collected more than 1 million pages of documents and closely analyzed almost 500 applications for tax exempt status. some members may wish your predecessor had appointed a special counsel to investigate the matter, but both the plaintext of the applicable regulations that the congressional research tells us otherwise. the facts of the case did not involve senior administration officials. they did not present a conflict of interest to the department of justice. so, the appointment of a special counsel was simply not appropriate in this matter. too often your predecessor who i still admire found himself the target of personal insults in this committee and elsewhere and i like to think that all of us in this room and on this committee regrets the frequent attacks on his character or at least realize that those attacks were almost entirely unproductive. we have a chance to start over today. we can do better. progresses and conservatives, congress any ministration, there is so much, graham between us to be explored, particularly in the work of the department of justice. so, i'm so glad that you are here with us today and i look forward to your testimony. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you and without objection, all other members opening statements will be made a part of the record and we again, welcome our distinguished witness and if you would please rise and we will begin by swearing un. do you swear that the testimony that you are about to give shall be the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> i do. >> thank you. but the record reflect that the witness has responded in the affirmative. i will now begin by introducing our sole witness today. of the attorney general of the united states, ms. loretta lynch, attorney general lynch was working as the 83rd attorney general of the united states on april 27, 2015. she began her career in public service by joining the united states attorney's office for the eastern district of new york and after nine years ms. lynch was appointed by president bill clinton to lead that office as united state's attorney. post she held until 2001. ms. lynch then worked in private practice until 2010. when president obama asked her to resume leadership of the united states attorney's office in brooklyn. ms. lynch is a graduate of harvard college and harvard law school. attorney general lynch, we welcome your perseverance before the judiciary committee and look forward to your testimony, your entire written statement will be made a part of the record and we ask that you summarize your testimony in five minutes. thank you and please begin at your convenience. >> thank you, sir. good morning. i am very grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today to share some of the recent, schmitz of the us department of justice. to discuss some of my top priorities as attorney general and to explore ways that we can continue to work together. i do want to begin, however, by commenting on fridays reprehensible and heartbreaking attacks in paris. that a part of justice and indeed that entire obama administration stand in solidarity with france, just as france has so often stood with us. as president obama said, this is not just an attack on paris with the people of france. it's an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share. we are committed to doing everything within our power to assist our french law enforcement colleagues in bringing those responsible for this monstrous act of terror to justice and as we go forward, our thoughts and prayers, of course, remain with the victims and their loved ones. as this distinguished committee knows our nation faces a host of serious, varied and evolving challenges. our highest priority must always be the security of our homeland and we are asking aggressively to diffuse threats as they emerge. we are working around the clock to uncover and disrupt plots that take aim at our people, our infrastructure and our way of life. we continue to investigate and apprehend those who seek to harm us, including upwards of 70 individuals charged since 2013, for conduct related to foreign fighter activity and homegrown violent extremism and of course, we remain focused on the threat posed by the messick extremist as well. at the same time, we are placing emphasis on countering security threats and cyber paid-- space and are on guard against individuals, organized groups, terrorist and state actors who might attempt to steal our data, endanger our economy, coppermine our privacy and threaten our security. in recognition of the need for strong public-private partnerships, we have created a new cyber security unit within our criminal division, computer crime and intellectual property section and announced a national security division outreach initiative designed to promote information sharing and resilience as part of the division's national asset protection program. i've also been meeting personally with corporate executives and general counsel around the country to spread our message of cyber awareness, to encourage strategic collaboration and the find new ways to protect american consumers. now, of course, to bring about the stronger nation that we all seek him a we must also empower the communities within our borders. across this country, brave the police officers risked their lives every day to protect their neighborhoods and to serve the residents of their jurisdictions and we are tremendously grateful for their dedication and their valor. but, we have seen the devastating of mistrust between law-enforcement officers and the citizens we serve and with experienced consequences when decades of tension crept into an rest. during first 100 days of my tenure, i conducted a six city committee policing to her to engage with communities that have made significant progress in this area. in each city, i convened roundtable discussions that included law-enforcement officers, public officials, civic leaders and young people where participants shared some of the most prospective where's that citizens and law enforcement officers could join forces to foster trust, builds-- respect and build mutual understanding. for storing that essential trust between communities and law-enforcement is one of my top priorities as attorney general and the department tends to do everything we can to foster those bonds and create safer and -- across the country. we also pay special attention to vulnerable victims in armed community. the two gillooly, those car in the clutches of human trafficking. in september, i announce the department would extend $44 million in new grant funding to help support research, bring more traffickers to justice and care for survivors. at this moment, i really want to thank our partners in congress for their efforts. by tripling human traffic related funding for office of justice program in 2015, congress was instrumental in allowing us to instrument-- increase our grant funding in this area. this october, march the 15th anniversary of the trafficking victims protection act, which is a fitting occasion to redouble our commitment to eradicating this pernicious practice. finally, i would like to address our efforts on criminal justice reform at the federal level. i commend the committee members who have come together to help chart a new course on criminal justice that will make our society both stronger and more secure. it is, of course, built in part on the success of the the crime initiative that my predecessor, attorney general eric holder, launched in 2013, which shifted her approach way from harsh mandatory sentences for low-level drug offenses and enabled us to focus on more significant violent offenders while better supporting rehabilitation and reentry programs that can reduce recidivism and promote public safety, but more must be done. prison spending has increasingly displaced other critical public safety investments. to make our sentencing laws more efficient, more effective and more just congressional action is needed. reform has been embraced by prosecutors, law enforcement and policymakers of all stripes and the justice department is eager to seek meaningful sentencing reform during this congress and we thank you for the chance to work with you on that. mr. chairman, ranking member, thank you so much for the chance to speak with you today and thank you all for your ongoing support of the justice department's efforts and i look forward to working closing with you to advance the objectives that we all share. i'm pleased to answer questions from this body at this time. thank you. >> thank you, general lynch and we will proceed under the five-minute rule with questions for the witnesses. i will begin by recognizing myself yesterday video link to to isis was posted stating that as we struck france, in the center of its about in paris, then we swear we will strike america at its center in washington. there is little doubt that isis views the united states and west it has its strategic enemy and there is little doubt our immigration laws are lawful immigration laws have been abused on a number of occasions by people intending to perpetrate harm against the united states. do you agree with what your own fbi director, told this committee regarding the inability to adequately that can confirm that your identity and cause of lack of information databases, law-enforcement resources, intelligent resources and military resources available to us in syria of syrians who have applied for refugee resettlement in the united states? >> thank you, mr. chairman. with respect to that important issue and as i've indicated the most important priority of the department of justice is the protection of the american people and certainly national security and terrorism are one of my own top priorities and certainly an area of concern for all of us. that is certainly our main concern. at the same time, we do have a system for allowing not just immigration, but refugee entrance into the country. as the fbi director has noted, there is a process in place that allows for significant vetting of refugees from all countries-- >> lets me an arrest because he said something contrary with regard to the situation with the syrians. he said: we can query our database until the cows come home, but there will be nothing to show up because we have no record on that person. >> surly, with respect to the databases that the director was referring to, as he noted i believe before this committee, there is a screening process that has data from several different agencies. of the fbi-- participate, the part of homeland security, national counterterrorism center and much information is vetted and queried. server, a lot of the information that is vetted does have to be inputted into the system. >> in the case of syria, you cannot go to the government's offices in that country. there in disarray and you can't interview people who know people who are applying for the status. do you disagree with the fbi director when he says that vetting syrian refugees is extremely difficult if not impossible? >> well, mr. chairman, i'm not sure he said it was impossible. certainly, not only that apartment justice, but our agencies will make every effort to vet every refugee coming into this country from the databases to the interviews that those interviews are subject to to the biometric screening as well. >> let me go on-- >> there are challenges to the process because of the situation in syria, but i would note that we do have the benefit of having that significant screening process in place and a process that europe has not been able to set up, which renders them more vulnerable. >> i think we will also be brawler role when it comes to syria when we cannot get access to those databases because the country is in disarray. we can even gather information fresh, new because we can't access the people we could talk to. let me move on. the latest available data from the justice department shows that during fiscal year 2015, the government reported 6002 new weapon convictions and this number is down 5.8% from the previous this clear with a number of convictions totaled 6373 compared to five years ago when there were 7101 weapon convictions, number four fiscal year 2015 is down 15.5%. convictions of the past year or lower than they were 10 years ago. overall, the data show convictions of this type, weapons violations are down 34.8% from the level of 9206 reported in 2005. the president has repeatedly called for new gun control laws yet your department has seen weapons prosecutions and convictions fall to levels not seen in over a decade. how do you explain such a precipitous drop in weapon prosecutions and convictions under this administration and why is such little emphasis placed on these types of prosecutions when the president has called for yet more laws when the current laws are not being enforced? >> mr. chairman, thank you for the question and with regard to the department of justice of the gun laws and we take those, seriously and are committed to using the full laws of regulations on the book. we typically use those laws at the federal level and conjecture with her many and numerous violent crime initiatives to read for example, in my former position as us attorney in the eastern district of new york, minibar gang cases also carried with them firearms charges. he would not necessarily be the lead charge and may not be reflected in the data you have, but they certainly are an important tool in every prosecutor's arsenal in combating violence crime-- >> then why aren't they being prosecuted for those violations? >> i'm sorry? >> then why are they being prosecuted for those violations and by the way this doesn't mean just using a firearm. it also means illegal sales of firearm, line on the check system of which over the last year for which we have complete data, 76000 people work found to have committed a felony of swearing to false information on that form. 5000 were referred for prosecution, but the 94 us attorney's offices across the country could only find time to prosecute 62 out of 76000. so, someone going into a gun store to buy a weapon knows that even if they are caught and often they are not because the system doesn't have all of the information it needs, but even if they are caught they often find that the odds are one in 8000 that they will be prosecuted even when they are caught. what are you doing about that? what should be done about it and why has this decline is so precipitous the last several years? >> with respect to the types of cases that are prosecuted and as i indicated a lot of the firearms prosecutions are done in conjunction with our violent crime program and they may not show up in your statistics as the lead charges. they are a significant part of the arsenal that every file-- but for prosecutor users read i've convened a summit with the top elected officials, police chiefs and leaders of major cities to talk about violence crime that is currently taking place in several major cities with a focus on finding root causes and finding the best ways to direct federal resources to those-- >> can we expect these prosecutions to go up as a result of that? >> what we do is look at the root causes of violence in a particular area and if for example, the firearms where the main issue we would focus our efforts there. we follow the facts-- speed and not for the gun violation, so if that is the case would you agree with me then that it doesn't make sense to add new gun laws when we already have hundreds of them that are not being enforced today's and you don't seem to anticipate an increase in the use of those current laws to prosecute people who misuse firearms? >> i think at this point it would be difficult to speculate as to what numbers would look like it here with respect to any remote program. i would say that that a part of justice is committed to using the full panel of laws that are currently on the books as part of our violent crime initiative, our desire to keep all communities safe and that does include our firearms laws. >> on the cover one more topic in the fbi investigation of the irs matter, the president stated on super bowl sunday that there was not quote even a smidgen of corruption at the irs. at the unit that investigation, no charges were filed three two weeks ago, the president stated with respect to secretary clinton e-mails quote this is not a situation in which america's security was in danger ,". should we expect that when the fbi finishes its investigation of this matter that no charges will be filed? does the department lab statements by the president to dictate its investigative practices? >> mr. chairman, the department reviews fax and evidence. we apply the law to those facts and evidence and take the appropriate steps in every matter we review. that is how we rule-- will essentially manage every matter under our purview whether it relates to the rs, an e-mail matter or every matter that comes before us and with respect to the president's comments, they have no influence or bearing on how the department manages these matters and i would have to refer you to him for a review of those. >> i'm glad to hear you say that here in your review, was it inappropriate for the president to once again inject his personal views into an ongoing fbi investigation? >> mr. chairman, i really don't have a comment on the president's views see that he is a chief executive officer of the united states and everything that operates within the executive branch is under his purview including the very important independent nature of the fbi in conducting its investigation. wouldn't it be better if the president of the united states did not comment on the merits of those investigations while they are going on? >> mr. chairman, i don't have a comment on the president's statements. >> thank you very much. chair recognizing the ranking member from michigan. >> thank you very much, chairman. attorney journal lynch, i want to thank you again for speaking to my panel at the shares congressional black caucus legislative form. it was marvelous. at that event he spoke about the breakdown in trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. you also spoke about getting to the root of the problem with a comprehensive approach to training, to policy and to research. many of the law enforcement officers in attendance agreed with your comments. how are you planning on reaching out to the broader law enforcement community to promote these ideas? >> thank you. this is one of my top priorities as attorney general. i am incredibly proud to say that a part of already begun the type of outreach i was discussing at that particular event. through our cops office in the tickler, the community oriented community service office, which after a? >> name: police department across the country and offer technical assistance. after training. we offer peer-to-peer support. we have found an accredited effective way to share information within the law enforcement community is pure to pure police officer to police officer, chief to chief and a so we work with the department that have, in fact, made great strides in the area of police community relations and seek to match them up with other departments who are having challenges in this area and who would be receptive to their input. i also as a noted in my opening statement have been on a six city community policing tour and as i talked with residents, young people, elected leaders i also talked with police officers and i do meet with chiefs and supervisors, but i also talked to the rank and file, the officers who are on the beats of our cities to get their ideas as to what has worked in their city. as to why a positive relationship has developed in the cities where they have had challenges and where they had had struggles. i listen to their stories-- stories of command, dedication and to their embrace of community come-- policing and concern for residents as a program and policy and makes policing more efficient and communities safer and i'm incredibly proud to support those efforts. >> thank you. in recent weeks there have been some suggestion, some from within your department that our dialogue on these issues have somehow reduced the willingness of some police officers to perform their duties. i know of no real evidence to substantiate this claim, but in your opinion, does our conversation about civil rights and the appropriate use of force by police somehow make us less safe? >> mr. congressman, our discussion about civil rights and the appropriate use of force and all police tactics can only serve to make all of us, community members and police officers safer. in my discussions with police officers around the country, i have found positive engagement on these issues. i have found them to have some of the best path of practice is to share with other departments on these issues. issues like the best practices for de-escalation of certain situations. issues like the best practices for maintaining a relationship with community organization and citizens council. issues on police safety. they are provided as invaluable input into our program such as providing bulletproof vest, body worn cameras and focusing on the best ways to use these new technologies. so, while certainly there may be anecdotal evidence there as all have noted there is no data to support it and what i see in my travels across the country is the dedication, the commitments and the resolve of our brave men and women in law enforcement to improve policing, embracing the 21st century passports recordation and continuing to have a dialogue that makes our country safer for all. >> thank you. the state of alabama's plan to close 31 drivers license offices demonstrates how one policy decision can have wide-ranging discriminatory effects. the media has picked up on this and this will make it harder for citizens of these rural counties to vote. and i'm concerned about the discriminatory economic affects of this decision, which will fall hardest on rural poor and african-american communities. i imagine a black farmer driving hundreds of miles across rural alabama to renew