YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Coleen Rowley Testifies Before The Senate - 6/6/2002 - Part I

Coleen Rowley Testifies Before The Senate - 6/6/2002 - Part I — Transcript

by Jon Gold · 18,426 words · 2,613 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:02take
0:05our I'm just going to need a little bit
0:07of cooperation so I can
0:11see I love you all but
0:15see
0:17um I do want to welcome special agent
0:21Colleen M Ry of the
0:23FBI she's been an FBI agent for 21 years
0:27she's currently the chief division
0:29Council for the Minneapolis field office
0:31of the
0:32FBI she came um to the attention of this
0:36committee when she wrote a letter to
0:39director meller that was given to
0:40members of Congress and our letter
0:43refers to a number of issues this
0:44committee has heard from other FBI
0:46agents in the
0:47past um and Senator hatch and I felt
0:53that by the nature of the hearing we're
0:55having today it would be good if she uh
0:59if she tested ified and
1:02um the did you want to say something
1:05before start F I'm just looking I'm just
1:07looking forward to your testimony U Mr
1:10Mr chairman could I say something the uh
1:13uh sen of mil of course yeah well I I
1:16thank you Mr chairman because uh special
1:19agent rowy is a native in my home state
1:22of Iowa and she's also a native of my
1:25wife's hometown of New Hampton Iowa but
1:28more importantly uh agent R is a
1:31patriotic American who had the courage
1:33to put truth first and raise critical
1:37but important questions about how the
1:39FBI handled a terrorist case before the
1:42attacks and about the FBI's cultural
1:45problems agent Raleigh uh your testimony
1:48today is a great service to this
1:51committee the entire Congress the FBI
1:54and the American people and I thank you
1:55for coming we should be honored to hear
1:58your testimony today
2:00uh people like you who come forth to uh
2:04as uh as I put it to commit the truth of
2:08a very terrible sin among some federal
2:10employees uh but you you come forth with
2:13important
2:14information
2:16uh about the FBI there's been Heroes
2:20like Fred Whitehurst before you who
2:22exposed the FBI crime lab Scandal we had
2:26four agents last summer who revealed
2:28disparities and dis displine and a
2:30pattern of retaliation against those who
2:32investigated misconduct inside the
2:35FBI agent Raleigh has thrown the
2:38spotlight on specific and general
2:40problems happening at the FBI before the
2:42terrorist attacks and she has important
2:45insights with her perspective from the
2:47field about what the FBI can do to
2:50change the FBI must improve so it can
2:53prevent future terrorist attacks and her
2:56testimony I believe is very important to
2:58help this happen Miss Raleigh I believe
3:01is a dedicated public servant who tells
3:03it like it is she wanted to be an FBI
3:06agent since she was 5 years old and she
3:09had a distinguished has had a
3:11distinguished 20-year career at the FBI
3:14she worked in variety of uh of offices
3:18including New York where she
3:19investigated Mafia after learning
3:22Italian and worked with people like Rudy
3:24Giuliani Louie free and Michael chto uh
3:28she worked in the meaning Apolis
3:30division now since 1990 in a number of
3:32areas including as the ethics offer
3:35officer agent Raleigh I thank you again
3:38for agreeing to testify today so that we
3:41can hear your constructive criticism of
3:43the FBI to help it reform and to help it
3:45improve thank you thank you thank you Mr
3:48uh well M Ry both Senator wellstone is a
3:51senior senator from your state and um uh
3:55Senator Grassley who is from your uh
3:59state of birth have said very good
4:01things about you and they both have gone
4:03out of their way to talk to members of
4:05the committee with all that now we'd
4:08like to hear from you and I should
4:10mention there a roll call vote has
4:14started why don't you begin your uh
4:17statement if we have to stop at some
4:19point I will it won't be because of
4:20something you said it's only because we
4:22have to vote in person go
4:24ahead well the first thing I want to do
4:27is um thank you for the opportunity to
4:29to appear today I never really
4:32anticipated this kind of impact um when
4:35I wrote this letter to director Miller
4:37to over two weeks ago um I don't know if
4:40you know I think they've been saying I
4:42anguished over this a week it wasn't
4:44even quite a week that I um it was more
4:46like a three-day period and it was a
4:48fairly Sleepless three-day period when I
4:51began to initially just jot down my
4:53thoughts because I knew I had to appear
4:56before the staffers of the joint
4:57intelligence committee and I didn't want
4:59to forget anything and also you'll
5:01probably find out I'm a little better on
5:03paper than I am verbally so I was kind
5:05of afraid of that um that was one of the
5:08reasons I started to write it down I
5:10also had another big impetus that um
5:12that was kind of behind this all and one
5:15of the things uh was I saw the new
5:18direction of the FBI perhaps it was kind
5:21of hard to discern when it was first
5:23announced but I thought I saw some
5:25impetus towards a little more um
5:27additional bureaucracy
5:30and um micromanaging from headquarters
5:33and I wanted to point out to uh director
5:36Mueller that that seemed to fly in the
5:38face of of what we should have learned
5:40from September 11th and the two things
5:43were were the impetus for the
5:45letter uh I of course you know I have
5:48many years of experience in the FBI I
5:51really do care um really about the FBI
5:54I've invested you know almost half my
5:56life in it and I do care also about our
5:59protection now I've got four children uh
6:01all my a lot of my friends have children
6:03and um I really think we ought to be
6:06doing our best to try to prevent any
6:08future acts of
6:10terrorism um I uh I did in the last
6:15couple of weeks receive um hundreds um I
6:18was counting them for a while but I lost
6:20track I but I received hundreds of
6:22emails and telephone calls from Agents
6:25uh mostly agents some supervisors some
6:27prosecutors um some retired FBI leaders
6:31and um I'm not going to presume to speak
6:33for all of those people but when I
6:36looked at them and I've read most of
6:37them there's a few I probably haven't
6:39gotten a chance to look at that have
6:40come in since I left but of the ones I I
6:43looked at I did see a real common theme
6:45emerging um it seems like they're kind
6:48of struck a chord with a lot of people
6:50about this idea about the
6:51Bucy a lot of other agents told me
6:55similar stories and about cases that had
6:58uh you know know maybe unjustifiably not
7:01gotten anywhere and I have a you know I
7:02have a whole stack of
7:04those uh I think there is really the
7:07main thing being a real strong consensus
7:10that we need to streamline the FBI's
7:12bureaucracy in order to more effectively
7:15combat terrorism uh we need that agility
7:18that uh director Mueller was speaking of
7:20this morning that agility and ability to
7:22quickly react and I really see that as
7:25um if you get too topheavy with too many
7:28layers he He also mentioned that problem
7:31that you are going to be
7:33stymied uh I was encouraged by director
7:36Mueller's testimony this morning because
7:38I think many of his ideas uh do seem to
7:41go in the right direction and actually
7:42are quite consistent with the um various
7:45items I had in my letter to
7:47him he he really has an extremely
7:51difficult job and that's an
7:52understatement uh when I talk about
7:55trying to trim the bureaucracy a little
7:57bit I don't know how you can
7:58underestimate that it's been tried
8:01before and failed and he just has a
8:03tremendously difficult job which uh I
8:05can
8:06appreciate uh I want everyone to know
8:08that no one today previewed in the FBI I
8:11of course they gave me approval to be
8:12here but no one uh was no one read the
8:16statement I did I did this one quite
8:18quite quickly because I didn't know I
8:19was coming until recently and in this
8:22statement which I'm not going to read um
8:24because you can read it when you want to
8:27I have some ideas in here some of these
8:30ideas again come from other agents some
8:32of whom are more experienced in
8:33intelligence than I am uh and then some
8:36of them are my own ideas um I am the
8:39legal counsel so some of the legal
8:41issues are things that I've seen as an
8:42issue that have Arisen in the past few
8:44years and uh you can read that at your
8:48leisure and if someone wants to ask me a
8:49specific question about any of those uh
8:51that's
8:52fine
8:54uh there part of I guess what I can
8:57maybe go on be Beyond what director
8:59Mueller um I guess what I'm going to try
9:02to do is the FBI made mistakes prior to
9:05September 11th uh I made a little
9:08mistake if you look at my letter I made
9:10a mistake on the first page and I got
9:12the date wrong it was August 16th I mean
9:14it I I proof read it once and I missed
9:17it um we all make mistakes and I think
9:20that um there are other levels of our
9:22Criminal Justice System there are other
9:24federal agencies I'm not going to talk
9:26about but there are also the the
9:28prosecutors when you try to go criminal
9:30there's uh entities in the Department of
9:32Justice and so to some extent I've kind
9:34of broaden some of uh what I have
9:37written in my statement to include those
9:39other criminal justice entities that you
9:42know the FBI is is real important but we
9:44certainly uh there's certainly other uh
9:46entities that are very important here
9:50too uh I was also encouraged I didn't uh
9:54I don't know if anyone asked a question
9:55about it today but when I read director
9:58Mueller's statement
9:59he points to Integrity I think it's the
10:02last page also and he does point to that
10:04as an issue um and I I'm very um
10:08encouraged by that because um of course
10:11if you look at the end of my statement I
10:12think Integrity is extremely important
10:15um some of the people this morning did
10:17ask questions about how are we going to
10:20effectively combat terrorism uh we're
10:23going to be in a proactive environment
10:26which definitely has the potential of of
10:28uh interfering with people's civil
10:32liberties uh and how are we going to
10:34still protect those civil liberties and
10:36I honestly think Integrity really plays
10:39into this uh whole item h a lot of of
10:43when you're asking for some new law or
10:45some new Authority it's perhaps not only
10:48what the law allows you to do but it's
10:51how it's going to be done and then it
10:53really boils down to an issue of trust
10:55with the agency or the entity that
10:57you're giving this particular power to
11:00and there are this there there are
11:02potentials for abuse if you go over that
11:04line and I think uh as an agency we have
11:07to be so uh so completely truthful and
11:12honest that people are able to uh trust
11:15the FBI that we will not cross those
11:17lines and uh commit or commit uh any
11:21kind of civil rights violation or
11:23collect too much information
11:26Etc um
11:29that basically is uh all I want to say
11:31and then if anyone has a question from
11:33my statement Mr Ry we will what I'm
11:37going to do now we have about four
11:38minutes left in this vote I'm going to
11:41suggest everybody go and vote we'll
11:43stand recess for a minute or the amount
11:45of time it takes come back and that way
11:47we'll be uninterrupted thank
11:57you
12:23and then this is the question on the
12:24computer search some rions based on
12:27testimony
12:34um if everybody could
12:41get must be hot weather nobody wants to
12:44go
12:45outside
12:47um agent rally you may uh be interested
12:51in knowing and I haven't even had a
12:52chance to um share this
12:55with Senator Grassley a copy of this is
12:58gone to Senator
13:00hatch
13:03um Dan Bryant of the Department of
13:07Justice
13:09has sent me a letter following a request
13:12I made assuring both me and Senator
13:16hatch there will not be any
13:20retaliation uh against you in any form
13:22for the letter you sent to the FBI
13:25director
13:26um of course that would also extend to
13:30the testimony here I will put this
13:33letter to Senor hatch and myself in the
13:36in the record and
13:39um uh Senator Grassley and I have both
13:43notified the attorney general and the
13:45director that we would be following this
13:48matter carefully
13:50anyway let me ask this
13:53um question of you
13:57and
14:01uh I asked this question basically to
14:04director mher this morning so I want to
14:05ask you as
14:07well to your
14:09knowledge did the agents in Minneapolis
14:13or at headquarters for that better ever
14:16try to do a routine search for reports
14:19on Aviation schools or Pilot training on
14:23the automated Cas system I'm not talking
14:25about putting in somebody's name but for
14:28search wordss like Aviation schools or
14:31or Pilot
14:34um uh
14:35training
14:38um anybody do that um well I know a
14:42little bit about our um our ACS system
14:47and the records we have and as well as
14:49the search methods we have because I
14:51also do our Freedom of Information
14:53requests and of course there are strict
14:55uh rules in place about how we search
14:57and when we people write to us you know
14:59if we find their name uh our main system
15:03of Records our Central record system is
15:05indexed according to the name of the
15:07subject usually so for instance in a
15:10case where a p particular suspect was
15:13named the normal method of searching
15:16would be to search that name only um we
15:19also have we do have the ability um to
15:22search some text for a word but unlike
15:26for instance if you were doing Lexus
15:28Nexus research you can put in the qualif
15:30Andor and there's all different ways
15:32that you can
15:33search our FBI uh search is probably the
15:37most fundamental rudimentary thing you
15:40can just put in a word so for instance
15:42if you put in airline to do a text
15:45retrieval you would get up such a volume
15:48of records that it would be impossible
15:49to review uh it's almost impossible to
15:52do just a one-word text now you're going
15:54put in aviation schools well you what
15:57you can't do for instance in Lexus Nexus
16:00when you're searching for things you can
16:01put those qualifiers in that narrow it
16:03down right and we can't we have no way
16:05of doing that we can put a word in you
16:07could put in aviation I think we could
16:09and but you couldn't put in aviation
16:11schools no so you might get be getting
16:13Aviation and you would just be gaining
16:14th you know records that you couldn't
16:16possibly review now what the normal
16:19method is is we do search those names
16:21and that that's because the subject's
16:23names are indexed so for Freedom of
16:25Information that's what I do and you do
16:27I think he mentioned that you have to
16:29have the correct spelling that's that's
16:30right I mean if you're one letter off
16:32you may not turn up a record but this
16:34doesn't do you much good if you're
16:36looking for somebody for example use
16:38nitroglycerin and types of bombings and
16:40is going around with an alias which
16:43changes bombing to
16:45bombing what about um the director s in
16:48his
16:49testimony that
16:52your your office couldn't have brought
16:54up the Phoenix electronic communication
16:57on the computer and use it in connection
17:00with the masawi
17:02case but the headquarters could have
17:04done that is that your understanding uh
17:07I don't know specifically about that EC
17:10but I do know that prior to September
17:1311th a number of classified documents
17:16and I probably almost all classified
17:18documents were blocked so that only
17:21certain people uh on a need to know
17:23basis would be would be able to if you
17:26went into the computer for instance and
17:27you didn't have that access you aren't
17:29going to get have you're not going to be
17:30able to see those things it was also in
17:32public corruption cases other types of
17:35cases that we had this blocking um and
17:37it served a good purpose in a way
17:38because you know it really keeps the uh
17:42people maybe from abusing it but if you
17:44have say I mean suppose you have a
17:46cleared person uh the head of your
17:48office head of the Phoenix office and
17:49others they want to do a computer search
17:52on the FBI a ACS computer network it's
17:56still difficult for them to do is that
17:57correct
17:58uh clear that's that's true I don't know
18:01exactly how this blocking you know what
18:03people in in each office were unblocked
18:06and which weren't typically it was the
18:07people who had a need to work on that
18:09case only unfortunately um some of the
18:13people may know something about it are