unexpired driver's license and on this committee we know what might happen to such a young man. what tools does the department have to combat discrimination in all of the ways that manifests itself and how are you going to be using these tools in this case? >> thank you, congressman and with respect to the department's enforcement of our various civil rights statutes, it is certainly robust and will continue to be so. while we do not-- we no longer had the advantage of the preclearance provisions hour in the voting rights act, we still have significant provisions of the voting rights act that allow us to review actions and decisions taken all be a determine whether there has been either discriminate oratory contest or as very often the case a discriminatory result. we can engage in negotiation and conversation and many times we do that before we even moved to litigation in an attempt to reason with or have a discussion with entities that are making significant changes and also in those discussions they are productive. i was pleased to see that after discussions with members of congress that the state of alabama may make modifications to those changes and certainly those types of discussions are an efficient way to bring about change and raise these important issues, but i will reiterate congressman, that the department of justice is committed to enforcing the civil rights laws that we have on the books and we are committed to a vigorous review of matters that are brought to our attention and we will ensure full and fair and efficient review of those matters and take action that is appropriate. >> thank you so much. last question. more than 30,000 people die from gun violence in this country every year. what can this committee, the committee on the judiciary right now do that would save at least some of those lives? >> well, mr. congressman a think there is a significant debate and discussion go on in how to best save lives in that situation. i think that all voices are necessary in that debate and discussion. certainly, if commerce were to consider new laws i'm sure this committee would be deeply involved in discussions and that is up to congress as part of your purview. that apartment would be happy to work with you with regard to that. i think that we also have to look at the root causes of the violence as a indicated in a response to an earlier question. last month i convened a summit on violence of several of the leaders of our major cities, police chiefs and mayors as well as police executives and with the department they are looking for ways to identify the root causes of so much of the pilots we are seeing, even as violence is at the store close nationwide we still have some communities that struggle with this issue. in some instances it is gun violence, some instances we see eight increase of drug use, heroine, opioids and so we are trying to find our best ways to focus our resources there. just yesterday, i met with representatives from the national conference of mayors and had discussions on these issues. the difference is that all communities present and the need to have a fuller robust discussion about these issues. >> thank you so much for your testimony and your views. >> thank you, sir. >> the chernow recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin for five minutes. >> thank you, madam attorney general. we hope to see you for a bit. at least for the next 14 months. i have a question relative to the issue of the wonton of zero detainees. passed-- the present is expected to sign into law legislation that explicitly prohibits the use of federal funds to group detainees from guantánamo bay to the united states. former white house counsel gregory craig recently wrote an op-ed arguing the laws unconstitutional and that president obama can legally ignore it. you are america's top lawyer. do you believe president obama could legally ignore legislation prohibiting the transfer of detainees to american soil? >> thank you, mr. congressman. what i would say on this issue certainly is as the administration has stated, the closure of guantánamo bay is something that is part of the administration's policy and department of justice support that as well. after this point time, i believe the current state of the law is that individuals are not transferred from guantánamo to us shores in the position is reiterated by the legislation that you mentioned and my understanding as you indicated as i do believe the president has indicated that he would sign and certainly the position of the department of justice that we would follow the law of the land in regard to that issue. >> the question i had is do you believe that the law is unconstitutional as mr. craig has opined in last week's "washington post"? would you ignore the law based upon that argument? >> well, mr. congressman, i am not familiar enough with that analysis to comment on that. i'm not able to comment on his views about the statue. with respect to the existing state of the law, the department justice is committed to fully following that and the closure of guantánamo bay is being carried out in compliance with that law. so, i believe that it is the view of the department that we would certainly observe the law passed by congress and signed by the president. only rarely would we take the step of finding an unconstitutional provision was something we could not manage. we would seek to work with congress and the administration to resolve that issue. >> you know, does this mean that you think it's okay for the present to transfer these people who are some of the worlds most dangerous terrorists to a country other than the united states, but would not be okay for him to transfer them to the united states? >> mr. congressman, the current state of the law allows for transfer of certain detainees from guantánamo bay. those that after a vigorous review process are placed in the transfer category two countries that after significant that he and promises of management can accept them. with respect to individuals being transferred to the united states, the law currently does not allow for that and that is not as i'm aware of going to be contemplated given the legal prescriptions. >> lets me ask one question unrelated matter. as you may know, the house last month passed a bill called the judicial redress act, which in my opinion is potential to enforcing an umbrella-- umbrella agreement of transfer law enforcement information from certain european countries to the united states and vice versa can read if the senate pales to pass this bill, in your opinion, what will be the effect on the sharing of law-enforcement data was certain certain european allies? >> we fully support the judicial redress act and i would like to thank you and the other members of this committee for the important work that you have done on this issue. as you have noted, this legislation is critical to continued law enforcement share of information from the us and the european union. in fact, i have been involved in discussions with ministers from the european union on that data protection act often called the umbrella act as well as the judicial redress act and it is our view that this important legislation should be passed and it would provide as you know redress of their european union citizens should there be an unauthorized or misuse of their data in the us, which is a privilege enjoyed by us citizens within the european union. without this, we do have a grave risk of not having the completion of the data protection or umbrella agreements. i think sadly recent events have shown the importance, the critical nature of making sure that we have these safe and secure portals for transferring information from law-- one line for spent entity to another. >> let me make one point as my time is expiring. while the judicial redress act is not deal with the sharing of counterterrorism information, there frequently is an interface between those who want to commit terrorist activity and those who do commit petty crimes, which would end up being in the law enforcement filed. i would just look at today's "new york times" or comments relative to the attack in paris, and what apparently happened in the neighborhood in brussels, where he neighborhood known for extremists with a trail of petty crimes amidst plots. the judicial redress act might be able to put the pieces of the puzzle together from petty crime so that there can be this plot. thank you for your support. >> thank you mr. congressman. >> the chair recognizes the german from new york, mr. nadler >> thank you, chairman. to think you attorney general. that attorney general, the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attack of september 11, 2001, the department of justice oversight victim compensation fund that divided more than $7 billion to families that lost loved ones on the day. in the years after the attacks it became clear thousands of first responders and survivors continue to suffer major health consequences of the attacks in the aftermath. thousands of lawsuits were filed against contractors and others by the victim. 2010, covers enacted the james or job act which provided healthcare services to those in need and reopened the victims compensation fund for the families whose losses became apparent after september 11. providing them an alternative to litigation. in the last five years, the victims compensation fund has provided nearly 6300 terse responder and survivors with $1.4 billion in compensation determinations. since we know to the bill, i am aware of no further 911 related lawsuits. despite its current success on september 30, 2015, congress allowed the dcf and world trade center health program to expire. for chile, there is legislation pending in the house to permanently reauthorize the victims compensation fund at the world trade center health program. the bill now is the cosponsorship of 247 cosponsors of the majority of the house including more than 50 republicans and a filibuster proof majority in the senate with 65 cosponsors. if congress fails to act thousands of first responders and survivors will lose access to compensation which they depend to support their families when they are tragically gone. the dcf is preparing to shutter its operation once it has perceived processing existing claims here if the dcf is not fully funded and reauthorized, first responders and survivors will already have received a notice of compensation and connections that amount cut by up to 50%. we are literally talked about taking money out of the hands of a sick police officer. i'm deeply saddened to think that as our congressman c remember the heroes of 911. attorney general lynch, do you agree to this is not the proper way to honor the heroes of 911? don't you think 911 survivors of firefighters and police officers who risk their own lives to save them in separate health consequences because of it deserved the full support of the american people and a fully funded victims compensation fund? >> thank you, congressman this is it important issue and we will always be deeply indebted to those first responders and brave men and women who risk their lives to search for and recover victims, limited debris at the site, to carry out the recovery efforts at ground zero at 911. certainly, it's important issue both to me has attorney general and as someone who is in new york on 911, and who has friends, former colleagues who are in the group of those who are on the scene and who were involved in those activities. this is, in fact, a serious issues for those affected and i greatly appreciate your expression of compassion for those who have fallen out. with respect to the bill that is currently pending, certainly on the hop of the department of justice we would do all we could to work with you to make sure there were any questions or issues that they could be addressed and we hope that there would be none. this is an important issue and again, i think it is something that deserves certainly strong review, serious consideration and please let us know how that apartment can be of assistance to any of the members as they consider this important issue. >> thank you. as you may know, others on the judiciary committee has introduced for-- unfortunately their bill would open the fund only temporarily and would authorize or limited funding. it would credit-- it was chris eyes as a result. the other bill is a permit reauthorization and has brought bipartisan support. this bill, like the black lung program like the upper black lung survivors, like the nuclear program where we have people who were irradiated is permanent, recognizing the permanent nature of the disability. i hope you will think the president for signing the original bill in 2010, and do everything you can to see this legislation is permanently and reauthorized and fully as soon as possible to make s, thank you, sir. i have another question on a different topic. .. if detainees were brought to super max security facilities, prisons in the united states, and what conceivable way could this threaten anyone safety? and what conceivable way could housing someone in a super max federal prison affect the local community especially when your talking about 60 or 70 people? and has anyone ever escape from a super max federal facility? >> certainly as a tribute to the strong efforts of the bureau of prisons, i do not believe anyone has escaped from super max. >> ever? >> as far as i know. certainly thecertainly the men and women of the bureau of prisons are dedicated professionals and do everythingn their power to run the institution in a way that protects the american people and contains the security issues therein. with respect to your question, congressman, it is difficult to say. obviously, i have the greatest pride and respect for the brave men and women of the bureau of prisons. i feel the men and women of the entire -- >> in other words some of your testimony that bringing people to super max prisons will cause no danger to anyone and communities of the united states? >> congressman, i am not in a position to say that any prisoner poses no danger ever. we certainly have security regulations over a host of dangerous inmates for very significant reasons, but i am tremendously proud of the work of the men and women of bureau of prisons,prisons command this issue is one that is before congress, going up as medication to the white house. wewe work with congress with respect to whatever decisions are made in providing decisions. >> thank you. i see my time is expired. >> thank you, mr. chairman. madam attorney general, under this administration number of sanctuary cities has doubled to 340 jurisdictions. as a result, many innocent americans have been killed. what are you doing to discourage jurisdictions from climbing sanctuary status? >> i'm sorry? >> the number of sanctuary jurisdictions has doubled. what are you doing to discourage municipalities from asserting sanctuary status? by doing so, of course, they are endangering americans is individuals who are released can commit crimes. what are you doing to discourage sanctuary cities? >> with respect to the issues you raise their serious. we are committed to enforcing a criminal and immigration laws. >> there is a law on the boat that prohibit sanctuary cities. >> i believe the designation of a sanctuary city is something that was in the purview -- >> no, it's actually in an act i introduce the became law in 1996. >> am having trouble hearing you. >> there is clearly a line in existence that prohibits jurisdictions from refusing to cooperate with the federal government when it comes to detaining criminal aliens, criminal aliens. what are you doing to enforce that law? >> whenever we have a situation where that situation occurs we would talk with that jurisdiction and reach directly into enforce the criminal laws against the individuals themselves. >> but you are not doing so. give me one example where you have enforced current law that prohibits jurisdictions reclaiming sanctuary status? >> i would like to study the issue of provide information on the point. >> i would hope that you would have more knowledge about enforce immigration laws than that, but i will await your report as to what you have done. next question, a recent ig report found that chairman's secret service file was improperly accessed and publicly disclosed by secret service managers. this may have violated the privacy act, the computer abuse act and, perhaps, amount to obstruction of justice. have you taken any disciplinary action whatsoever against the secret service managers involved the disclosure of the file? >> congressman, my understanding is that the matter is being handled by the inspector general. the secret service is part of the department of homeland security. with respect to the specific administrative or disciplinary actions, my understanding is there inspector general -- >> laws that may have been violated, under your jurisdiction. are you aware of any investigation by doj into that matter or not? >> am not able to comment at this time. >> and you would let the member involved know of any investigation. >> you certainly let the member involved know of any investigation? >> typically we do not comment on whether an investigation is open or not. >> i'm not asking you to comment publicly on the details. i'm asking you if you elect a member. >> are you referring to the member of the secret service? >> member of congress. >> we would certainly do everything we could to provide what information we could consistent with the law enforcement obligation. >> and one more question about the fbi. to your knowledge, has the president or any white house staff or you or any of your staff attempted to influence the fbi's investigation of former secretary? >> no, sir. >> okay. do you have any idea when that investigation will be completed? lex i am not able to comment on the status of that matter,matter, and we typically do not comment. also, it is impossible to predict when any matter will be concluded. >> and i'm not asking for a comment on the contents, just an idea of what it might be finished. have you heard when it might be finished? >> again,again, i'm not able to comment on the timing of the conclusion of any matter >> thank you. >> the gentleman recognizes the gentleman from california. >> i look forward to working with you not only today but in the months ahead. as you likely know, i am on the immigration subcommittee and follow closely what your department is doing in that arena. your predecessor, attorney general holder testified in 2013 before the senate -- and this is a direct quote -- it is inexcusable that young kids, six, seven, 14 -year-olds have immigration decisions made on their behalf against them without being represented by counsel. in july of this year the american immigration counsel other organizations filed a class-action lawsuit in district court in the western district of washington challenging the validity of removal proceedings for children without appointed counsel. their argument is that an eight -year-old could not receive a full and fair hearing in the immigration court without representation. as you know, i'm sure the administration has made efforts to provide counsel to small children by funding nonprofit groups, but the assistant attorney general who argued mr. leon fresco argue contrary to that in district court. i'm wondering if the department's position has changed since mr. holder left the department and whether you think it would need to process to have an eight -year-old who speaks only spanish appear and immigration court without a lawyer and be able to argue the nuances of immigration law and asylum law. do you think that means due process requirements? >> respect to the argument come i would have to review those pleadings to understand the specific context and whether or not there was an appropriations issue involved. >> fair enough. what do you think about the due process issue? >> again, thank you for that because it is important. certainly it is the department's position that as a general matter all who appear before tribunals whether they be in courts, administrative bodies tend to have a more efficienta more efficient process and a fairer process if they are represented by counsel. certainly we have statutes and laws to that effect with regard to adults, criminal matters and the like. for those children also it certainly would seem to increase efficiency of these higher processes to have counsel and as you noted through our grant process we have supported nonprofit or ngo organizations that are provided counsel. >> you are not willing to say that it does not meet due process requirements at this point? >> i would like to look at the procedures that are in place before i make a constitutional decision about to process, but i agree it is an area of concern. as a general matter we support counsel in proceeding for litigants, particularly children. >> the department of homeland security office of inspector general has done an analysis. we have many people from central america who are seeking asylum. he reports that there is a review called operation streamline that found that the department of justice has prosecuted asylum-seekers for illegal entry before there asylum cases heard. and it seems to me that not only does not violate the requirements of the international law but it does not seem like an efficient use of resources if someone gains asylum under the law then there prosecution would not be very pertinent. have you reviewed that? >> i have not review the specific report. what i can tell you is that the prosecution and apprehension of individuals at the border is one to which not just the department but the specific us attorneys in the border states to the significant time and attention and steps are taken at the initial level to try and ensure that those who are seeking asylum are handled appropriately and that those who are coming in for other intents and purposes are handled through the immigration law system. >> can i ask you whether you would take a look at that report and make sure we are using our resources in a sensible way relative to asylum-seekers? >> certainly. we are happy to review. >> finally i want to mention a situation. we have had a class-action complaint because they have been released from detention. mothers who are being held at the present with the children, and they had a demonstration and in response they were put in solitary confinement. their argument was that they have free-speech rights. do you think immigrants in detention are entitled to constitutional rights of due process and the first amendment and the like? >> i certainly think that when it comes to the conditions in our detention centers we need to do all that we can to ensure the treatment is fair, humane, and cognizant of the individual rights of all of those who come through those systems. i think that we have recognized certain rights for those within our borders , certain rights for citizens, and in varying degrees with respect to the constitution barring that or even taking that into consideration certainly have leave our detention centers should be run efficiently, fairly, and humanely. >> i seei see my time has expired. thank you for allowing me to go over. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california for five minutes. >> thank you. as you may recall, a woman working for the irs was held in contempt by the oversight and government reform committee and the full house and referred to the department of justice under your predecessor. >> i'm aware of the report. >> speaking of those reports the committee reviewed more than a million documents. approximately 50 interviews and produced a report. are you familiar? >> i have not had occasion to read the committee's report. >> the senate finance committee released a bipartisan report in august of this year finding the irs abuse conservative applicants for nonprofit status. i repeat abused applicants. >> i have not had occasion to read the report. >> the german sitting behind you signed on your behalf and eight page report explaining why nothing went wrong legally at the irs. are you familiar with that? >> yes, i am familiar with the letter the department has provided to congress. >> in that case you did not just indicate that in fact the laws were broken. you indicated that it was just mismanagement and that you found no laws broken. >> actually, i believe that our review found that the management of the process by which tax-exempt applications are handled the irs was characterized by mismanagement and inefficiency in numerous circumstances. >> right. you found that there was an administrative problem, not a legal problem. are you familiar with two usc 194? >> i'm sorry? >> two usc 194, and i will refresh your memory. it states the statute covering congressional contempt, it shall be the duty of the relevant us attorney to bring the matter before the grand jury. in the case of the referral, lois lerner, for contempt the us attorney failed to comply with that law under your predecessor. are you willing to comply with that law? are you willing to have the current us attorney comply with two usc 194 which clearly says shall,, not me, not can make an independent decision about whether or not that individual has done wrong or should be held in contempt. will you comply with two usc 194 that is structure us attorney to bring that contempt before congress? >> congressman, i believe that matter has been reviewed by the us attorney and the prosecutorial decision was made. >> again, it states that it shall be the duty of the relevant us attorney to bring before the grand jury. is it your opinion that shall do in a law passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president is a discussion? >> congressman, i believe the matter was reviewed. >> am asking you, when something says that you or your employees shall do something, do you believe that his discretion? >> sir, as i indicated, and thein the exercise of prosecutorial discretion the matter was handled unresolved. >> do we simply disagree on what the meaning of shall is. for your purpose they are synonyms. is that correct? equally able to be decided? i'm not trying to be argumentative. you're telling me shall is something that has discretion. what part of discretion is in shall do? >> congressman, and the exercise of prosecutorial discretion that exercises made. >> you have no respect for laws passed if you don't like them. you think you have discretion when something says shall is what you are testifying to today. my question to you is, during your predecessor, the committee on oversight and others ask for a woman working for you and wanted to do a transcribed interview. the department of justice said she would not be made available because it was an ongoing investigation. since you have now dismiss that investigation, are you prepared to make are available to committees for transcribed interview? >> it is the practice of the department not to provide line attorneys for congressional testimony. we seek to provide the information that will help you in your oversight duties >> mr. conyers is still sitting here at the dance. he very bravely took on the bush administration where relevant us attorneys and case law effectively now is that in fact is a committee of congress want somebody it is not a discretion to say no. that was pretty well adjudicated, and mr. conyers as chair made it very clear that congress has a right to have someone. i we will ask you finally, previously the reason was not that you would not make a truly available but since an investigation is done are you saying that you refuse to half are available under any conditions? >> i'm saying that i am consistent with the policy of the department of justice. >> i'm not asking a policy question. asking about one individual. theythey would like to talk about a past investigation. if requested will you make are available? >> as indicated, we provide information to the committee and seek to do so through a number of means. we provide a letter and are happy to continue with our offer of a briefing to the full committee on this matter with respect to line attorneys of any investigation, it is not the policy of the department of justice to have the line attorneys testify because they do their work independently and focus solely on the facts and law command we do not want them having to deal with the issue of a political review. they are focused solely on the facts and law and follow the evidence where it leads. as indicated with respect to the letter and as i believe the deputy attorney general indicated in this matter we are happy to provide information to the committee and i believei believe we have offered a briefing to members of the committee on the matter and certainly standby that offer. >> i appreciate the indulgence for answer as insufficient as it was. >> the chair thanks the gentleman and recognizes the gentlewoman from texas for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, ranking member, thank you very much for your service. might i as well thank your staff who have always been responsive to me in particular and the members of this committee as we have tried to work toward justice for the people of the united states. a moment i just want to begin and say to you i apologize if one of the pointed questions that if i can get yes or no will be helpful so that i can get through them. as i do so, let me offer to the people of france again our deepest sympathy. sympathy. this committee in particular is well aware of the impact of terrorism. our subcommittee on crime is one that is crime, terrorism , investigations. we stand united with them as the justice department through the president of the united states have been working. to that point headline that says working with french authorities after attack which is a good thing. and i say that because there has been a massive race by various states to make pronouncements of blocking syrian refugees, people seeking asylum command i understand the fear. my question is, is your competence and procedures, and i, and i would suggest that there be an interagency task force as i hope that we will have a task force either out of this committee or either -- i know that there is one recommended by the majority that we will have one that is bipartisan on this issue. do you feel confident in our processes is a partner to this process of being able to discern who is amongst those suffering people would be a bad guy? i understand we are doing 10,000. do you receive assured and short? >> thank you command i look forward to continuing this dialogue on this important peemack. we have a robust screening measures in place that include not just databases but individual interviews, biometric data. we gather relevant information about refugees from all countries because our 1st goal is the protection and safety of the american people as well as carrying out the compassionate nature also of the american people. >> and you feel comfortable if the terminology was used that was certify that you could be confident on those that you process? use every measure to certify they are non- intent to do harm in this country. >> we would use every measure as we always do to ensure those allowed in the country would not pose a threat to the american citizens. >> a look forwarda look forward to working with you. let me move on to law enforcement and emphasize that they become more important in these times and we thank them for their service. we also know and your testimony earlier said that we are better when they are better. law-enforcement integrity act which includes a position on data collection and also includes provisions on accreditation, that the natural association of police chiefs have always supported. what do you think the importance of having department subject themselves to accreditation determining best practices and helping them as well as the american public? >> congresswoman, in my discussions with law enforcement i found them eager for assistance and sharing best practices. i also found the meager for recognition of their professionalism and accreditation is one way to do that. there are a number of ways to do that. we in the department are working with police organizations to try and develop consistent and national standards on data collection. we rely heavily on their expertise for guiding the standards. and we would look to start with that same process with regard to any move toward accreditation also. i have found that law enforcement frankly are focused on professionalism and focused on spreading best practices as best they can. >> let me do this semi- chairman will not gavel me, quickly raised three points. the reform and values of reducing mass incarceration, legislation that will reduce the treatment of juveniles and put it in a positive, like you make an overall comment. and then the idea being particularly discern before coming back to the united states. and then let me close on these three points if i could please which aare very important. i know i'm leaving out important points. the voting rights you already had a question on. isn't it more efficient on a preclearance approach such that it might be more helpful for us to reinstate that preclearance because it would be more proficient and i am going to give you the three cases if i can meet with your staff on them on really a blatant miscarriage of justice. we have not had a response from the justice department. the case of robbie tolan that went all the way up to the supreme court and indicated he had been mistreated. he lived in was shot by an officer on his driveway. and in a nonviolent person in the state prison in texas with a life sentence for a nonviolent drug offense 1st offense is almost unbelievable. so would like you to answer just the questions i gave you. i would like to leave as soon as possible. >> i look forward to continuing to work with you on important issues. with respect to voting rights the preclearance remedy was when we found to be not just effective but efficient command we felt it was a way a way in which to engage with jurisdictions as they contemplate changes to their laws and prevent them from going down a road that would have disenfranchised citizens. we felt that it was efficient and much less costly litigation. it is an important part of the voting rights act, and we support the efforts to restore the preclearance remedy to the voting rights act. >> juvenile justice clemency juvenile justice -- i'm sorry, juvenile justice prison reform and the sentencing reform reducing mass incarceration, the value of that. >> the time of the gentlewoman has expired. >> i think the chairman for his indulgence. >> with respect to reform we feel it is a vital measure the recognizes only put measures in place several years ago designed to protect the american people as we look back on this measures they see the collateral consequences that did not just to citizens but communities with the passage of time whether or not lengthy sentences with the most effective way to deal with the offenders they tended to sweep up. certainly to make sure this is always efficient and fair , sentencing reform is an important role to play in that apartment of not just the committee's efforts but congress is effort in that regard. >> and we look forward to meeting with your staff this week about these cases. >> thank. >> thank you, congressman. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia for five minutes. >> thank you for being here this day. i know you know well that one of the parts of the mission is to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic. i have a couple of news articles. we have to pay attention to them. one of them was fox news that talked about isi s having certain terror cells in 15 states and targeting the states. and then one where we were told by cbs news national security correspondent was reporting that the pentagon was notifying various soldiers who had appeared on the list and neighborhoods and cities that have been targeted throughout virginia and were actually trying to get the police to increase patrols in these particular neighborhoods of the city's. my question to you is, would you not conclude that it would be reasonable to conclude that if terrorists were brought from guantánamo bay to a particular city in the united states that it will be reasonable to conclude that that could increase the likelihood that one of those cities to be placed on one of these lists from leadership or some domestic copycat in the united states? .. there are even any allegations of lists around the country today?? >> with respect to the matter that you mentioned, as i indicated, i'm not aware. >> so you're not aware that there are any lists that target particular cities or states by people who claim to be isis? >> i'm not. >> you're not aware to anything? >> i'm saying any of these lists. my question is to you is wouldn't it be reasonable to conclude that it could very well enhance that city being on one of these targeted lists? yes or no #that's a pretty easy question. if you disagree with that you can say no. if you agree with that yes. >> i thought you you were return burning to the service members that are on. >> and making it clear. any list. if you bring terrorists when you conclude it would enhance that city to be on the list? >> i think there are any number of factors. >> would you not agree that that would be a factor. >> i think there are any number of factors. >> would that be a factor? >> there are any number of factors. >> but you would disagree that would be a factor? >> i don't agree or disagree. i said there would be any number of factors. >> see you do not have an opinion. i'm asking you if that would be one of those factors. >> no you have indicated you wouldn't answer the question. i think that's atrocious that you don't even have an opinion about it. let me ask you a question about this. you talk about have you attempted to gather any information about outside organizations that may come from outside the community that make come into that community and estimate escalate that situation. >> you ever report that you can provide on your investigation and what that has to do with a list of those organizations. >> we do not generate a report. what i was indicating was in our review, if there was a violent issue. >> i'm not talking about whether or not there was a crime. do you have any information, you talked about police escalating the violence. you have any information you can supply the committee that these outside groups may be coming in and escalating that violence question on. >> congressman, the reports we do would not focus solely on one factor. >> so you haven't focused at all on outside groups that could come in and escalate the violence question. >> it has been brought to attention and is under our review. >> but you haven't done anything. >> we do not have a report for you. >> do you have an investigation undergoing question. >> i yield back without getting a single answer to a single question we posed. >> the chair recognize the german from tennessee for five minutes. >> i'm going to be like mr. lee and ask you a lot of questions because there's a lot on my mind and we have limited time. in july a young man was shot and killed by memphis police. he was a passenger in a motor vehicle stopped 48 traffic citation. he was asked to get out of the car. he was shot and killed. the das the grand jury to indict voluntary manslaughter. they chose not to. how that was presented, who knows. now that the case has gone through the grand jury and they have not gone the response they wanted, i would ask the department of justice to look into this and see if a violation of rights has occurred. >> i will have my staff reach out to you and get that information sir. >> are you familiar with the case #. >> i'm not personally familiar with the case we have a number of cases under review. >> if for some reason it hasn't risen to the radar of the atty. attorney general by now, i hope that it will. there was a drug assessment survey completed in 2015. at that particular summary or study, most agents said marijuana was 5% total risk to society and meth and heroin were the most serious drug affecting them in the american people. do you agree that we should spend more time working against heroin and math and other drugs and not marijuana? >> i believe that refers to our narcotic laws. what we try to do at the doj nda is focus on specific problems in a specific region. we currently have heroin and opiate problems in some areas the country. there are some areas that have problems with methamphetamine. there might be different focus on different areas. >> right but marijuana is not where cities have problems with people knocking off 711's to get money. that's being done by those using heroin and other drugs. >> we have seen cases where there have been significant violence at the dealer level. >> there is and the reason there is that violence is just like prohibition, we made it illegal. it's not just because of the need to have marijuana, it's because we made the same mistake with marijuana as we did in the 20s with alcohol. the public demanded it. the racketeers, the rebels got involved. we made them rich and they use guns to protect their property. that was a mistake. you agreed marijuana should not be schedule one in the same category as lsd and heroin? >> with the extent of the issue of scheduling, that is determined based on whether or not there is another use for the product. i think there would have to be studies by the fda among others to determine whether or not scheduling change in any drug is necessary. >> don't you agree that you have to change the scheduling from one to get the study? there are lots of young people, like one of my constituents who died waiting for the opportunity. lots of people would like to get cannibal us oil. you can talk to montel williams and how it helps multiple sclerosis. don't you feel this is something serious and should be looked at as an aid for people to get through difficult problems and not a joke? >> certainly the medical marijuana is certainly different than the criminal use of marijuana. fda studies in the use of the oil or the substance within marijuana. >> i would hope you would look into initiating what you can and taking it off schedule one. it's crazy to have it with lsd and heroin and should not be there and should be studied. it has been used to allow groups to discriminate lgbt people and it's based on a 2007 opinion that they could be used to grant exemptions to discrimination laws. we instruct the office of legal counsel to review the 2007 olc legal opinion that is being used today to justify taxpayer-funded discrimination counter to the president's executive order? >> i would like to look into that issue if i can have my staff reach out to you and get more information on that, i would us appreciate that. >> on the same issue, holdover from the bush team, that was a holdover for six years. that's why the president got hardly any recommendation for commutation. i have a commitment for you to give more resources to study prison records and facilitate the expeditious recommendation to the president for commutations for thousands of people who sentences should be commuted who are serving time for long-term drug offenses, offenses, nonviolent drug offenses that aren't serving the american people by having them be in federal. prison? >> over the last 18 months we have in fact taken a significant look at the staff and resource needs of the office of department of the attorney and look to provide additional resources so every application that comes through can be considered quickly and efficiently. >> but it hasn't done that. let me remind you what doctor king said. justice delayed is justice denied. every single one of those people serving a day in prison who will get a recommendation is having their justice delayed and denied. on that note, the gentleman time has expired. >> will recognize the gentleman from ohio, mr. jordan. >> thank you. on february 2, 2014, he learned that the hard drive had crashed and they didn't have all the email. they waited until june of that year until then to