18:15not going to be able to go much
18:18further uh you wrote that a supervisor
18:20at FBI headquarters made
18:22changes to the Minneapolis agents
18:25affidavit I'm talking about the fisa
18:27process now
18:29you wrote that they made changes to the
18:31agents affidavit the quote to use your
18:34words set it up for failure now the New
18:37York Times has also reported that
18:38another headquarters agent was basically
18:41banned from the courts from the fisa
18:44courts by the judge based on his past
18:48affidavits I know that um the response
18:52some of these problems the FBI's
18:53Institute the so-called Woods procedures
18:56and we put that in the record been de
18:58classifi put in the record this
19:01morning do you think uh some of these
19:04problems with a FIS of Court made headqu
19:06is more cautious and risk averse in
19:09processing the fice applications to the
19:12court I've never actually served at
19:15headquarters so um I'm I guess I would
19:18only be speaking from
19:20heay uh and as well as maybe the
19:22opinions of some of the people that have
19:24uh called me and and emailed me I think
19:27that uh when incidents occur where
19:30people in the FBI are disciplined uh or
19:34even even investigated possibly I think
19:37there are some consequences to that and
19:39it does in the future make them much
19:40more careful in the instances that I'm
19:42aware of in our office where that's
19:44happened uh we have typically in order
19:47not to repeat the problem we've
19:48instituted some kind of procedure that
19:51makes it more difficult so I think that
19:54in a way um you know from what I know of
19:56it and again I've never served in headqu
19:58quarters that I would probably agree you
20:01also wrote that you and the agents in
20:03Minneapolis were frustrated with the
20:05headquarters agent that was assigned to
20:06the m case and it actually hindered your
20:11investigation did you or any other
20:14supervisor agent in Minneapolis
20:16call the agent you are concerned would
20:19call his supervisor or others in
20:22Washington to complain about this before
20:23September
20:2511th I'm uh of course uh a little bit
20:29restricted in what I can talk today
20:31about the events of pre-september 11th I
20:34had put that in my statement I failed to
20:36mention it earlier when I comment I'm
20:38going to try to comment in a general way
20:40and just avoid the specifics prior to
20:42the events prior and not get into true
20:45real facts when I wrote the letter to
20:47director Mueller um I think some of the
20:50news accounts may be uh misunderstood I
20:54really was speaking more from a third
20:57party perspective and talking about what
21:00I saw our agents and other people in our
21:03office as opposed to me personally I
21:06there was a word in the first page I
21:07said I had a peripheral role and I think
21:10that's very accurate I did have a role
21:11but it it was peripheral and uh when you
21:14ask if other people uh took these
21:17actions you know I I will say this um
21:21this we have a culture in the FBI that
21:24there's a certain pecking order and it's
21:26pretty strong and it's very rare that
21:30someone picks up the phone and calls a
21:33rank or two above themselves it would
21:36have to be only on the the strongest
21:38reasons uh typically you you have to
21:41pick up and call you know pick up the
21:43phone and talk to somebody who is at
21:44your rank um so when these when you have
21:48an item that requires review by a higher
21:51level it's incumbent for you to go to a
21:54higher level person in your office and
21:56then for that person to make a call
21:58do uh is the Inspector General talk to
22:00you about this case uh I've had a call
22:03from the Inspector General but so far we
22:05haven't gotten into any uh real facts or
22:08anything and when did he when did he
22:10first contact you I I was contacted by
22:13an investigative counsel um from the
22:16office of Inspector General and that's
22:18all and it was basically just to um
22:20introduce introduce herself and how long
22:22ago it was uh last week I think uh just
22:27a day or two after um director Mueller
22:30announced that it would be turned over
22:32to the office of Inspector General thank
22:33you um and you raised an important issue
22:37also about the so-called McDade law and
22:40your testimony did you know that law was
22:43slipped into a massive Omnibus
22:44Appropriations bill or some of us call
22:46it ominous Appropriations bills back in
22:491999 Senator hatch and I and Senator W
22:53have been trying to fix this problem
22:55fact we introduced what was it S14 37 to
22:58fix the
22:59problem I want you to know there's some
23:01of us on the committee that recognize it
23:03is a problem and Senator hatch and I are
23:06trying very much to fix the problem
23:09we'll keep trying eventually hope be
23:12successful we came very close we thought
23:14we had it fixed in the um USA Patriot
23:17Act but others didn't want it to go for
23:21been able to but I'm committed and I
23:24think I can speak for Senator hatch he's
23:25committed to get it fixed Senator hatch
23:28well thank you Mr chairman want to
23:30welcome you to the committee Miss Ry and
23:33um at the outset I wanted to thank you
23:35for appearing before the committee I
23:36also commend you for your letter of May
23:3821st to director
23:40Mueller uh that letter raises a variety
23:43of significant issues that need to be
23:46considered during the reor any
23:48reorganizing of the FBI and I can only
23:51imagine how difficult it was for you to
23:53write the letter and then forward it to
23:55director Mueller and others so I want to
23:57ask you a few questions to clarify some
23:59statements in the letter and to seek
24:01your views on on aspects of the specific
24:05reorganization
24:07plan uh I believe the FBI is the most
24:10important uh law enforcement agency in
24:12the world and I know you do too and
24:15that's why you wrote the letter and
24:17you'd like to have it continue to uh be
24:20a great agency but in your letter you
24:22detail the difficulties you and the
24:24Minneapolis agents encountered in
24:26Seeking a search warrant
24:28under the foreign intelligence
24:30surveillance act procedures we've been
24:32referring to that as fisa all day uh
24:36with the fisa and your legal training
24:38what modifications do you believe may be
24:40warranted to the fisa statute in order
24:43to enable the FBI to obtain such
24:46approvals when uh investigating
24:50terrorists um well I heard some of the
24:52discussion this morning about the uh the
24:55necessity to perhaps take out the uh
24:59working on behalf of a foreign power um
25:01aspect um and thinking about that and to
25:04be honest I haven't thought about it a
25:05whole lot and in addition I have not had
25:08that much personal experience uh in
25:10working with the fisa process our office
25:13is not as involved as other offices
25:15would be um however I think in a way um
25:19just knowing what I know about criminal
25:21and totality of circumstances Etc I am
25:24not quite sure that it needs to be
25:26modified I think think in a way perhaps
25:28what we have is because probable cause
25:31and proving or show making these
25:34showings that are required are not like
25:37a DNA test they're not a litmus test you
25:39can't put it in and have it come out a
25:41hundred times the same way and what can
25:44happen is mindsets and overtime
25:46different
25:47interpretations and you can have
25:49something becoming uh unduly difficult
25:52when when you actually look back maybe
25:5410 years ago this wasn't the case and
25:57there was basically a lesser standard I
25:59think when you look at um totality of
26:02the circumstances and probable cause uh
26:05you are looking at more probable than
26:07not I'm not even quite sure if the fisis
26:10I think fisis statute requires it as
26:12well more probable than not and I think
26:14that if you look at a totality if
26:16someone is working on behalf of a
26:18foreign power these um terrorist
26:21entities are not like countries they
26:24don't have embassies they don't send us
26:26their membership
26:28they don't send us uh their little
26:31organizational charts um I worked Mafia
26:34cases in the 1980 and the mafia didn't
26:36do that either we did not they didn't
26:38send us their membership we had to
26:40figure it out and after a few years we
26:43certainly did have hierarchies of each
26:46organized crime family but that that was
26:48gained from surveillance it was gained
26:51from Little Snippets of information we
26:53would get from wirs uh that so and so is
26:56working for so and and so and I think
26:58that we should be able to use that same
27:00type of thing uh for demonstrating that
27:03someone is working on behalf of a
27:04foreign power especially with a
27:06terrorist organization and I'm not sure
27:08that the language needs to be modified
27:10but I think we need to realize that it's
27:12almost the same type of thing that we're
27:14up against we are not going to get
27:16concrete uh membership lists
27:19organizational charts that we can say
27:21okay or even the the definition of the
27:23group sometimes these groups are very
27:26amorphous and
27:28uh By Nature terrorism groups operate
27:30more effectively without having real
27:32defined hierarchies and and who reports
27:35to who Etc so that's kind of my take on
27:38it of course to a large degree we're
27:40talking about surveillance and U and
27:42unless you can show that they are
27:44operatives for a foreign power or that
27:47they you have probable CA to believe
27:49that they are part of alqa say in this
27:52particular case you can't get the f a
27:55right to to surveil and see that's what
27:58I think is uh and many people are
28:01concerned on the other side that that if
28:04we grant that broad right then it'll be
28:07misused Sooner or Later by somebody who
28:09would not be as perspicacious as you are
28:11or or director Mueller is but I see it
28:14as a big problem because as you can see
28:17we basically couldn't get surveillance
28:20on I think basically all of those uh 20
28:24I'm not going to comment on all the
28:26facts but um of the case I I my analysis
28:30of uh the case is that um perhaps that
28:34you know it already exists you've read
28:35my letter and um I think that it's an
28:38it's a it's an obstacle and I think
28:41maybe it's a possibility to consider
28:43whether maybe that that amount or that
28:45threshold should be somewhat eased
28:47especially in cases with terrorists
28:49where it's it's hard to but I think that
28:52things like surveillance and knowing who
28:54met who and things like that should
28:55figure into it all right agent R since
28:57your letter of May 21st the attorney
29:00general has issued a new investigative
29:03guidelines that will expand the FBI's
29:04investigative tools now given your
29:07experience in the field can you describe
29:09in Practical terms how will these new
29:12guidelines assist the FBI uh at least
29:14the the field agents in carrying out the
29:17FBI Mission or
29:19missions I have not had a chance to
29:22really fully read the modifications I
29:26have heard um what the three you know
29:28the main topics that have been brought
29:30up about going into public meetings and
29:32surfing the net um and there is one
29:35additional thing I think in those AG
29:37guidelines which delegates down to the
29:39sa's the ability and the authority to
29:41open up a case a preliminary inquiry um
29:46to the extent that I am definitely and I
29:49think we the the rest of the agents I've
29:51heard from are definitely in favor that
29:54when it's possible to delegate down to a
29:56lore Authority level we will be more
29:59Nimble and and agile I am very much in
30:02favor of that ability to open up a a
30:04preliminary inquiry by the sa that
30:06aspect is good um I I do want to maybe
30:09at some point get the chance to talk
30:11about um how I know people this morning
30:14were talking about uh their fear that
30:17some of these new um abilities to
30:20monitor public meetings um I have a
30:23little unique Insight because I process
30:25Freedom of Information cases and I can I
30:28read some of our old files from the
30:301950s and I will see in there where we
30:33got the people back then for a lot of
30:35reasons got a little carried away when
30:38they went to a meeting they recorded
30:40everyone who came whether they were
30:42important or not whether the person
30:45advocated uh uh whatever you know um a
30:49uh terrorist point of view or whatever
30:51and I see that type of thing that
30:53happened in the past what I think that
30:56we need to do is a lot of it is in the
30:58how and if you go to a public meeting
31:01for instance maybe someone maybe we've
31:03gotten a little bit of information that
31:06someone in that meeting might be
31:07discussing a terrorist act I think it is
31:11very good and logical that someone would
31:13go and sit in just to make sure that
31:15doesn't happen so if in fact a person
31:19stands up and says uh hey let's all do
31:23this let's all you know undertake this
31:25and gives a speech about under taking an
31:27act of terrorism we are now going to be
31:29in a position that we will know it now
31:32if that same agent even based on a good
31:34tip goes to the meeting and people are
31:37merely engaging in their first amendment
31:39rights here's the the thing nothing
31:42happens from that information that's the
31:43difference in the 50s we don't come back
31:46and record who was there we do not uh
31:49look into the people that were there it
31:52just ends I think there is a difference
31:54between how we do this and exactly what
31:57the authority is and I think to the
32:00extent that it gives us a little bit
32:01extra opportunity to prot perhaps detect
32:04something I think it would be good in
32:07your May 21st letter you U you indicate
32:10your concerns about director Mueller's
32:12proposal to create quote flying squads
32:15unquote uh which would operate at out
32:18out of FBI headquarters here uh could
32:21you tell us more specifically U your
32:23concerns about such
32:25squads um when I wrote the letter to
32:28director meller the term and I maybe it
32:31was the media that used this term but
32:32the term that was being used was super
32:35squad and that connotates in my mind
32:38that we're going to have more people at
32:41headquarters who now when a when let's
32:43say an office does detect some terrorism
32:46or or an actual terrorist event occurs
32:49that now we'll get a whole contingent of
32:51Managers from headquarters who will
32:53direct the case and when that term was
32:55first used I Again by heay I think
32:58that's what a lot of people in the FBI
33:00had that connotation and I that's what
33:03it was a major impetus for my uh want
33:06giving that letter to director I
33:08understand now just one last question
33:09because my time's about up in your
33:11testimony you've identified a number of
33:13significant problems with the FBI's
33:16bureaucracy you've stated that quote the
33:18problem is huge unquote uh that the U
33:22and quote cannot be quickly cured
33:24unquote now in your view what immedi
33:27steps could be taken to remedy some of
33:28the problems that you've identified in
33:30your letter and which problems will take
33:33more time to
33:35address you know uh that is the $100
33:38million question on how to reduce
33:40bureaucracy and I really can't pretend
33:43uh give me another week uh I really
33:46can't pretend to understand I I know
33:49director Mueller uh is also very
33:52cognizant of this problem he iterated
33:55today that there are eight levels before
33:56before you get to him uh this is an
33:59unwieldy situation if there is a way to
34:03somehow reduce the levels I think that's
34:05what the way we need to go eight Le
34:07seven to nine levels is is really
34:09ridiculous and it's just how do we do
34:11this once it gets started well I'm
34:14grateful for your testimony grateful for
34:15your letter and and I think you've done
34:17a service and and uh let's hope that
34:21uh well and I think director Miller
34:24Mueller has taken it very care very
34:26seriously I
34:27we're going to take a three minute break
34:28I wonder if the Senators could all meet
34:31with me out back that also give the
34:33photographers a chance to clear we'll be
34:36right
34:55back
35:25f
35:55e
36:25like
36:55need
37:25some
37:49too okay thank
37:53you I think um
38:00thank you Mr Ry you
38:03um you've been
38:06very patient I want to turn to um I want
38:11to turn to senator finstein who
38:13is actually doing double duty on this um
38:17on this investigation like several
38:19members on both sides of the
38:21aisle traditionally just so you know the
38:24Judiciary Committee has always had