tell congress be at in that four-month time. until they learned her hard drive had crashed and they didn't have all of her e-mail in june when they discovered it, they testified twice in front of congress and did not disclose the fact that they knew her hard drive had crashed. one month later after they learn the hard drive had crashed, crashed, in march 2014, march 4, 2014, the irs destroyed 422 backed up tapes. just so you understand the facts, they know in february 2 that the hard drive is crashed and they don't have all her e-mail. thirty days later they destroyed 422 backup tapes. they destroy those tapes with three preservation orders in place. in fact, 11 of those preservation orders came from the justice department ten months before that. you had told them, hey, preserve all the documents and emails. we have an investigation going on. there were two other preservation orders as well. two subpoenas and three preservation orders. that sure looks like the irs service concealed information and destroyed information, but just last month you send us a letter telling us you're not going to prosecute anyone in the irs targeting scandal and you specifically say in that letter, our investigation revealed no evidence to deliberately conceal or destroy information. so here's what i can't figure out, they learn on februaryfebr, 2014 that lowest earners hard drive crashed and they don't have all her email. thirty days later with preservation orders and subpoenas in place they destroyed backup tape. if that's not evidence of deliberately concealing and destroying information, what is the question that. >> thank you congressman. with respect to the matter that you have raised, as we set forth in our letter we did review the issues surrounding ms. lerner's email and the backup tape. as with every criminal investigation, we are looking for evidence with criminal intent. we are looking for evidence of a specific reason for why the actions that you know. >> comedy times you have direct evidence of an event in any other fraud investigation question you weren't going to get, what were you looking for where he send an e-mail and said destroy the tape #you had three preservation orders. one of them came from the justice department. they knew there were problems of the hard drive and they didn't have all the e-mail. thirty days after that they destroyed 422 backup tapes. that's not enough to take it to a grand jury? if it wasn't deliberate intent to destroy in conceal, what was it. >> the findings we had, based on those actions. >> here's what you said. >> they uncovered substantial evidence of mismanagement and poor judgment. what i just described, was that evidence of mis- management by the aria irs? >> i'm not going to contribute that to one individual. i believe certainly there would be others two was evidence of poor judgment when the chief counsel knew that the hard drive had crashed and comes and testifies and doesn't tell us that awaits four months to tell us that. >> i can't tell you what was in his mind when he testified before you. what i can tell you was the information that was provided to this committee and the conclusions that were drawn. >> what was going to take before you take this to the grand jury? >> would you have to wait five months before he told us, eight months before he told us #that they need to destroy 423 backup tapes, 450 backup tapes? what was it going to take? if that fact pattern doesn't want going to a grand jury and prosecuting, tell me what would question. >> certainly that fact pattern was part of the investigation as were a number of other facts in there. as we outlined in our letter, we outline the steps we took and the conclusion we drew. >> hootie refer to when you're talking about mismanagement and poor judgment? is it the guy at the top, the guy who was responsible. in march of 2014 they destroyed 422 backup tapes. if a private citizen gets an audit notice from the irs and then ten months later destroy the evidence, are they going to be prosecuted?? >> it would depend upon the evidence of intent. >> really, i bet the average american are going to be prosecuted in court but you wouldn't take this to a grand jury. who mismanaged what? who is responsible? >> it outlined in our letter. >> but you didn't. i want to know if it's the guy at the top, the guy who runs the irs, the guy who was presided presiding over them when the tapes were discussed destroyed. >> as we outlined there was substantial mismanagement. when we indicated we would provide this information to the committee, we are also happy to provide a briefing to the committee on other questions you might have about this matter. >> your time has asked tired. we now recognize the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson. >> general lens, i want to commend you and the department of justice with the fact that 70 individuals have been charged for conduct elated to violent extremism and homegrown. we have heard how other terrace organizations build potential recruits in potential social networking sites via corrupted messaging platforms. also over voice and over internet apps. are these encrypted private messaging platforms and also voice over internet apps hampering the ability of the department to quickly ascertain and address threats to national security, and if so, in what ways? >> conger's men, thank you for the question. certainly when an individual choose to move from open means of communication it can cause disruption to use lawful legal process to intercept those medications. it does give us concern about being able to gather the evidence we need to continue our mission and the protection of the american people. >> how so. >> with respect to individuals in this country, we have seen communications between them and individuals urging them to commit acts of violence and terrorism. then those individuals dropping from one type of communication to an encrypted method of communication. we no longer have visibility into those discussions. >> when you say no longer have visibility into those discussions, can you break that down and explain what that means >> certainly, with the court order we would go to a communications provider and focus specifically on individuals against who we had probable cause to suspect are part of criminal activity. we would review their communication's in the past as well as an ongoing basis. when an individual moves to an encrypted platform, one that is nonassessable by the provider themselves, then we have a situation where we are not able to have our court orders handled in the typical way. that is to say, were not not able to receive that information and ascertain what these individuals are planning and just as importantly, with whom they are planning these actions. we rely on other methods and means, but that is a loss of an important means in an important law-enforcement tool. >> is there any way that the department can overcome the use of encrypted data and communications by terrorists who are trying to recruit within the borders of the united states or a terrorist plot taking place between persons inside the united states? take for example the terrorists incident in paris this past weekend where i heard one expert say he had been shot shocked that the terrorists were not using encrypted communications, perhaps even during the terrorists events. how can the department for that kind of act tivoli taking place here on united states soil given the fact that we have these encrypted medications? >> our approach has been to work with the electronic companies in the up internet providers on a case-by-case basis and help them find a way or work with them to find a way to allow them to respond to the legal process. we are having difficulties as an industry as a whole to make sure they can comply with legal process and provide the information we need. are there other means of gathering intelligence on those individuals and associates, but it does cause a a loss of a very valuable source of information. >> with that i will yield back and think your testimony. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from texas. >> thank you attorney general, i appreciate you being here. obviously people are rather sensitive to potential terrorism, especially since isis is known for keeping their word when they make threats, at least as often as they can. we had a witness sometime back, the the fbi director at that time, director mueller, and i was asking him about investigations at the mosque in boston where the dzhokhar tsarnaev's attended, and he indicated the fbi had an outreach program with that mosque where they would commune together, but they never actually investigated at the mosque whether or not dzhokhar tsarnaev had been radicalized. even after russia gave the fbi a heads up that the elder brother had been radicalized. they never ask questions of the people there. i know i've been through materials with fbi agents that have been cleaned out from the teaching materials and for some ridiculous reason they were classified so we had to do it in a closed setting. it appears to me that fbi agents, justice officials, are not even being allowed to be taught what it is that radical islam us believe. not even perhaps that osama bin laden indicated that the ejection martyr, muslim brotherhood member wrote milestones that actually help radicalize him. nobody knew enough to go to the mosque and ask, has dzhokhar tsarnaev been reading this material. have you heard him talking about milestones? it seems like we've blinded, as one in intelligence official said, we've blinded ourselves to see our enemy. so i was also surprised, since director mueller was fbi director after all a moody was arrested based on his information that gave us, but he is doing 23 years for supporting terrorism. he didn't know that he was the one at the bottom starting that mosque. we know that he helped in both the clinton and bush white house to find muslims that he could be trusted to work in those white houses and i'm just wondering, since we now know that he supported terrorism and that dzhokhar tsarnaev had been radicalized worshiped at that mosque, has the outreach program been terminated with that mosque in boston and hasn't been any investigation into people that he placed in the clinton and bush white house, now that we know he supported terrorism. he's doing 23 years three years. do you know of any such investigation? >> mr. congressman, i don't have the information that you are requesting but certainly what i can say is that you have touched upon an issue that all of us in law enforcement deal with as we work, not only to protect the american people but to counter violent extremism that does pull in young people. >> i appreciate you calling it violent extremism. did you have a degree in islamic studies? i really don't know. did you have any degrees in islamic studies? >> no sir. >> well there is a guy named the godey. b god and he he says isis is islamic and i think we should take the word of an expert. it doesn't represent the views of all muslims, thank god, but, but i would encourage you to take another look at the training materials and take another look at your outreach program and look back and investigate who was placed in the white house to see if there is still around. the fbi completely dropped the ball on dzhokhar tsarnaev and it concerns americans they may be dropping the ball on the syrians as we speak. my time has expired. i yield back. >> we now recognize gentleman from puerto rico. >> actually i want to concentrate on the u.s. territory. this is the same topic i raised with general holder each time he appeared before this committee. broadly speaking, speaking, when it comes to violent crime, the narrative in puerto rico. in 2011, there were 1136 murders that's nearly three a day, the highest in our history. most of these homicides were related to drug trade. so, so, i push dhs and the doj extremely hard to dedicate more personnel and resources to puerto rico. dhs including the coast guard and ice responded to the pressure. doj responded but to a lesser extent. these final efforts has helped decrease the number of homicides significantly every year. in 2015, to 15, to date, there have been 508 murders. if the current trend continues there will be about half as many homicides in puerto rico versus four years ago. that is a remarkable statistic. we should be proud. we are fighting a a determined enemy and the gains we gains we have could be lost. despite recent improvement, puerto rico still has a homicide rate far higher than any state. yet my staff and i have found it difficult to obtain answers to basic questions about doj efforts in the territory. so, i want a briefing on this subject as soon as possible. in the meantime, i have three specific questions for you today. i will ask them all at once and then give you the time to answer them's. first, the u.s. attorney's office in puerto rico has been very high criminal caseload. part of the reason is they are prosecuting a a number of cases that in the states would local likely be prosecuted in a local or state court as he note the homicide rate is down significantly but it is still far too high and it places the citizens of puerto rico in an unreasonable situation. >> thank you for gemina puerto rico we now recognize the gentleman from arizona. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you attorney general for being here, joan lynch, several videos as you have been talked about and have been released that show corporate officers and employees of planned parenthood casually discussing their practice of harvesting little baby parts from the many hundreds of thousands of thousands of babies they kill and their clinics every year. the videos repeal some babies are born in tact, which is the most -- understood as i understand the most desirable state of the baby's body in in that business because the body parts have not been damaged by the abortion procedure. because of that incentive, some of these babies are born alive. i am wondering, has the investigator have any cases of babies being born alive being killed by abortionists? >> in respect to the issue you raise, you are asking about born alive. >> yes born alive abortion survivors. babies that were victims of abortion but were born alive. much like the situation, there's some legislation on the books that protect unborn children people. >> it is my understanding that since the relevant statute was passed sometime ago, ago, there has been a few cases that dealt with certain issues about -- i believe it is the national transplant acts. there have been been few cases under that. there been a i would have to get that information to you. >> let me shift gears slightly, there there is legislation here in the congress that has passed the house that would give definitive protection to born alive -- i'm not talking about unborn children i'm talking about born alive babies that have survived the abortion process. would you support that legislation and would you enforce it if that were in statute question work. >> i have not seen those drafts, certainly any draft legislation proposed by this body the department of justice would review and provide relevant input to you for your use. >> generally, would you support legislation supporting born alive abortion survivors. >> have a not seen the draft i will not be able to give specific. >> born alive? >> we would look at whatever proposal you had congressman. >> okay, it is is too bad you cannot answer a question like that. let me shift gears on you again. visit the department of justice currently investigating planned parenthood based on the footage released, and if so what is the status of that investigation? if not, why not? >> we have received a number of requests for information as well as congressional rate weston referrals on this matter. because we are still reviewing it i'm not able to comment on the status of that. >> okay, in light of doj's recent public praise of the southern public law center, an organization implement gated in the domestic terrorism conviction -- floyd corgan's as you know, who use the southern poverty law center publications to identify and attempt to kill employees of profamily organizations in d.c. it is important for us to know the doj's level of involvement with splc, can you tell us about doj's relationship with the southern poverty law center and its employees, publications, and events? >> well i am aware of the organization but unable to give you specifics on the departments involvement, if any in the splc at this time. i would appreciate the opportunity for my staff to reach out to your. >> will, i hope that you would respond in writing to these questions because you certainly have not answer them here. the last person that held your position did not answer them either and promise to respond in writing, did not do that either. have you personally reviewed any videos released by the center of medical progress? if so, was there anything of the videos that you found disturbing? >> progress men i have not undertaken a review of the videos. i'm. i'm aware of the news reports about them. as indicated the information has been received by the department and is currently under review, i have no further comment on it at this time. >> yes ma'am, thank you. >> german yells, we now recognize the gentleman from california. >> attorney general, i want to bring your attention to the cases of chinese-american scientist, all of these individuals, despite their ethnic names are american citizens. all of them have been profiled, suspected, and suspected, and treated as spies by our nation's government within the past two years only to have all charges dropped. these are only the cases that reach national headlines, there could be countless more. two of these individuals, sherry chan and shushing cheney are here at today's hearing sitting two rows behind you. i want to take a moment to share their stories. doctor she is at temple university, in may of this year on a day that seems like any ordinary they were woken up at the break of down by almost one dozen armed fbi agents in his home, pointing guns at him. in his pajamas, he was handcuffed and arrested in front of his wife, two young daughters, and neighbors. after months of investigation, after losing his position as chair, after losing his position as chair of the physics department, after the emotional trauma that he and his family endured, all of the charges against him were dropped. it turns out, the technology he thought he wish sharing with china was not the right technology to begin with. we also have sherry chan, who, who is wrongfully profiled and suspected of being a spy for china. she was arrested by six fbi officers and humiliatingly handcuffed in her office at the national weather service. after months of investigation and having a reputation smeared, all all charges against her will were dropped. not only is she suffering from mental and emotional turmoil about this investigation has cause, she is not fighting for heard job as a hydrologist just. these chinese-americans were roughly suspected as spies and paraded as criminals through their arrest only to have the charges later dropped, but not before they were traumatized and their lives nearly room. that leaves us to the question, are all chinese-american scientist suspect because they are chinese-american? so my question to you is, what went wrong in these cases and how are you addressing this internally, especially with the fbi to prevent this from happening in the future? >> thank you congressman. i can say to unequivocally that the doj does not focus investigation on any individual on the basis of their race or national origin. i would expect the specific questions that you mentioned i'm not able to comment on the specifics at this time. >> even if you can't comment on the specific of the cases, i will follow-up with you personally on the details of these cases. there is no question we must fight against espionage and threats to america, but in this process we must not smear americans that make this nation great or undermine our fundamental values of liberty, due process and equality under the law. this is especially true in light of the horrendous paris attacks which sensibly took over 120 lives in an act of terror. but we must combat terrorism and protect national security we must also not impinge on fundamental rights, we must ensure we do not see an increase of profiling against muslims because of these events. we have seen what happens when we compromise our fundamental values, in fact it wasn't long ago that 120,000 people of japanese ancestry were removed from their homes, rounded up, and incarcerated during world war ii accused of having spies amongst them. they were proud americans but their citizenship meant nothing. in the eyes of our government, all of them were potential spies, outsiders, and enemies. yet, over 66 years later not a single case of espionage have ever been proven. today when we profile chinese scientists in this matter or any american by the basis of race, ethnic city or country of origin, our government is telling our own citizens, our own community that they are on american and that it is okay to feel or even hate that. when this happens, happens, my opinion we have failed as a government. i yelled back. >> the chairman now recognizes. >> an afternoon general i am going to talk briefly on drug diversion. it has been a priority of mine to encourage the dea to collaborate with companies in the pharmaceutical supply chain to address prescription drug abuse. in the past officials have used ambiguities in the law to treat this businesses like suspected criminals. with the support of this committee the house passed legislation to clear up the reveling provisions of the controlled substance act, that bill is now pending in the senate, it appears likely to be enacted. the department's response to my recent questions on the subject that the department, recently made some, important changes that demonstrate its commitment to work more closely with the drug supply chain and registrants, is very encouraging to me. i will closely keep an eye on this, i am optimistic that progress is being made and i think you for pursuing that. >> thank you sir. >> i want to switch gears now to the bureau of prison and oversight. i do have some questions. my district has three high-security federal penitentiaries, i'm i'm in pennsylvania district, lewisburg and allenwood. three correction officers have died in recent years in the line of duty. williams was working alone and unarmed on a cellblock with over 100 inmates. he was stabbed 129 times. a pilot program was put into place to provide officers with pepper spray, which i think eric and others would have had a chance to survive. will you promise and give your word to me that you will support this program and make it permanent to all personnel? >> congressman, i am aware of the debt that you mentioned as well as the deaths of several other brave men and women in the crest journal institution. i do. i do support additional measures to increase their safety. i recently had a meeting with the head of the correctional officers union and spoke about these issues, i would look forward to working with them and with this body to make sure they have all of the tools they need to have a safe working environment. >> do do you believe that pepper spray is one of these protection devices that would help officers, but yet not have a weapon that the inmates could take? >> yes, it's really think pepper spray is a viable option. i would like to see the results of the pilot study. i would also like to make sure we include every possible option for protecting our pert fractional officer. >> i would like to talk about staffing permitted. our federal prisons are understaffed below their levels. in some cases, counselors, not corrections officers fill in to guard inmates, counselors. would you fully staffed correction officer positions with trained officers? >> congressman, i can tell you certainly not only is the safety and security of correctional officers a priority of mine but ensuring they have the appropriate staffing is a priority of mine. it is certainly been a challenge from us from a budgetary perspective. we are looking forward to meeting those challenges in the future trying to ensure every specific is fully separate professional officer. >> almost one year ago the committee requested all communications relating to mandatory donation provisions in certain doj settlements. >> i'm sorry, mandatory mandatory? >> mandatory donation provisions. in doj settlements. last week, week, your staff advised they did not realize we wanted internal documents, we were very, very clear both via letter and live question that we're specifically seeking internal documents. there always seemed to be some jockeying between congress and this administration over oversight matters, this is unacceptable. it is a continual problem. when will we receive the internal documents we requested, almost exactly your goal? >> congressman, with respect to the request that has been made, to the extent we receive requests that would have been asked for internal deliberative documents, typically we do not disclose. that may have been the reason for that. what we try to do his work with your staff or the entire committee to provide the information you need to carry out your oversight function, consistent with our law enforcement and obligations and we certainly look for to working with you to do that. >> i just hope that we do not have to continue as we have in the past, splitting hairs over particular words. thank you, and i yelled back. >> the gentleman-year-olds back. we back. we recognize the jump from florida. >> thank you. thank you for joining us. especially in light of the horrific attacks in paris. i know the department of justice is doing everything it can to the french counterparts to do their part to bring all of those responsible to justice. i want to acknowledge the importance of the work that the department of justice does in keeping the american people safe. as we mourn with paris it is moments like these that we pull our own love ones closer. we trust that the administration, including the justice department and law-enforcement, and our intelligence community and the men and women serving our country are doing what they can to keep our people safe from the threat of terrorism, homegrown and abroad. we are grateful for that. we face daily threats of another kind here at home, i want to talk to you about the daily gun violence that claims nearly one american life every hour of every day and over 32000. every day dangerous individuals buy guns without completing any back on check at all. whether it is dylan roof, whose approval went through and he murdered nine americans during the summer, or whether it is gang members in chicago where more than 400 people have been killed by gun violence this year. i served on this house judiciary committee for over five and a half years, in that time gun violence has claimed the lives of over 150,000 americans. we have not had a hearing on this gun violence, not on this committee, not after tucson, not after aurora, not after aurora, not after newtown, not after roseburg. the chairman said just today, there is no reason to have a hearing, we need to do is simply enforce the existing laws and we are told everything will get better. be going on to my question for you i'm sure you would acknowledge that it was helpful to hear the chairman say earlier that sometimes the background check does not have all the information it needs and i would point out that after the virginia tech massacre, where that gunman's mental mental health record was not accessible, the court declared him a danger to himself he should have never allowed him to purchase a gun. congress acted and pass legislation, signed by president bush that authorized over 1,000,000,000 dollars to states and territories to improve their recordkeeping and reporting to the national background check system. congress however has only allocated about 11% of of that money. i would ask the chairman, consistent with his views that there are some problems with existing law that we work together to fund, allocate the funds so that all of the information gets to the national institute a background check so it can actually work to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. that does not require a new law, law, it simply requires making sure we allocate the money, that we spend the money that congress has authorized over the past several years. now, i do want to ask you about steps that can be taken. as you know, the gun lobbyist made it nearly impossible for the federal government to enforce some of our existing laws. the federal government has barred gun sales for more than 24 hours, barred from denying a gun sale of a background check cannot be completed within 72 hours. it. it is barred from electronically managing trace data recovered at crime scenes the people who sold them. investigation into cryptic gun dealers then take months instead of minutes. and it is barred from seeking other agencies like the fbi and dea. i reject the assertion that there is no room for improvement, clearly there is. i will continue to push for sensible gun safety laws. there may be ways, real ways to strengthen background checks through executive action. every town with gun violence issued every port on one action, undercurrent like, only people in the business of selling firearms have to do background checks. people who are not in the business of selling firearms do not have to. some of these people who technically are not sellers and do not work in the business sell hundreds of guns a year from gun shows, online and other places. couldn't we sent a number to how many gun sales it takes to be in the business of selling guns? is your office explore that possibility and are you thinking of a threshold of something like that question work. >> with respect to the serious issue of gun violence, the department is pursuing all of our force men that we do have under existing law. certainly it would always be useful to have additional resources for our atf to allow them to fully investigate everything we need and it comes under our purview. with respect to the question you raise, as to the statutory definition, i believe the statue is going to do find that define that at this time. certainly the doj makes the commitment to rigorous enforcement of that set you. >> to the extent there is an opportunity for executive action that can be taken to help define something that is undefined in the statue, is that something you are looking at? or let me just simply encourage you to take a hard look at that because that would be a meaningful step to ensure the background checks that should be completed, even without additional legislation are back completed. i hope you'll consider that seriously, you'll back. >> the chairman now recognizes, i enjoyed visiting with you recently. i want to thank you for your recent trip to south carolina which was very well received. there are three areas i want to recover with you. first, the letter to congress recently and i am going to paraphrase one of the paragraphs but it is a pretty) price. the irs mishandled tax-exempt applications in a manner that disproportionately impacted conservative groups. i read that to me that he found it discriminatory to fact. there is a similar situated people but there was a disparate impact on conservative groups. that is the only way to read that paragraph in his letter. he then wrote, it, it left the appearance the irs conducted, or conduct was motivated by discriminatory or other inappropriate motives. so so you have a discriminatory effect but he says the cause, the motive was mismanagement. as opposed to a crime. that got me thinking, if my share of stopped only read cars for speeding, at what point is it not mismanagement where it is circumstantial evidence of intent? >> with respect to the actions you referred to congressman, i think you sternly are accurate when you indicate that our letter noted that the groups that had complained were treated differently from other groups. they were also treated in a way that did not advance their application, they were treated badly. so i can understand their concern and the issues they raise. with respect to the investigation as we outline on our letter, under the relevant statutes we were reviewing we needed to find evidence of criminal intent. that intent was not there. with respect to the example that you raised, certainly there are certain statues that take into effect the discriminatory impact, but again even our civil rights law if one had a discriminatory impact you would not necessarily be able to prove a discriminatory intent. >> it is really hard to prove intent. that is why usually you use circumstantial evidence. if it female voters were required to show two forms of id but male voters were only required to show one, how many voters would have to pass through the prompter before you would say that is circumstantial evidence of an intent to discriminate? never do you have direct evidence of intent. it is really hard to prove intent. that is why we typically use circumstantial evidence. i noted in mr. cad stick but there is, he did not say there is insufficient evidence, he said there was no evidence. would you agree with me that there is a bit very big difference between san insufficient evidence and absolutely no evidence, which is what he wrote. he he found no evidence of any intent to discriminate despite the fact that there is a discriminatory effects. >> i think the letter does speak for itself in that regard. what i would say that as a general matter in how we handle our criminal investigations, we do look for evidence of intent and it comes in a number of ways. some circumstantial, some circumstantial, some direct. every case is different. every investigation we gather all the evidence, all the facts, we apply the laws to those facts and let that determined the outcome. >> i am with you. but you can see the discriminatory effect, so that is half of what you have to prove and it is already there. you can see that. we have emails from this learner that we need to plan but we have to be cautious that is not per se a political project, i think a jury would find that an interesting email. she worried mightily that a republican control control of the senate might be tantamount to a republican president she was not thrilled about that. that would be be circumstantial evidence of a political motivation. she referred to the tea party is very dangerous, how many pieces of circumstantial evidence, keeping in mind the letter did not say insufficient. i could have lived with it if you would have said that, prosecutors could not make a case. it was a close call but we could make the case. that is not what he said. he said there is no evidence. i just cited three emails that i think would be evidence of some intent. only thing question work. >> well as you i think the letter in its entirety speaks for itself and it outlines the issues you raise but a host of other things that were reviewed and looked at in the course of the investigation. it doesn't explain the conclusions to which the department came. with respect to the referral, the, the issue is whether or not there was evidence of a criminal intent. did one act on certain views question mark was that the reason for the action? as we notify letter and offered to have them further briefings with you, we did not find evidence of that through the million pages of documents and hundreds of witnesses that were interviewed. >> i would love to take you up on that offer for private debriefing. i need somebody to explain to me the difference between specific intent and general intent. as i read her e-mails, even some of the mediocre prosecutors on this panel i think you get to a jury given the evidence that they have. i want to touch into other issues because there's a trend of going over. i would invite you, at some point and this is going to be a bipartisan, because because this goes back to 2004. in 2004 there is a republican administration, if, if you look at the firearms prosecution from 200-42-2012, you are going to be shocked as to how few prosecutions there were not for firearms offensive that happened during a crime of violence, but i mean lying, buying, selling a gun to someone who has been adjudicated, mentally ill, someone who has been committed. there were 22 guilty adjudications over the course of nine years. for people possessing firearms who were users are addicts of drugs, 22 in nine years. when i hear my friend from florida talk about the need for more gun laws, yes, we are going to say how are you doing with the ones you currently have? i would invite your attention to this chart which came from former attorney general holder provided it to us, i think you'll be shocked as to how few, and i guess there's no not much jury appeal. i get that it's hard to go in front of a jury in a line and buying case. but you noted earlier the focus of firearm cases and violent crimes, i think we would all agree that the objective is to prevent the violent crime, not to do a really good job prosecuting afterward but to keep it from happening in the first place. that is why would invite your attention to this. my last point is this, you have been asked repeatedly this morning to comment on ongoing investigations. you always give the same answer, it is the exact same answer that marino gave me in the back is a former u.s. attorney, it's the same answer others which is either you can neither confirm nor deny the existence of an ongoing investigation and if we happen to know about one, you're not going to comment on it. that is exactly what you should say. i am just wondering why the president didn't get that memo. you may, in your soul does not impact the director or you, and it may not, but i promise you promise you it impacts the perception of my fellow citizens when the person who is responsible for executing the laws in this country prejudge is the outcome of the investigation. it may not impact the reality, i promise you it impacts the perception and that is equally dangerous. with that i would that i would recognize the gentleman from illinois. >> thank you very much. welcome attorney general. >> think it's her. >> i i pose the same question to the fbi director, i want your advice and i would like to work with you. in my hometown of chicago there are 40 or 50 shootings on any given weekend. this entire classroom of children, it is unacceptable. we need more federal action i think. whatever we do in chicago, according to a federal report from the mayor's office in the chicago police department, 60% of the guns are coming from wisconsin, indiana, from wisconsin, indiana, and mississippi. all states that have weaker gun laws in the city of chicago does. we know this thanks to the chicago police department's tracking of trace data, meaning the chicago police department traces every gun and recovers and determine whether it was originally sold and how it may have entered the illegal market. so given the majority party in congress refuses to take up this bait robust support for gun control legislation, a couple of questions. what is your advice to me as an individual member of congress who supports going control and how can i help curb gun violence in chicago? second, will, will the justice department encourage the police departments everywhere in the nation to collect trace data on the illegal gun like we do in chicago? so first, you are member of congress what is your advice, second, trace the guns, we are doing it in chicago what you think about doing it across the nation question mark speemac, eastman, thank you for the question. you certainly raise an area of concern a priority for the department of justice which is of course violence, in our cities as it affects our children, not only those who are victims but children who are exposed to violent suffer greatly as we know in their later development as well. we feel the city of chicago is certainly taking a concerted look at this problem. i'm extremely proud to note the federal government, through the u.s. attorney's office in chicago is working very closely with local law-enforcement on this issue focus on the issue of not just fire arms by gang violence in chicago as well. we also have a strong presence with our federal agencies, fbi as well as atf who work closely with the chicago police department on the e trace program that you mention. we do find it very useful program. we find it find it something that arms us with the data to trace the source of weapons into neighborhood who suffer so much from them. it is an example that we would hope could be exported to other cities as well, as you have noted. i can tell you we are committed to continuing to work with the city of chicago and all of our major cities and violence reduction programs. in fact, chicago was represented at the violence reduction summit that i held just last with the mayor and police chief. we had a very robust discussion about the causes of violence, some of the ways the department could be helpful, very targeted ways, whether it is increasing our task force present, focusing on dangerous fugitives in the area, or focusing on violence prevention efforts as well. we remain committed to working with all of our cities works. seeing these issues. >> so if you were to suffer something as egregious as a motion to a member of congress to your high position as attorney general, what do you think what would you do back in chicago? >> i certainly would not call that a demotion. i think all of us in public service have a great opportunity to serve our people. certainly, i think within this body there is a lot of significant discussion going on. obviously the resources to fund the programs that we have on the ground are essential and funding the departments budget that focuses on the crime initiative and it folksong violence reduction and reentry and recidivism. a grave concern as people return home to their communities that they not return violence as well. certainly the resources that would be useful for the departments overall budget and particularly with firearms, the resources for atf to continue the vigorous enforcement of the laws in e trace program would be very official. >> lastly there is a letter from my colleagues from chicago, they have asked to meet with you and a group of members of the congressional hispanic caucus and black caucus. i like to put in the context of all of the members why we would invite you to meet particularly with that group. because african-americans are 13% of the population but they constitute over half of all of the homicides, over half. 13% by 50% of all the deaths. interesting, latinos are relatively less likely to own a firearm for the general population, yet again they disproportionately died to the gun violence. you have a population that does not own guns but dies of guns and 13% black population and over half of the deaths. i hope you got the letter, i love working with those new colleagues of mine, i was wondering if you would accept the invitation to me with a. >> i look forward to meeting with the caucus. thank you so much. >> the gentleman yields back we now recognize gentleman from utah. >> thank you for being here. the inspector general act says that inspectors general and caring out their provisions under the act is authorized, and i quote to have access to all records report, audits, reviews and other read material available to the applicable establishment which relate to programs to which the gentleman has responsibilities under the act. the legal counsel and july 20 despite long-standing tradition in the fbi specifically, the department department of justice does is no longer allowed access to credit information and others, we disagree with that conclusion but at this point we have worked with the inspector general, worked with this committee and are still waiting for full input from the department of justice to try to rectify this. i was hoping i would get some commitment from you to work with us and spend time with us on