38:28uh some members from both sides on the
38:31Senate intelligence committee as does
38:33the armed services committee and the
38:34Appropriations Committee for the obvious
38:37reasons because those are the armed
38:40services and foreign foreign relations
38:42the other on Foreign Relations arm
38:43Services appropriation
38:45Judiciary uh we handle classified
38:48material all the time so we have
38:49somebody we have members on the
38:52intelligence committee fortunately we're
38:54meeting and they're meeting Senator
38:57Feinstein has somehow managed to be in
38:59both places at once and so I yield to
39:01her thank you very much uh Mr chairman
39:04Mrs Raleigh welcome uh delighted to have
39:07you here and we thank you for your
39:09letter and for your comments uh about
39:12your career in the FBI and your concern
39:14about it uh you indicated earlier that
39:17you were watching uh this morning and
39:19the testimony of director Mueller oh I
39:22asked my questions really based on some
39:24of the things you said in the letter to
39:26the director and one of them involved
39:29the fisa
39:30process um and without going into the
39:34details of it you indicated your
39:36concerns in the letter about the fisa
39:39process and I think uh director Mueller
39:42uh put on the record the very clear way
39:46in which these fisa warrants are going
39:48to be processed in the future and the
39:51question of intelligence also being
39:54added uh in the warrant request W um my
39:58my comment to you was do you believe
40:00that or my question of you is do you
40:02believe that this is a substantial
40:04Improvement now over the way things were
40:08uh yes and if you in my written
40:10statement too I think September 11 alone
40:14just the the acts uh really created a
40:16huge change in mindset and um in
40:21addition to that of course uh director
40:23Mueller has announced that prevention
40:25will be our goal over
40:26prosecution prosecution I think should
40:29still be an important thing that we
40:31should keep in mind but there are those
40:32instances and when you have the two
40:35prevention definitely has to to override
40:38I think that what he is um stating that
40:41if there is a um application that uh
40:44someone at a lower level disputes or
40:47does not think should rise up it will
40:49then automatically get reviewed at a
40:52higher level by him that's right now by
40:54him I'm I'm not quite sure that maybe it
40:56could even be lower than him because I
40:58think he he's a busy man and I don't
41:01know that uh it would necessarily have
41:02to be the director although it depends
41:05and that these would go then to the opir
41:07right as well which well obviously would
41:10depend on his review he may well agree
41:12with the uh lower level and that would
41:14be fine it we do need though um as I
41:18said in my statement we need a kind of a
41:20a uh way to get around the roadblock and
41:22I think with the fisis process this is a
41:25pretty good idea to have it the ones
41:27that are not approved or disputed to go
41:30to a higher level for review uh
41:32obviously the higher level May well
41:35agree that there it's insufficient and
41:37uh and that's fine but at least it's had
41:39a good review right and the second area
41:42that I asked about was really in direct
41:45um reaction to your comments in your
41:48letter about what you call the super
41:50squad which he has pointed out very
41:53carefully today was a flying Squad and
41:56that the local sack would have uh the
41:59authority to invent to initiate
42:03an the first
42:06inquiry um the flying Squad again with
42:09the kind of the difference that I see
42:11there is that with a with a small office
42:14that does not have translators does not
42:17have enough forensic computer examiners
42:20uh perhaps does not even have enough
42:22surveillance experts that if an office
42:25had that need
42:26uh to have those um additional resources
42:29a flying Squad could come and help out
42:32it would really serve the purpose of
42:34flexibility and if they if it if they
42:36didn't try to take over and micromanage
42:38something that may well already be at a
42:41certain point stage along I think it is
42:44is a very good idea the only thing that
42:46I was really uh worried about was the
42:48was the fact that I saw this as managers
42:51coming to now take it over and
42:53micromanage or whatever and I uh that's
42:56the distinction thank you now in your
42:59letter you also mentioned and I quote a
43:01climate of fear which has chilled
43:03aggressive FBI law enforcement actions
43:06decisions and you attribute that to the
43:10fact that numerous high ranking FBI
43:12officials who have made decisions or
43:14have taken an action which in hindsight
43:17has turned out uh to be mistaken or just
43:20turned out badly have seen their careers
43:22plummet and end that was a you know a
43:26very profound statement I want you to
43:28respond to that but I also want you to
43:30respond to something else and here's
43:32something which is enormously
43:34controversial and which has no matter
43:37who you talk to everybody has got a
43:39slightly different view of how racial
43:43profiling should or should not be
43:46applied and exactly what it is whether
43:50it involves a country whether it
43:52involves a race whether it involves
43:55whether whether it has a chilling effect
43:57on FBI agents uh
44:00instituting uh this kind of
44:03inquiry I would be interested in your
44:06observations if there are places where
44:09you believe you have actually seen
44:12racial
44:14profiling uh impact or
44:17chill uh an agent's perspicacity or
44:21desire to look into
44:24something you want me to answer that one
44:26first the raal answer yeah um I think
44:29one of the Senators this morning uh drew
44:31a distinction of course racial profiling
44:34I don't even like the term or the word
44:36because I think it it already has this
44:37majority of sense and PE different
44:39people have different meanings in their
44:41own mind as to what it means I agree
44:43with you one of the Senators this
44:44morning made a a good uh I think it was
44:47a good uh line when you use race ethnic
44:53origin religion any one of those factors
44:56as a sole reason or the main reason to
44:59take an investigative action that is
45:01what I would think of as racial
45:03profiling so if a trooper goes out and
45:05stops all uh uh Indian males going down
45:09the street that is racial profiling now
45:12on the other hand what you have are we
45:15could get a report that a um black male
45:18with a red baseball cap wearing white
45:20trousers and sneakers just rob the bank
45:23and you don't disregard the race because
45:26it's just one of several factors that is
45:29describing that individual so I think
45:31that's kind of what I see as a
45:32difference here between courts I think
45:34follow that rule do you think your
45:37colleagues have the same interpretation
45:39that you do because I think you have a
45:41very substantial
45:43interpretation um well the ones I
45:46train uh do I trying to think if I've uh
45:49brought this up in other law enforcement
45:51circles I think in Minnesota it's been a
45:53very hot topic and uh to the extent that
45:56it's been discussed I've tried to point
45:58this out at different times that I think
46:00a lot of times you see people arguing
46:02when they're they're not even hitting
46:03the issue because they have different
46:05definitions and um I think there this
46:08this the senator remarked this the
46:10Senator's remarks today kind of show
46:12that maybe this kind of thing is rising
46:15uh where people are getting this better
46:17understanding of what is permissible
46:19what is logical in common sense and then
46:22what is improper and and it's uh and you
46:25use the term
46:26it's just a prority of term and then
46:28people like in the debate I see the red
46:30light could you go to the first part of
46:32my question which is the qu climate of
46:34fear um I think that you know as I said
46:37in my letter that these high visibility
46:40um demotions or uh even uh people being
46:45ending their careers have impact and
46:47everyone sees this there are times when
46:50um it that results in less than
46:52aggressive law enforcement there are
46:54actually times though I think it
46:55actually is the opposite because um your
46:58boss for instance could be making a
47:00mistake the other way and let's say that