the proposed piece of legislation. i think the current laws the patient, but you do not. we are trying to come up with something that would rectify this. would you be willing or someone from the department of justice to give us guidance and input on this? >> thank you, i think you raise the important issue of the important work of all agencies and inspectors general in particular the department of justice. >> i just want to commitment that you will work with us. >> we have set legislation up come out that we feel we clarify an impact ensure the inspector general would receive all of the information he needed. >> would you meet with us? with someone within the department of justice give input on the piece of legislation that i am drafting in a bipartisan way by which mr. cummings to try to resolve this? >> we would be happy to meet with you. >> okay, and hopefully soon i hope. >> i will have have my staff reach out yours. >> thank you. >> i also have a concern on geo locations, in july the oversight committee sent a letter seeking the so-called jones memos. this relates to spring court case from a number of of years ago. on october 26 i issued a bipartisan letter, six represented, five senators including the ranking member from both judiciary committees of the house and the senate, calling the department of justice to share with congress these letters. i still do not understand why you will not share this information with us. >> certainly with respect to the request that you refer to, to the extent that it refers to the internal delivery of process of the department we typically do not provide the specific memos. however, we do look forward to working with you to share the information. >> you don't think the house judiciary committee should understand your approach in tracking people through geolocation? >> we are certainly willing to sit and work with you to convey what we can. as much as we can. >> better be a huge step for because that's where the department of justice has not been willing to share with us any information or have such meetings. i need to ask one more topic and try to go quick. share with me your thoughts and perspectives on subpoenas, subpoenas are often issued from a variety of places. congress also issues subpoenas, do you feel a duty and obligation to help enforce those subpoenas as well? >> certainly that is part of the application of the department of justice in terms of its general law-enforcement application. >> and when would you not it's force a subpoena question marks. >> i would have to know more specific facts to provide an answer as to whether or not we would not be able to, for some reason or whether there be a reason not to. >> ledoux feel a duty and obligation to enforce than a congressionally issued subpoena? >> certainly with respect to a subpoena issued by anybody, the decision to re-force it or not would be one to review and determine the best course of action to take. i'd like to have more facts of the specific issue if i could. >> i think what the gentleman is asking, if a subpoena goes out and someone does not comply with the subpoena, how do you view the department's obligation to enforce compliance. the subpoenas only as good as your ability to enforce and we do not have access to a police force which is a good thing, we are relying upon you to enforce them. i take the gentleman's question to be, how do you view your obligation to back up this branch of government when it needs access to documents or witnesses? >> with respect to the subpoena of this body or any other that we come to the department of justice for enforcement, we would review all of the information about that. certainly in my career as a prosecutor in u.s. attorney i have had occasion to issue subpoenas and then work on alternate means of compliance, both as a prosecutor and and as a private attorney. there are number of ways in which we can obtain compliance. we would certainly need to know more of the facts before i could provide you with specific guidance. >> yes-man. >> the gentleman yields back we now wreck denies from california. >> thank you attorney general lynch for your time and patience today. it seems as though many people on the committee would like to have some of your time. i listen to my colleague a minute of go as well as my colleague gutierrez and he mentioned a letter. there is a letter i also also sent to your staff requesting a meeting with you, perhaps what we could do is just join forces. i did not realize there were multiple letters. the concern is really the increase of homicides in the number of cities and specifically the desire to sit down with you personally as well as members of your staff to look at various programs that the agency has that might be allocated and more of an emergency fashion, considering there has been a spike in specific cities. i definitely like to continue following up and perhaps it by the middle of next month we could have the meeting it would be very good, since we have been asking for a while. i wanted to know if you would tell us about some of the programs from a more global perspective. for example, the federal local partnership between the federal law-enforcement and and local police in baltimore, if you could talk about how those efforts are helping to address a spike in baltimore. as well as you mentioned your summit that you had in detroit. i wanted to know if you could share some of the lessons from that summit in terms of how cities are able to address the spike. after that, i want to ask you a another question. >> thank you for those questions on topics of great importance. to me as the attorney general and to the american people. with respect to the violent crime issues that we are facing, while we have noted for a number of months and even the last year or so, we are fortunate that crime in general is down across the country. in all of our major cities crime generally is down but we do have neighborhoods where there is a persistence issue of violence. we have neighborhoods where we either have not seen similar decreases are we have seen increases in violent crime. in my former role as u.s. attorney in brooklyn, i have many of those neighborhoods within my district. i dealt with dealt with those on a daily basis. i know the importance of a partnership in terms of dealing with that issues. baltimore is an excellent example of some of the resources federal government is looking to bring to bear to deal with specific situations. we have partnered partnered with the police department in baltimore to provide an influx of pedal agents focusing on the violent crime program to aid in the investigation and literally making the cases so that we can remove the violent offenders from the streets of baltimore and allow the citizens to flourish in that great city. with respect to the summit we had, because we had looking at this from a host of perspective i asked my united states attorneys and cities that have seen an increase in violence in some neighborhoods to meet directly with their local partners and counterparts, district attorneys, police officers, sheriffs, and discuss the nature of crime increase and focus on the reason and what could be gleaned from those discussions. we were able to accumulate a great body of information there. as one can imagine, the reasons for crime differ depending on the neighborhood. with that, we built on an convener violent crime summit in october where we had mayors, please chiefs, u.s. attorneys chiefs, u.s. attorneys from the cities here in washington. we were speaking together sharing best practices for crime reduction. >> so i want to get to my last point and would ask for the patients with this. perhaps perhaps we could get the information from that summit that happened in october, if we could get those it would be very helpful. finally i wanted wanted to ask you about trafficking. that is a high priority for you, i wanted to know if you could mention any in particular we know that a percentage of the girls in trafficking are in the foster care system. the question is, is, is there collaboration between doj and dhs and kenny speak to that? >> certainly, we have have a number of collaborations across different agencies come i cannot recall the specific ones with hhs but i would like to provide you with that information. we are also working with the department of labor and state and local law-enforcement. were working in many ways to improve enforcement and provide services for the survivors. the services range from housing, treatment, therapy and the like. >> okay and i will follow up with you specifically getting these girls back into the foster care system is really critical. i will specifically look for that collaboration. >> the lady eels back. madame attorney general you have been sitting there for three hours. votes are coming. that will provide break but i am happy to break now given the fact that you have been sitting there for three hours. >> i would appreciate five minutes of that is possible. >> done. >> know no. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> will come to order. welcome back, thank you for the break and allowing us to go vote. at at this time will continue questions. we recognize california. >> thank you mr. chairman. attorney general lynch, last year i followed the very scandals that plagued the department of veteran affairs. like many americans, i was appalled at the manipulation of patient wait times that numerous virginia facilities. our veterans risk life and limb to serve this nation and the virginia failed them. fbi director confirmed on june eleventh, 2014 that thousand 14 that the fbi was investigating criminal allegations. this was within the veteran affairs related to the manipulation of patient wait times. can you provide to us a status of an update regarding the investigation question. >> thank you for the question it. i share your concern and regard for nations veteran. having several of them in my own family. with respect that matter, i'm not able to provide you an update at this time, i would like to have my staff reach out to you after we see what information we would be able to provide your office. >> okay. are there any cases in which the department of justice has decided to pursue against wait times and if so why or why not. >> i am not aware of the status of that matter right now. what i can say, not to delay the time, is that certainly the service of our veterans is of great importance to us, we support them in a number of ways. not just through not just through the investigation that you refer to, but there are servicemembers initiative act and our work protecting their right to vote overseas as well is our implementation of services such as veterans court. we are working with local municipalities to illuminate homelessness and veterans. all of these issues plague our veterans and it is something we as a nation need to be engaged in. >> do you happen to know how many virginia medical facilities are under active investigation for manipulating wait times? >> i'm not able to give you that information at this time. >> okay so you would not know when that investigation plan to be concluded. >> know i was really appreciate the chance to get back to. >> just a few more questions, how many cases have is the doj declined to prosecute or press charges against the virginia employees for a minute delayed wait times? >> i'm not able to give you that information. >> okay, thank you. >> i yelled back. >> the chair now recognizes -- >> thank you for enduring several hours of testimony. i will try to be very brief. what i wanted to do in the beginning mr. chairman's ask this ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a report from the clemency report which talks about 25 women deserving clemency. of interest to me would be sharonda jones and danielle matz, i would like i would like to give it to you so we can talk about it in the future. they are all. >> without objection. >> they are all cases where women were a large number of years in jail and they were not actual kingpin, they were actually following their boyfriend or other things. i would like the department to do something on that as we talk about criminal justice reform and move forward. i represent the second congressional district of louisiana which is in new orleans. we are in a unique situation in which we have our police department and our sheriff's department and the cost of implementation of those are a large part of our city budget. in an effort to make the police department more constitution and the gel more constitution, we are sacrificing city services that would keep people from having to deal with the police or the sheriffs department. it is almost, we are doing something on her left hand to help but we are depleting all of our resources on the rights, so it is not helping. and out we have an increase in police response time that is almost one hour when you call 911. so, the question is as you all decide grandson others and look at -- when you have a unique instance can you help to provide resources so that we can one comply with the decree but to not lose critical services for youth in our public to keep them safe at the same time. >> will congressman a appreciate the question. certainly our practice of being involved with local law-enforcement jurist's actions and a and a host of areas, not just consent decrees is an important way in which we provide assistance or colic there. with with respect to the new orleans situation, i think every municipality does see these as a financial challenge. we certainly understand that, we view it as an investment in the future of constitutional policing and constitutional jails. what a jurisdiction is involved with the consent decree, they are still able to apply for grants and other programs, and from other portions of the department or any other agency. it would not preclude the kind of assistance you're talking about. certainly, i am happy to have some of them are grantmaking arm reach out to your staff and talk about options there. >> i would just a that because it is taken up such a disproportionate large part aversive budget, we are having to raise taxes and cut services such as youth recreation and other things that would keep kids out of trouble in the first place. we do not want to overstress constitutionality and then at the same time take opportunity away for kids. to the extent that you can help with grants and other things, we would appreciate it. another thing the attorney general holder and secretary duncan sent out an advisory on the school to prison pipeline. i would just hope that would be something you would follow up with. we had a bill, it seems like school districts are still not getting the word that police are not the answer to a school discipline problem. what are you all doing and that ever question mark. >> with respect to the school to prison pipeline it is still very important focus of the department civil-rights effort. we provide guidance to school districts and law enforcement organizations, we have a number of cases that were brought to her two and half years ago by the civil rights division challenging school district disciplinary policies. we are trying to provide assistance to reduce the zero-tolerance policy that tend to be the start of this problem. that in conjunction with providing appropriate training with law-enforcement officers, should schools choose to have resource officers is a way in which we hope will be helpful to every school district in dealing with these issues. school district need to have discipline but just as obviously, the education and future of the children really is the first priority. >> to things as i close, one is is to stress the cops program and additional funding for community policing and other initiatives that would help. the second to our request, one would be to urge you to continue to work with a different district courts to push specialty courts, whether drug courts, reentry courts reentry courts are other things that could help with the very important. and the other one is a request, can your office get to me the statistics on the adjudicated deferral of convictions, the diversion program, how many how many people get accepted and what are those demographic look like? i'm very concerned that diversion programs are usually used for those that have means and those have some sort of political connection or comedic connections and people who really need it don't get the benefit of the doubt to get accepted and it. >> .. but certainly we do have a wealth of information on the success of those programs. >> thank you. the chair now recognizes myself for questions. the office of inspector general recommended the district of columbia pursue district charges if found to have abused their position or to take of less responsibility will keeping higher salaries. pressure to accept responsibility. >> thank you for the question, mr. chairman. with respect to a matter that has been recently referred to the department, the matter that is currently under review, and so i cannot comment at this time. >> one of the issues, the va issue is something that has been ongoing. our veterans deserve that support and help command we are seeing how fast we have seen it in georgia. i think coming to this conclusion is more than just words. actions have to be taken. frankly the people on both sides of the aisle are not satisfied with that kind of response. you were expanding that process as well as local das judicial circuits i worked well in that regard. i would command that and continue process. trade secrets, issues, and we recognize a form of intellectual properties. companies increasingly target sophisticated information common global competitiveness. we need to create a federal civil remedy for the appropriation of trade secrets so the companies can protect. do you join them in recognizing would be beneficial? >> congressman, you raise an important issue and one of great priority to me in the entire department of justice. they do seek to steal intellectual property. we are losing possibly up to $250 billion worth of intellectual property per year through hacks and crimes and likes and we look forward to working with you on the proposed legislation that you have mentioned and discussed. >> complement your efforts given the resources and limited actions? that will be something that would complement your action >> i wouldi would like to see the language, but will look forward to working with you. >> the 1 i want to come back to that was brought up earlier how do you do a sanctuary cities, as doj taken any action to withhold law enforcement grants other funding if not why not? >> the grant process under which doj operates is a formula based grantmaking process and different organizations and entities within entities apply. certainly we are always cognizant of concerns. we have found we can effectuate great change in a host of significant -- >> shouldn't following the law be a prerequisite for a grant? >> certainly we work to enforce not only the laws that you are referring to but all the laws. >> but getting a grant if you are not following the law to have no intention of following the law, the applications should be set aside. follow the law and we will talk to you. whyyou. why can't we get to that? >> thank you for the question. our grants are very focused on specific areas. for example, providing more police officers. >> you got great talking points and i appreciate that. that is not my question. if you're using money to circumvent the law, that's even worse. you don't incentivize this kind of behavior. why would it just not be a permanenta permanent stopped the grantmaking process or municipality our government entity point. >> well, with respect to our grantmaking process we make very discreet focused grants to specific portions of city government. >> government. >> in essence you have subsidize lawless behavior, that is what the attorney general of the united states of america is just testified to? you will give money to a locality that is not following the law because you want to use your grant indiscreet and private ways? >> we use our grants to incentivize better behavior and a host of ways, and our grantmaking policy is focused to a very rigorous application. will not even be considered if a locality is not complying with the law, you will still give your tax dollars to a locale? >> aa host of factors. >> the answer is yes. this is the part. earlier when he 1st started and i want to finish up,up, had these hearings and you will be back before us at another time. what is amazing to me in the american people watching is the being prepared for questions. not basically a setup where the people don't understand that, it very much frustrates most people in washington dc. he had been prepared. there is just a big disconnect. they will not say that they will not want to give money to an organization or locality that is not following the law. that is unacceptable and what most people find aparta part and with that i recognize the gentle lady from washington. >> thank you, mr. chair, atty. gen. for being here today and for your time. as you are no doubt aware, in 2012 voters in my home state of washington passed initiative 502 which legalize the sale, consumption, and taxation a marijuana products including washington, 23, 23 states, the district of columbia have legalize some form of marijuana command in 2016 several more states are expected to consider marijuana legislation ballot initiatives. washington is already collected over a million tax revenue from sales. since the passage of initiative 502 court filings for low-level marijuana offenses have dropped by 98 percent. savingsaving the state millions of dollars in enforcement and judicial expenses. you also may know, there are a wide variety of marijuana reform measures that have been introduced in congress, and there is still the ongoing concerns about the conflict between state and federal law in many areas, particularly banking, and they range from legalization the rescheduling and a bill that i recently introduced the smart enforcement act. my bill would give you the atty. gen. the authority to waive the controlled substances act for states that are effectively regulating marijuana themselves such as washington state. so it authorizes a waiver from the controlled substances act for states that the requirements preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors, violence or use of firearms and cultivation distribution and drunk driving, and i want to thank your team france are many questions that my office had as we were in the drafting process. i wanted to hear from you your thoughts on this type of legislation and this approach to reform and about how the enforcement priorities that were outlined have been working. >> thankworking. >> thank you for the question. and we are happy to provide information and assistance as needed by staff as you review this important issue. certainly the factors outlined in the memo and that have been stressed in further discussions with the us attorney community remain consistent. our concerns are the areas that you mentioned. mentioned.mentioned. where state chooses to have a legalize marijuana structure we will review the structure and look at that, but our concern is, frankly, that marijuana getting into the hands of minors and also being trafficked out-of-state real estate may have not made the same choice, we also have grave concerns about the areas of the edible products so appealing to children and expose them to this product which i don't believe is the goal of the regime but is a concern of ours. we are also concerned as well about the violence that is still associated with the higher levels of the marijuana trafficking industry. and so at the federal level we are focusing our resources on that enforcement action, and we continue to do so. in my former office be prosecuted cases involving importation of large amounts of marijuana utilizing an indian reservation on the canadian border and also utilizing organized crime connections. so we certainly still have a robust practice.a robust practice. we focus limited federal resources on those types of cases. >> we know we have states like ours that have challenges, banking in particular because while there may not be active activity against states by the legalized we have situations where banks are not able to serve these types of businesses because of the conflict. my legislation would allow you to issue waivers to states that need and provide effective regulatory regime, and these would be three-year waivers so that you are able to give the states a waiver from the controlled substances act and establish the requirements they were going to meet. is that a type of legislation that would address the issues between federal and state law? >> i was happy to review any proposal that you think would be helpful and to provide comment. i would have to look further before i could respond. >> it is a bill we have introduced. i also just wanted to ask quickly, you talked about creating a new cyber security unit within the criminal division and i wanted to ask exactly what made you decide to do that and what are the goals of that particular new unit? >> that is within our computer crime unit. we havewe have a cyber security unit focusing our computer intrusions, computer hacking, and the sophisticated types of computer activity that hackers, many of whom based overseas are using to infiltrate our computer systems. not just the wholesale theft upon information which can be so challenging at a basic level of identity theft but also the theft of personal information such as health care information which raises significant privacy concerns and intellectual property. we find the private industry is being targeted for particularly our financial services are being targeted at an increasing level by several recruiters recent estimates indicate $250 a year worth of our intellectual property is being lost to us through that. all the seat to make sure our economy is strong as possible and we get the benefit of american ingenuity and protect what are protective secrets, secrets, many of the matter is being stolen are not always sensitive the very unique to particular industries and important to the growth. in addition it is working very well and one way is through our connections to private industry. we along with the fbi and the secret service had made extensive contact and discussion with private industry, general counsel, ceos, cios about cyber security and the need to share information about breaches when they occur. we are also ramping up within the federal government our own efforts to provide information to companies when we determine that theydetermined that they have been the subject of a breach rack. we are working to reduce our response time to get information to them as quickly as possible so that they can also begin protecting data and information. it has been a positive effort. >> the gentle lady's time has expired. the has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from florida. >> thank you.you. when you were the us attorney in your received inquiries. >> thank you for the question. it is department policy and my own view is a career prosecutor can't typically our response would be that we are not able to comment. >> part of the reason is that it detracts from public confidence that you are doing it if you're trying to prejudice the investigation. the year the prosecutor's case against someone with who you had a relationship on a personal or professional basis? >> can you be more specific? >> did you get assigned a case where the defendant with someone you knew personally or professionally >> that did not occur in my experience. >> would it have been appropriate for you to have a case? with that case likely have been sent to a prosecutor who did not have that relationship? >> it depends entirely on the facts and circumstances of the case, what type of case it was the main entity, every cases looked at on its merits. >> here's why i'm asking these questions because i delivered a letter, you probably haven't had a chance to read it yet, requesting you appoint a special counsel to look into the situation with former secretary of state hillary clinton's e-mails. the applicable regulations say that that is warranted if there is a conflict of interest or there are other extraordinary circumstances and it will be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel. here is why it makes sense. you were appointed to the us attorney in 1999 i have a chance to meet people who serve as ambassadors. i have never met anybody that does not have a steam for the person who promoted them to high office. their current boss appointed you again to the us attorney's office and now your current job as attorney general and they made statements mean that somehow there is no damage to national security. and you have the presumptive presidential nominee of your party subject to investigation. to me investigation. to me that would meet any definition of extraordinary circumstances. i don't think we could find a similar fact pattern in american history where such an investigation was put up. why not so that the public has confidence that this is done in a political matter assigned someone trustworthy to serve a special counsel and in this way however the investigation goes out the public will have much more confidence in the outcome. >> thank you for your letter and i look forward to reviewing it and will provide a response. >> why not forget about the letter, why aren't these extraordinary circumstances? >> congressman, i icongressman, i would never forget about your letter, and we will provide a response. we will review the issues and provide you with a response. >> do you think that you as attorney general having investigation that concerns the spouse of somebody that has appointed you previously to an important position and not saying that somehow you won't try to do a good job but is human nature and in the appearance of whether there's a conflict of interest is something that a lot of people are concerned about. i appreciate you will review the letter. the vetting the testimony. about our capacity to that. and he said that you are getting better at it that you can't guarantee. you guarantee. you are confident that they will be able to that. your departmentdepartment brought terrorism charges against a number of bosnian immigrants. so if our vetting is good what happened in that case involving the bosnian who was indicted on material support for terrorism charges? >> i would have to look at that specific case. we have a robust screaming mechanism. it relies upon efforts of not just the fbi of the department of homeland security for my department of defense, state department and uses interviews, biometric data and is as i indicated earlier aa challenging process, as is everything we do in law enforcement but doesn't mean we are not committed to doing everything we can to make sure the process is as robust as possible and that we do everything we can to protect the american people. >> the concern is that you can do everything right but given the lack of data or lack of information on people being pulled out of a very difficult circumstance essentially an islamic civil war that you can do everything right and still have people come into the country who mean to do us harm. the bosnianthe bosnian was able to get in and circumstances that would have been easier to that. a lot of us have concerns. >> the gentleman yields back >> the chair recognizes the settlement from new york. >> thank the chairman and the attorney general for your presence in testimony. one of my colleagues from illinois mentioned earlier that in the city of chicago approximately 60 percent of the instances of gun violence can be traced to weapons that were initially purchased another the neighboring states, wisconsin, indiana as well as mississippi. it is mississippi. it is also the case that many of the weapons that are used to commit crime can be traced initially to the neighboring state of arizona a similar problem in new york in terms of the weapons that are used often to commit crime. in effect, this has been illustrated recently. we experience the deaths of four officers in the line of duty over the last ten months. detective ramos kamali brian moore and grandma folder. a very diverse group. one was asian, one was latino. pay the ultimate price. one of the things they had in common was the weapons that were used to kill each of these officers. officer more, weapon that came from georgia, officer holder weapon that came from south carolina. even as certain states see fit to tighten there gun violence prevention loss no national legislative effort, many states have been subjected my question is do you think that the gun trafficking laws they currently exist on the books are adequate and atf, fbi, department of justice to do his job in combating gun violence? >> certainly congressman the protection of the american people, particularly when it comes to gun violence is one of our highest priorities. we are making every effort to carry out the goal. we look to them to vigorously enforce our laws on the books. there are a number of cases that my colleague in the brooklyn das office was able to essentially close down a firearm trafficking ring that was bringing guns from georgia to new york. so itso it is something that all levels of law enforcement take seriously. we work closely with state and local colleagues on this issue and will continue to do so. certainly should congress consider additional legislation we would be happy to provide input and comment on that. that is something there is a debate about. >> has the department of justice taken a position as to whether universal background checks are comprehensive background checks would be something that congress should look to do as it relates to tightening our gun violence prevention loss? >> we have provided information about cases that we have seen that we hope will be helpful to the analysis and congress on that. if that were something that congress were to consider it worked implement that as well. >> it is my understanding that the department of justice is currently investigating whether the civil rights of eric garner were violated when he died as a result of a chokehold that was deployed in july of 2014 by an nypd officer. is that correct? >> yes. that tragic incident did occur in 2014, and it was on staten island, which is in my former district. >> in december of 2014 the department of justice publicly announced that it was considering whether civil rights prosecution would be appropriate. >> yes. essentially the staten island district attorney initially undertook an investigation by grand jury presentation. we awaited the results of that investigation, and after the conclusion of the state matter began our own federal which is ongoing. >> and in the context of the federal review ongoing, eric garner obviously has been killed. the individual who courageously recorded the incident is currently being prosecuted at the state level in a manner that many of us use retaliatory. remains to be seen, but the officer deployed a chokehold that have been administratively prohibited by the nypd for the previous 20 years remains on the force on desk duty still receiving a salary. at any point to the department of justice communicate that it should refrain from proceeding with disciplinary action against this officer during the pendency of your investigation? >> the jonas time has expired. >> i am not able to go into the specifics of the discussions that we may or may not have had with the nypd except to say that it is common practice during the pendency of the investigation officers are placed on a modified duty assignment consistent with the internal preface of the nypd and that they still retain the right to take action. they often do await the results of a federal investigation. that has been my experience with the cases i have personally prosecuted unseen prosecuted. >> pajamas time is expired. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you for being here today and for your patients and sitting through this long testimony. the primary function of any prosecutor is to enforce the law and the constitution and to ensure justice. as i listened to some of the questions the chairman take you down the path of talking to you about sanctuary cities. to me, the idea of sanctuary cities is antithetical to what prosecutors believe, justice. because it is the selective application of loss. i am wondering what your opinion is of sanctuary cities given all that has been happening in this country. we have cities that have decided to enforce their own brand of law, to ignore law. we have constituents that we represent the don't understand that. and we have members that do not understand how we can have law enforcement community that does not enforce the law. it just is inexplicable. i think it is important that we have some clarity. but federal law prohibits specifically section 642 of the illegal immigration reform and immigrant responsibility act of 1996 any state or local government from prohibiting their officials from communicating information regarding the immigration status of any person. yet it happens. i am just wondering, your predecessor did not address this issue. i am wondering if you can address it and give the american people some clarity as to why sanctuary cities are still allowed to exist in this country. >> congressman, i have to tell you, it is not an issue how much i'll give you clarity about the history of sanctuary cities. i am happy to look into the issue of provide you with more information we can. i know it is an issue of intense debate, and the department of justice is able to provide not only the information that the help in that debate. i'm not able to give you the history of how they came about or explain that to you. i understand the challenges that you note, however. >> that is exactly why americans are frustrated because that is the answer they are getting. selective enforcement of the law is not justice. it is, in fact, lawlessness. .. antoine law enforcement refuses to talk to each other and why we allow some of these glaring examples of violence to occur in our inner cities. we complain about it and i've heard it here today yet we are not doing what we could do to ensure that it doesn't happen in the future. it causes me great anxiety to sit here and not here some public officials say we will not stand for it, for lawlessness. we will not allow cities to circumvent or ignore the law. we will use the power and the weight of her office to ensure justice is done. and i say that with conviction because i believe it's common sense and has nothing to do with politics. it's common sense and i will let you respond to that if you have any response. >> thank you congressman. i do understand the frustration that you outlined and certainly with respect to the statutory regime that you inquired about a syndicated. i'm not able able to give you that historical information but i look forward to providing what information we can. >> i yield that. >> the gentleman yields back. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you madam attorney general for being here, particularly at a moment when i know you and the entire justice department are offering full assistance to your counterparts in france to respond to this horrific terror attack. as you know under federal law a gondola may transfer a firearm to a purchaser after 72 business hours even if a criminal background check has not been completed and because of that is called the default or see policy within the department and because of that gun dealers went forward with almost 8000 sales to people who turned out to be prohibited purchasers between 2,000,010 in 2014. my first question is do you think the default policy should be changed to a policy that says firearm sales mail me courage the background check has been completed and approved? >> certainly raise an important issue about gun safety and our background systems. we have been looking specifically at this issue. given the unfortunate tragic circumstance allowed dylann roof to purchase a firearm and what i will say though is while it certainly does make it challenging and makes it difficult to ensure that we keep iran's away from those that are prohibited that is the currency of the law. >> understand that but do you agree madam attorney general that if the law on background checks has been completed and approved it would reduce the likelihood that people who are ineligible from purchasing firearms? >> certainly would provide law enforcement with another tool to make sure that firearms out of the hands of ribadu persons and should congress consider something we would he happy to provide input and comment on that. >> when that information is determined, it is determined that a person is a primitive purchaser the agency sends out data retrieval noticed to the bureau of alcohol tobacco and firearms, correct? >> as if it riveted resendez acquire weapon. >> you know what happens to those cases in which atf is directed to retrieve a firearm? >> with respect to retrieval noticed his atf oil send an agent to investigate the whereabouts of the individual and the firearm and retrieve the firearm. >> under current law no notice is provided to local law enforcement or to the u.s. attorney's office in that jurisdiction. is that correct? >> it is done. tf that is correct. >> so in at least some of these cases someone who is ineligible because they are convicted felon has purchased a firearm but they don't provide notice to local law enforcement of u.s. attorneys attorney's office, only to atf? you would agree that providing that information to local law enforcement or u.s. attorney's office would allow them to prosecute some number of individuals who criminally in violation of the law artegon with a criminal record? >> congressman i agree that the sharing of all relevant information helps all law enforcement. every case would have to be looked at differently and with respect to the individual facts of the case. >> in addition i want to focus attention madam attorney general on the system. director, he testified that receiving -- was a potential area for improvement. either legislative efforts we can undertake to increase compliance by the state and local government? is it your sense that it's a lack of federal standards, general buster the difficulties or is just not compliance and what can we do as members of congress to try to encourage or require the system because it's only as good as the information contained within it. >> the system is an important part of our background check system and we do rely very heavily on information from her state and local counterparts. in many instances we have excellent reporting from most counterparts. it is not as robust as we need and anything that can be done to improve that would be useful. certainly congress could consider legislation and we have been speaking directly with those localities to encourage them to improve their reporting to the current system. >> one final question madam attorney general congressman deutsch made reference to the challenging issue of the engaging in the business of dealing with firearms even if the atf is that prosecutions allows people who regularly sell guns to avoid requirement of a background check and some have suggested that you could issue a regulation that would provide greater clarity. we recognize legislation is -- but would you agree we could look at whether or not you have the ability to issue a clarifying legislation that will attempt to reach these individuals who are regularly engaged in the sale of firearms but are not determined to be engaged in the business of dealing with firearms and thereby go free from any of the constraints that exist for firearm sales that prevent significant dangers as a result? >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> congressman with respect to the important issue of our firearm statutes obviously significant changes would have to be considered and implemented by congress and should they be considered i would be happy