47:03your boss has said something that you
47:05think could be I'm just using the
47:07example now it comes close to racial
47:09profiling now if you're under that boss
47:12with this climate of fear and whatever
47:14you might actually be unwilling to
47:16challenge that so I think it can
47:17actually work both ways and I definitely
47:20think it results in less in aggressive
47:22law enforcement when we've had some high
47:25visibility m mistakes and in my paper I
47:27I drew a distinction between those
47:29mistakes that are really kind of
47:31deliberate or made for selfish reasons
47:33and I think our people need to be held
47:36fully accountable for those types of
47:38mistakes whereas the good faith type
47:41mistakes I I get involved in civil suits
47:43all the time and we're humans FBI agents
47:46are humans we make mistakes all the time
47:48uh in Minnesota once we made a mistake
47:50and had the wrong guy arrested for a
47:52bank robbery because he was a complete
47:55lookalike of the real bank robber and
47:57you know that type of thing we ought not
47:59to um you know that agent really did
48:02nothing wrong you know everyone would
48:04make that mistake so I think we have to
48:06distinguish between the types of
48:08mistakes and um be careful about uh
48:11pursuing the ones that really are good
48:13faith ones because I think we will have
48:15some Pro we will have some repercussions
48:16for that thanks my time is up thank you
48:19very much thanks Mr chairman thank you
48:21Senator Feinstein Senator
48:24Grassley
48:27I want to follow up on uh What uh
48:30Senator Feinstein just uh was talking
48:33about I've been concerned for a long
48:35time about what I call the FBI's culture
48:38of arrogance uh in your letter you
48:40mentioned a Culture of Fear especially
48:43of fear taking action and the problem of
48:46careerism uh could you talk about how
48:49this hurts investigations in the field
48:51what the causes are and what you think
48:54might fix these problems
48:57um of course I don't think this happened
48:59overnight it's one of those things that
49:01starts to happen and um and eventually
49:04you get at a point where it's uh you
49:07know it's it's not good and I think
49:10careerism when I looked at the
49:12definition I really said unbelievable
49:14how appropriate that is I I think the
49:17FBI does have a problem with that and if
49:19I remember right it means promoting
49:20one's career over Integrity so when
49:25people make
49:26decisions and it's basically so that I
49:29can get to the next level and not rock
49:32either it's not rock the boat or do what
49:35a boss says without question and and
49:38either way that works if you're making
49:39the decision to try to get to the next
49:41level but you're not making that
49:43decision for the real right reasons um
49:46that's a problem and I think that in the
49:49FBI we've we have had this we've had
49:51some serious disincentives to getting
49:53into management uh We've we also had um
49:57uh some of our promotional system I
50:00think could be adjusted there are some
50:01standards that we we've gone to kind of
50:03a a real low level of Legally
50:06defensible uh it's become over the years
50:09kind of a volunteer system because a lot
50:12of good good people that have good
50:14backgrounds uh prefer not to transfer
50:17all those times there's a lot of other
50:18reasons so I think that the careerism is
50:22a problem I think the the uh the pecking
50:24order which I alluded to earlier uh is
50:27sometimes a problem and we have to be
50:30willing to um I guess as director
50:32Mueller has done a little bit in this
50:33case with me uh when I made my critical
50:36remarks I was quite worried um because I
50:39don't I know in the FBI you don't
50:41Venture close to criticizing a su a
50:44superior and without really running some
50:47risk but in this case I actually was
50:49pleasantly surprised that you know I've
50:51been promised repeatedly no retaliation
50:54and I want to hopefully hope that that
50:56kind of atmosphere now starts to kind of
50:58take over and that people make decisions
51:02these are huge some of these decisions
51:04are just huge you don't even know when
51:06you're doing it but they are huge and
51:08you've got to make them for the right
51:09reasons not because I don't want to rock
51:11the boat not because I don't want to
51:13bring up a problem to my supervisor
51:17Etc I think it would be helpful to hear
51:20about U headquarters FBI from the
51:24perspective of your work working in the
51:25field your letter to the director about
51:29the mswi case talked about supervisors
51:32actually hindering that case now I know
51:34that you can't talk about that case
51:37because of trial and I appreciate that
51:39and expect you uh not to but it would be
51:43useful for you to talk about how
51:46headquarters gets involved in cases from
51:48the field and what you and other agents
51:51think of headquarter involvement and
51:53whether the people there are helpful or
51:55a hindrance well I I mentioned in my
51:58letter um because I'm a a legal counsel
52:00in the office I interact a lot with our
52:03office of general counsel and for the
52:06most part the the people in the office
52:09of general counsel that I um interact
52:11with on a daily basis are very helpful I
52:14think they they mostly see their mission
52:16as assisting people uh giving advice
52:19that type of thing our laboratory I
52:21think is is something like that as well
52:23because their mission is to do that test
52:26so they can get it back to the field um
52:29other entities are less helpful at
52:31headquarters because they do not see
52:33their mission as assisting in the
52:35investigation when we get these uh seven
52:38to nine approvement management levels in
52:41place at headquarters many of those
52:43people see their job as kind of a
52:45gatekeeper function and kind of a power
52:47thing or whatever and again I think we
52:50have to stress that you know to the
52:52people if we can limit the number of
52:55management levels all the better but the
52:57people if they realize that their
52:58function is to um assist in the way with
53:02intelligence in the future hopefully
53:04this will happen if we have more
53:06analysts that they see their function as
53:08assisting that investigation and I think
53:11then then it's helpful so it's kind of a
53:12mixed bag is is I think what I'm saying
53:15it's kind of a mixed bag and some
53:17entities are helpful others maybe aren't
53:19quite as as what they should be well
53:22could you kind of summarize that by
53:23saying or let me summarize and see if
53:26this might uh fit it you headquarters
53:29ought to be helping people at the
53:31Grassroots and not be a hindrance yeah I
53:35I think that's true and then the worst
53:37is I forgot to even mention the worst is
53:39micromanaging and there have been
53:40instances in the past where a higher
53:43level in the FBI has almost decided to
53:45tell an office how to do something and I
53:48can name a few uh cases where these just
53:51became disastrous uh so micromanaging
53:54from from a higher level is is really
53:56the epitome of of what would be the
53:58worst I don't think you have to name
54:00those cases we've looked into those an
54:02awful lot here in the last decade your
54:05letter uh highlighted some of the
54:07problems within the bureaucracy at the
54:09uh FBI headquarters with the many layers
54:12of approval in order to get a search
54:15warrant what are your recommendations
54:17for streamlining this bureaucracy so
54:19that field agents can effectively pursue
54:23investigations um well I've mentioned
54:26before that uh the bureaucracy is a huge
54:28problem and I'm I'm really um I really
54:32have to think longer about you know how
54:34that would uh be remedied um I can
54:37mention one other thing about
54:39streamlining um being able to uh go
54:43around roadblocks that might arise and
54:46I've mentioned internally in the FBI if
54:48we're pursuing a fisa or an intelligence
54:51method um it should also be recognized
54:54that uh we pursue we can pursue
54:56terrorism on a criminal level and we can
54:58then go across the street to a a US
55:01attorney's office and I think a similar
55:04mechanism perhaps needs to be considered
55:07also for us attorney's offices uh it's
55:10not a terribly different when you go and
55:12and say Here's why I think I have
55:14probable cause to an assistant us
55:16attorney in my write up um in thinking
55:19about this I thought it's kind of
55:20analogous to a person who gets diagnosed
55:22with cancer and of course course uh or
55:25with a serious illness they always try
55:28to get a second opinion um and it's
55:30accepted in the medical profession but
55:32in the legal profession uh for some
55:35reason it's not that well accepted that
55:38if you get an answer from an assistant
55:40us attorney that you have a possibly
55:42have a way to have it reviewed again or
55:44have it reviewed by an expert in the
55:47field and I I think that we should maybe
55:49consider that for the Department of
55:51Justice to have some I don't like really
55:53super squad but maybe a Cadre of of also
55:57prosecutors that have experience with
56:00terrorism that in the event that we were
56:02trying to pursue it criminally we might
56:04be able to uh to uh have a second a way
56:07around a roadblock that way okay and my
56:10La is my time UPS my last question is
56:14that we heard quite a bit about how the
56:16answers are somehow Solutions the
56:20problems with the FBI seem to be more
56:22comp computers more money uh not the
56:26first time that we've heard that uh uh
56:29uh supposed solution to problems at the
56:32FBI or for that matter a lot of other
56:34government agencies how much uh uh do
56:38you believe more money and more
56:40computers will solve the problems with
56:42the FBI or are there other more
56:45important changes that need to be made
56:47at the
56:48FBI uh I think upgrading our computer
56:51system is uh would be um not nice uh the
56:56capability to do these kind of searches
56:58and pull up um related uh information
57:02would be nice I I have in my statement
57:06today actually suggested a number of
57:08things that really don't require a lot
57:10of money upgrading our manual to give
57:13clear concise uh uh guidance to agents
57:17working intelligence is not going to
57:19require huge sums of money um the the uh
57:24idea of I have to look at some of the
57:26things oh some of the the law if we can
57:28possibly towards the end some of the uh
57:30legal changes I've uh uh mentioned are
57:33could be problems the
57:36uh I'm going to um development of a
57:40maybe a a Department of Justice uh Cadre
57:43of professional expertise a lot of I I
57:46have a few ideas that really don't cost
57:48seems that they really don't cost a lot
57:50of money and I think that they should be
57:52considered in addition uh you know
57:54perhaps to upgrading the computers we
57:57the hiring of new agents always of
57:58course entails U money and funding and I
58:02uh I'm not really in a position to
58:04comment whether we're adequately
58:05adequately staffed I I think that we the
58:08new measures to hire additional
58:09translators is very good thank you thank
58:13you very much Senator canwell thank you
58:16Mr chairman aent Ry thank you for being
58:18here and thank you for your service to
58:20our
58:21country um your memo to who director
58:26Muller said um quote I don't find I do
58:32find it odd that no inquiry whatsoever
58:35was launched of the relevant
58:37FBI HQ personnels and their actions and
58:42despite FBI's leaders full knowledge of
58:45all the items mentioned here in
58:46basically talking about the events of of
58:49um September 11th information that was
58:51on the MWI case in the Phoenix memo the
58:54SS say and his unit Chief and others
58:56involved in headquarter Personnel were
58:58allowed to stay in their positions and
59:00what's worse occupy critical positions
59:02in the FBI's sioc Command Center Post
59:05September 11th then you go on to say um
59:08I'm relatively
59:09certain that if it appeared that a lowly
59:13field office agent had committed such
59:15errors of judgment the FBI's opr would
59:18have notified to investigate the agent
59:21and would have at least quickly
59:22reassigned them now I know you're not
59:23going to comment on that
59:26um but you do in your recommen your
59:30testimony
59:31today talk about the management of
59:34intelligence which I think is more or
59:36less what you were getting at in that uh
59:39particular statement in your letter to
59:41the director that perhaps there had been
59:43a uh mismanagement of information
59:48analysis and
59:50processing uh and in your
59:52recommendations your recommendation
59:53number five you said say that uh that
59:57management of information should be you
1:00:00I'm paraphrasing what improve but
1:00:02specifically you say centralized
1:00:04information is required however it must
1:00:05be properly anal analyzed evaluated and
1:00:09disseminated in a timely fashion to the
1:00:11field and uh you also say recently that
1:00:16state and local officials as well as the
1:00:18media have frequently received more
1:00:20information than the FBI field
1:00:23divisions so how do you uh how do you
1:00:26think that we address that in the
1:00:28reorganization that's been proposed so
1:00:31far by the FBI and I know you're talking
1:00:33about reducing the layers but what is it
1:00:35specifically uh that needs to be done to
1:00:39better process information at
1:00:43headquarters um I well we've already
1:00:45discussed the computer that would
1:00:47probably help somewhat again for an
1:00:49analyst to have the ability to go on the
1:00:51computer and then be able to put in
1:00:53Flight Airline or whatever it is and and
1:00:55and draw some intelligence together so I
1:00:58think that probably would help we need
1:01:01professional um analysis of the
1:01:04intelligence we already have I mean
1:01:06we're I think director Mueller is
1:01:07talking about an intelligence I'm not
1:01:09sure of the the title but it's something
1:01:11with intelligence and the way I've
1:01:13perceived that is basically this is a
1:01:16group of people who who uh conduct uh
1:01:20put together reports or conduct at
1:01:22request if you have a an issue or a
1:01:25question that they then can produce that
1:01:27intelligence that might add on to um an
1:01:31affidavit or whatever they may well
1:01:34entail requesting field offices to
1:01:36conduct certain investigations to be in
1:01:39a kind of a proactive mode that if they
1:01:41get two offices sending in something
1:01:43that looks like oh my gosh we ought to
1:01:45look into this that we have a group who
1:01:48is in charge of analyzing and looking at
1:01:51these things so that we don't have two
1:01:53things coming in three week apart and
1:01:56not even being able to put it together
1:01:58is that somebody's specific
1:01:59responsibility today or several people
1:02:01uh well I think at the present time it's
1:02:04uh it's not done very well I really
1:02:07don't um and I think that you know uh
1:02:10creating as director director Mueller is
1:02:12is uh starting to do that I think that
1:02:14we don't have it now and I think that
1:02:16this group hopefully would be there as
1:02:19function as an assisting thing to the
1:02:21the offices that develop something or
1:02:24they make a request but but when I look
1:02:26on this org chart of an Office of
1:02:28Intelligence it doesn't it doesn't
1:02:30strike me as a flat organization that
1:02:33you seem to be more describing you're
1:02:35talking about information that's easily
1:02:38processed and driven back to the
1:02:40field and to me and and and no surprise
1:02:45that's where most of America is moving
1:02:46in the corporate world to Flat
1:02:48organizations because information flow
1:02:49is so critical and it seems to me that
1:02:52you're describing a similar need that
1:02:55I'm not sure I I I haven't seen that
1:02:57chart that's the first time when you
1:02:58held it up and um when I made my my
1:03:01first comments today and I mentioned
1:03:03that many of director Mueller's ideas
1:03:06seem to be consistent with what my
1:03:08initial letter was I did want there is
1:03:10one kind of I see maybe a slight uh
1:03:13difference and that is I really think we
1:03:15should scrutinize exactly when you held
1:03:17it up it just hit me we really need to
1:03:20scrutinize all these proposals for this
1:03:24problem that Creeps in of having these
1:03:26various levels I I think that the the
1:03:29flatlining and if there's a way to to
1:03:31reduce these levels somehow we have to
1:03:34look at each thing and and say why
1:03:36create more it's not going to be an
1:03:38answer and that if I have one little