to provide input and guidance there in the current statutory scheme we always do everything that we can to ensure robust enforcement of the current statute. involved for exemplar reach on the part of atf to gun dealers to provide guidance to them as to their activities. that goes on on a regular basis to the cat in fact increase and encourage compliance on the part of the d.o.e.. >> mr. chair i would ask unanimous consent that this first report the fbi data shows thousands of gun sales be introduced as part of the record. >> without objection. >> i would assess article entitled walmart has tougher policies for background checks and finally report business as usual prepared by every town for gun safety hide level gun sales fuels these. >> without objection. >> thank you attorney general lynch for being here. i know it's been a long day. as you i'm deeply deeply troubled by recent events taking place. i know you have shared you concerned about what happened in paris and the fact that the current crisis in syria. these events pose singular impressed on a very harsh reality of our world. and now we are confronted with a duty to respond s. congress. i hope that the administration will take the necessary steps to ensure our nation's security to every extent possible in these uncertain times. as you know director comey was here a couple weeks ago and we asked him some questions and he testified before this committee that the f. e. i cannot offer absolute assurance that there is no risk associated with the current syrian refugee crisis. in fact, when i asked him specifically about the security gaps in syria he said the challenge we face with syria is that we don't have that set of data so even though we have gotten better at clearing what we have we certainly will have less overall so in other words he's saying we have the ability to query the information that we have that we don't have a good set of data. we don't have a good set of intelligence. do you agree with that? >> certainly with respect to the information coming into our databases from syria as the director has noted it does present challenges to law enforcement however it does not mean people stop trying to obtain data and utilize that screen and system. i certainly want to convey our commitment to doing that but certainly as the director has indicated there are challenges to a system based upon the amount and type of data that one can obtain. >> so when you are the media out there, they have spent the last few days saying we are vetting the syrian rebels but the reality is that we don't have sufficient information. obviously your administration is doing everything possible to gather the information that we have what put the problems that we don't know what we don't have such is the intelligence on these people is not as fast as it was in iraq for example. is that correct? >> certainly every country presents a different scenario in terms of information we can gather from them and certainly was. does present its challenges i'm not able to unequivocally say that we obtain no data from them. >> i don't think that's what i said. i don't think that's what i said. i just said we have some problems and in fact he said, i would say that we have a less robust dataset dramatically than we had with iraq so it is difficult. would you agree with that assessment? >> is certainly does present challenges guess congressman. >> he didn't just say there's a small difference between the two countries but between iraq and syria there is a dramatic difference in the type of intelligence that we have. then when i asked the fbi director, i asked him what the fbi can do to improve security, this is one of the things that scared me the most. he said that's one i don't have a good answer for. so do you have a good answer for what we could do right now to improve dramatically the intelligence that we have on the syrian refugee's? >> congressman what i can tell you is that both the fbi director and i've will do everything in our power to continue to protect. >> i know you will do everything in your power and i appreciate your answer but what specifically are you going to do so i can go back to the people of idaho and let them know that the syrian refugees that may be coming from the state of idaho have been properly vetted, not just that it would properly vetted so we know exactly what the backgrounds are? >> certainly congressman we can provide information on the type of vetting that is done. as i mentioned before. >> we already nova betting that is done is not sufficient. director comey already said that so your answer is insufficient at this time. how can i give assurances to the people of my district we will have the intelligence that is necessary to know whether they there are going to be harmful or not to our communities and to our nation and to the families in my district? >> congressman has indicated we can in fact provide you information on the nature of the vetting. we can in fact provide information as i indicated that is done by the fbi but also in conjunction with the department of defense, state, homeland security we also rely on more than the databases. every refugee from whatever country who chooses to come here or to try and come here is also subject to robust interview process as well as the biometric analysis of the individual who is literally in front of the interviewer. something that unfortunately europe does not have the ability to do at this time placing them in a dramatically different situation than us and certainly we are happy to keep you updated >> you think of biometric information provided was not sufficient. do you think it's sufficient? >> congressman i can navigate to the types of measures that are in place and provided information on the types of screening that is done so that information can be sent to your district. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the chair now recognizes mr.. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you madam general for testifying today predict how -- want to talk about the mortgage settlement and in 2013 access groups met with then deputy attorney general tony west and urged him to in my opinion create a slush fund to fund goodies in connection with the jpmorgan chase settlement and then in 2014 the same groups came back to the deputy attorney general and in connection with the city and wells fargo settlements really pushed and accomplished mandatory donations to activist groups specifically iaf with enhanced credits for donations to those groups. and i wondered if you could comment on whether you think that -- those discussions occurred number one and if they did why? >> congressman with respect to the settlements involving residential mortgage-backed securities fraud they are an important part of the departments work to not only protect the american people but to provide relief from the financial crisis and the housing crisis that has occurred from 2008 on. in connection with your specific question i'm not aware of the meetings you are talking about. i was not involved in them but what i can tell you as the former u.s. attorney involved in the settlements and two of those matters negotiations were between the banks and the government, and that is certainly how those those matters were handled and how they were solved. with respect to the consumer relief portion of those settlements, the money bear comes from the bank and it is specifically designed in the wake of the widespread and detailed issues of wrongdoing on the part of the banks that led to thousands if not hundreds of thousands of homeowners losing not only their homes but the value in their homes and their savings. we also instituted consumer relief to provide direct relief to people. that went above and beyond the statutory penalty of the statute under which these cases were bought -- brought. where banks are able to provide for example one of the main forms of relief this principle reduction. where there entities involved the bank would make a selection and they would have to be of an entity from a preapproved hud list. it is focuses on relief for example for foreclosure. >> understand how the money, how the settlements and the money in connection with the settlements was supposed to be used. what i'm concerned about is iaf specifically an activist group which focuses on community organizing that tens of millions of dollars with the intent i believe of training high school students about the importance of debt management and financial management and i can't for the life of me understand why if you are really looking at trying to curtail future mortgage defaults why that money wasn't given to the mortgage bankers of america for the different state bar associations that were doing very good work in terms of loan modifications and instead it went to some group that had a different agenda in my opinion unrelated to mortgage default activity and then i guess the larger question is how were we doing on discovery with respect to what really happened in connection with the settlements? >> can you be more specific? >> 11 months ago the committee asked for e-mails relating to discussions between doj and outside groups as relates to mandatory donations to these activist groups. that was 11 months ago and former prosecutor, how would you deal with -- feel if a corporation to keep elements to send you the details? >> it would depend on the request and the discovery associations. >> is 11 months a good time for return of discovery? >> it depends on the specific facts. >> the sanctuary cities for just a moment to read earlier today chairman smith asked you about the immigration reform act of 1996 which bar state and local governments from prohibiting their officials from communicating information regarding immigration status at dhs and your response to chairman smith's question was that we are talking with the different jurisdictions about their compliance with this act so what are you talking with them about? >> congressman i don't believe that was my specific response. i would have to go back and look at that response. what i can tell you is that i believe my response was that i was not familiar enough with the specific statutory terms that we were discussing to provide a specific answer to this question. >> the section that chairman smith was referring to, section 642a were specifically gives you the ability to join jurisdictions from deciding not to comply with this act. have you sought other than talking with the jurisdictions, have you sought any enforcement actions are any injunctive relief to try to make sure that the different cities that have decided to go rogue aarp following federal law? >> the gentleman's time has expired. the attorney general can answer the question. >> i'm not aware but i'm certainly happy to look into that and provide a response. >> at this time the chairman recognizes the senator from iowa senator king. >> and number things come to mind. i would like to pick up the sanctuary cities and that is that this is a statute that prohibits the political local jurisdictions law enforcement jurisdictions from having a policy that prohibits law enforcement officers from engaging with supporting with her helping immigration enforcement officials from the federal government. i'm of the understanding that some of these communities prohibit law enforcement officers from gathering information and they circumvent the text of 642a. so i think it's important that you know that section and enforce that section. i've not yet seen an attorney general that doesn't force that section of the law and if you read that and it reads to you is literally as i have described to you would you be prepared to withhold law enforcement grants from those local jurisdictions? >> thank you for the question and the predicate to it. it's not a statute that i'm familiar with to give you a specific response to but i am having -- happy to look them provide you with information on that paid. >> i would urge you to do that and i'm asking you in this record to please send that to me it my office as well as to the committee. i would like to know directly what your responses on that. it's very frustrating to be engaged in passing legislation here in this the congress and then saying it's ignored. that's the sanctuary cities but i wanted to go back to the background checks and bank stand the more difficult than ceria but do we have no metrics on the syrian refugees for the migrants? do we have digital photographs in that part of background checked? >> it depends on individual circumstance. a number of people do come in and do have that information and the number people do not. if they comment as i indicated before as part of the process that information together and also stored. >> but you can't do background information that you have that you just gather this verse fingerprints or digital photographs are concerned to would have to be part of their record prior to that coming out of iraq or syria. i just came back back from their last we get not only that but i traveled over much of europe and i tracked with the migrants and i saw tens of thousands of them. i met with the state department and number of countries and they tell me they are grantees are giving expert -- expertise to local countries in the opinion and because as you said we are ahead of them so i said are they fingerprinting and taking digital photographs and her answer was they are not. so i'm very troubled about the level of confidence you seem to exude here or the president exudes on ability to do background checks when i see a haystack of community and in that haystack of the people that are terrorists and also in that haystack are pieces of hay that will become the needles of terrorists. so do you actually believe that the administration altogether can assure america within a jury of confidence that they can identify someone will be radicalized because of their association especially with their religion and family members that they will be transferred into this country? >> congressman has indicated we do have a robust screening mechanism and a self syndicated change the circumstance to and ensure we have the information we need to make a determination on who can come into the country and who cannot. >> let me suggest it doesn't sound at all robust to me. it's not robust enough that we are to have identified them in their home country. if they don't have the legal existence of narrow home country how and what can we possibly do background checks on people that from a legal perspective didn't exist before they showed up to the borders of the united states? how about this. are you under any kind of directive not to say islamic jihad or radical islam? is that a memo that has come out? >> i see no memo on. >> are the islamic radicals? >> i call the murderers. >> you can't say a slump in conjunction with that. and we understand them if we can't say that? i want to read to you, you can't say it, can you? you can't say it any more than hillary clinton can say the word radical islamic jihad. we can understand our enemy and if we don't know who they are and we don't know much motivates them. you know what the term hadron means quick sentence in islamic term for peaceful migration to invade other countries and start your civilization there and don't assemble it into the broader culture of civilization and that is being preached in mosques around the middle east than they are rising up and moving into your bin into the and they are resisting the idea that they could ever assimilate into the american culture civilization we are sitting here acting like weekend at them without even understanding what the pictures of not being able to say radical islamic jihad and having a president out of your party that can save either. i'm flabbergasted and this will be my last question honestly. i would ask unanimous consent to ask my question. would you ever think and a little bit of levity actually committed to be think you'd be sitting here testifying before the house judiciary committee during so many of the other party advocate -- advocating for -- it surely will rhetorical. >> thank you mr. chairman. madam attorney general in my district there is quite a large number of law-abiding gun owners who happen to be hunters but i can't tell you how many times i've heard complaints from the hunters about the availability of ammunition especially at the start of deer season. as you may know hunters are being wars to use alternative non-lead ammunition because manufacturers can't make brass or steel ammunition for 30 out six or 270 deer hunting rifle unless they get a waiver saying primarily it's intended for sporting purposes and that waiver has to come from the attorney general. now in the last four years there have been at least 32 petitions that have been submitted by manufacturers seeking that designation. not a single one of those positions has been granted. what's really begs an explanation is that in the last four years not a single response has been sent to any manufacture with regard to those petitions for my question to you is why haven't those been responded to and when can a response be expected? >> thank you for the question congressman. i thank you for racing data network like the opportunity to look into that matter provides information. >> any tummy last four years have discussed the existence of those petitions with anyone at the department of justice? >> congressman certainly for the last four years and my prior position as u.s. attorney for brooklyn the matter would not have been within my purview in the syndicated while i'm not aware of the situation now i would appreciate the opportunity to speak to your staff and provide you with information. >> are you aware that there is a statute 921 that says which the attorney general finds primarily intended to use for sporting purposes. you understand it's your responsibility to make that designation? >> it certainly included in the panoply of responsibilities for the office of the attorney general. >> to have an explanation for why there hasn't been any response at all in the last four years to looks making petitions to the united states department of justice? >> happy to look at it then provide information to you on that. >> let me then turn to another troubling issue is the nation's top law enforcement official, i want to get your reaction to growing anti-police sentiments and actions by public groups in this country. i'm hoping that you will agree with me. i'm also a former united states attorney and i took the same oath that he did it and hoping you'll agree with me that police officers and law enforcement are in important part of the bad one of our criminal justice system and in fact i would hope you would agree with me that the work that they do is vital to your ability as the attorney general and the thousands of lawyers who work for you at the department of justice to be able to prosecute violations of the law. >> i would call them essential congressman. >> with that in mind what is the status of your investigation into carla dubinsky? >> can you give me some context for the question? >> carla dubinsky with the doj lawyer for the new orleans police officers that were charged in connection with the shooting of civilians in the aftermath of hurricane katrina and as you know madam attorney general the role of the officers to make sure the constitutional rights of police officers are protected from disclosure of privileged information. it was subsequently established in federal court. rather than protecting those police officers ms. dubinsky who was the doj deputy chief actually rather than protecting the constitutional rights when on line to anonymously leak evidence from the case and the defendant police officers that she was supposed to be protecting. a federal judge in the case called it reckless. he he called at 110 and a new term that i have not heard come he called it misconduct and found that she had personally fanned the flames of those defendants convicted so the reason i raised this 10 months ago after confirmation hearing for the judiciary committee deferred answering questions and chairman grassley investigating the matter. he responded in writing by saying if the firm that will commit to ensuring that department hold accountable any employees who are found to have committed misconduct. so please tell me that you have in fact done this you have promised and help ms. dubinsky accountable for that outrageous conduct. >> congressman my understanding of the matter to the extent that i'm aware and to the extent of it the matter was referred and reviewed by her office of professional responsibility and the department followed the applicable civil service laws in conjunction with that. but i don't have further specifics on that for you. >> any tummy whether or not ms. dubinsky who engaged in the conduct of trying to help convict the defendant she was sworn to protect, can you tell me whether or not she's employed with the department of justice? >> that tome's time has expired but you may respond. >> i believe she was.

Related Keywords

Louisiana , United States , Alabama , China , California , Syria , Russia , Washington , District Of Columbia , San Francisco , Arizona , Temple University , Pennsylvania , South Carolina , Iowa , Spain , Chicago , Illinois , Brooklyn , Lewisburg , Miami , Florida , New York , Canada , Japan , Western District , Virginia , Tivoli , Texas , Germany , Iran , Boston , Massachusetts , Indiana , Georgia , Wisconsin , Brussels , Bruxelles Capitale , Belgium , Michigan , Jordan , Mississippi , Puerto Rico , Staten Island , Iraq , Tennessee , Idaho , Chile , Maryland , Ohio , Paris , Rhôalpes , France , Utah , Bosnia Herzegovina , Americans , America , Canadian , Chinese , Syrians , Bosnian , Spanish , French , German , Syrian , Japanese , American , Gregory Craig , Carla Dubinsky , Montel Williams , Danielle Matz , Loretta Lynch , Peggy Noonan , Lois Lerner , Sherry Chan , Robbie Tolan , Judith Miller , Barack Obama , Barbra Streisand , Ramos Kamali Brian Moore , Ted Koppel , Dzhokhar Tsarnaev , Joan Lynch , Hillary Clinton ,