1:03:41slight difference that's that's that was
1:03:43the impetus for my first letter really
1:03:45it was well I I happen to agree with you
1:03:47that we're talking about more
1:03:49information flow here and the thing that
1:03:50seems to be missing is the processing of
1:03:53that information and the quick
1:03:54distribution of that and we're only
1:03:55going to get more um given the um type
1:03:58of uh attacks that we're monitoring
1:04:01monitoring um not to um catch you off
1:04:05guard but I am curious tonight the
1:04:07president is going to make making
1:04:09address about somewhat of a
1:04:11reorganization and uh some of the uh
1:04:14descriptions of it we don't know what
1:04:15he's going to say yet but some of it you
1:04:18know his own press secretary the
1:04:19department may be responsible for border
1:04:22security intelligence and other
1:04:23functions at several federal agencies
1:04:25that it now supervises it wouldn't
1:04:27replace the FBI or CIA but it might be
1:04:29one of the biggest restructurings that
1:04:31we've had what advice would you give the
1:04:33president about
1:04:36this uh we're I really can't presume to
1:04:39give a advice at um on that such a high
1:04:42level I will say one thing um in the
1:04:45past when we've had different agencies
1:04:47where there was some overlap in their
1:04:50jurisdiction uh the things that come to
1:04:52mind are FBI DEA because we we shared
1:04:54drugs sometimes FBI and ATF where there
1:04:57was bombings that we kind of both got
1:04:59involved in um if you have two different
1:05:02entities and there's an overlap and it's
1:05:04not clear who does what uh we can have
1:05:08some friction starting up and we can
1:05:10have some problems so that that's the
1:05:12only thing that comes to mind is that it
1:05:13has to be kind of clearly demarked so
1:05:16that the agencies don't develop this
1:05:18friction and uh we we're not at Cross
1:05:21you know cross ends with each other so
1:05:23if if there's a new agency starting
1:05:25which it sounds like um that's the only
1:05:27Vice I can think of well I read in your
1:05:30statement that you didn't expect your
1:05:31memo to uh create such a f but thank you
1:05:33for stepping into the spotlight and
1:05:35giving this issue the needed
1:05:38attention thank you Mr chairman thank
1:05:40you very very much Senator uh Senator
1:05:43Spector thank you Mr chairman uh agent
1:05:47rally we thank you very much for coming
1:05:50forward it is obvious that it was very
1:05:54very difficult to write the letter which
1:05:56you
1:05:57did and it is uh filled with passion you
1:06:02were really very
1:06:05concerned a word you used
1:06:08repeatedly and your purpose was of the
1:06:11highest and there are obvious risks
1:06:14which you undertook in in in in coming
1:06:18forward uh I'm confident at this point
1:06:21that uh the FBI and the department of
1:06:24Justice will honor the commitments which
1:06:25they have
1:06:26made and uh if they don't I know that
1:06:30this committee is prepared to make sure
1:06:32that they
1:06:33do I think you performed a great service
1:06:36for the
1:06:37FBI because after director Mueller's
1:06:40first
1:06:41response which was unresponsive to your
1:06:44memo he did come forward and
1:06:48articulate uh an acknowledgment of the
1:06:51problems and then move to correct them
1:06:53which is is
1:06:55indispensable and we've said repeatedly
1:06:57that we're not interested in uh finding
1:07:00fault we're interested in saying to it
1:07:02that if there's a recurrence and you
1:07:04have all of these indicators that you
1:07:07put them together and you read a road
1:07:09map which is there on an analytical
1:07:12basis uh I I understand your uh
1:07:15limitations as to what you can testify
1:07:17to about a case I spent uh a dozen years
1:07:21as an assistant DA and as a district
1:07:23attorney and
1:07:24have some appreciation for what
1:07:27prosecution requires and what the
1:07:28limitations are uh but in trying to
1:07:32understand the mentality of the
1:07:34FBI which I think their General
1:07:36agreement has to be changed I was
1:07:39intrigued by your
1:07:41characterization that the United States
1:07:43attorney's
1:07:45office for a lot of reasons including
1:07:47just to play it safe and regularly
1:07:49requiring much more than probable cost
1:07:52before approving affid David maybe a
1:07:54quantify 75 to 80% probability or
1:07:58sometimes even higher can you give us
1:08:02some insights as to why so that we might
1:08:06approach uh the issue as to how we
1:08:08change that attitude well in in some
1:08:12ways maybe that um that could be
1:08:14misinterpreted I think actually there
1:08:16are cases um playing it safe has kind of
1:08:19a negative connotation but playing it
1:08:21careful or being careful or meticulous
1:08:24doesn't and I think there actually are
1:08:26cases I think many times in uh White
1:08:28Collar cases for instance when you
1:08:30really are want to be extremely careful
1:08:34um public corruption cases these types
1:08:36of things where you really want to uh be
1:08:38careful about proceeding that it might
1:08:41well be appropriate to uh be maybe
1:08:45require something more than 51% well I
1:08:48can see if it's a prosecution perhaps
1:08:51but if it's an investigation it's very
1:08:52different I think the FBI has to change
1:08:55the approach to case preparation to
1:08:58investigation but but even on the
1:09:00Quantum of proof uh referring to
1:09:04Illinois versus Gates which I mentioned
1:09:05to directive Mueller this morning a 1983
1:09:08Supreme Court decision opinion by then
1:09:11Justice renquist he points out going
1:09:14back to lock versus United States in
1:09:18183 referring to the term probable cause
1:09:22it
1:09:22Imports circumstances which warrant
1:09:26suspicion more recently we said the
1:09:29Quantum of proof appropriate in ordinary
1:09:31judicial proceedings are inapplicable
1:09:33finally two standards and then he refers
1:09:35to preponderance of the evidence useful
1:09:38in criminal trials have no place in the
1:09:41Magistrate's decision so that uh justice
1:09:44renquist is pretty explicitly saying
1:09:48that it's not a preponderance of the
1:09:50evidence it's not more more likely than
1:09:54not that it is and he quotes uh
1:09:58Marshall pretty good authorities chief
1:10:01justice Marshall and chief justice
1:10:02renquist talking about about suspicion
1:10:06so that uh one of the things that we're
1:10:08going to be looking forward to and I
1:10:10have discussed with the chairman the
1:10:12issue of pursuing this train through the
1:10:16foreign intelligence surveillance act to
1:10:19find out let me go to another point
1:10:21which you raised in your uh
1:10:24exhaustive letter and that that referred
1:10:28to the issue as to Zachariah moui and
1:10:31I'm not asking you about evidence now
1:10:33we're still on the foreign intelligence
1:10:35surveillance act issue where you pointed
1:10:38out quote for example at one point the
1:10:41supervisory agent of the FBI
1:10:43headquarters posited that the French
1:10:46information could be worthless because
1:10:48it only identified Zacharias masui by
1:10:51name and he the special agent and
1:10:53headquarters didn't know how many people
1:10:56by that name existed in
1:10:58France now it's
1:11:01extraordinary Zachariah MSI is not
1:11:04exactly a name like John Smith and after
1:11:07you track it down going to the Paris
1:11:09telephone book you noted
1:11:12here that the special supervisory agent
1:11:16at FBI headquarters quote continued to
1:11:19find new reasons to
1:11:21stall and here we're looking at what we
1:11:25have to do to have a sensible response
1:11:30from FBI headquarters on an application
1:11:33under the foreign intelligence
1:11:34surveillance act can you give us any
1:11:37insights from your experience which has
1:11:40been considerable considerably painful
1:11:43as to what we might do um in my
1:11:46statement I uh talk about roadblocks and
1:11:50uh basically in in that in my statement
1:11:53I'm addressing in criminal cases when
1:11:55you first talked about probable cause um
1:11:58and we all know there's no perfect test
1:12:00for it what I think has happened in
1:12:03years we have um adopted certain
1:12:06mindsets from a Judicial rulings or from
1:12:09what might be the prevailing mindset in
1:12:11a US attorney's office and I think what
1:12:14we do see are elevated standards in some
1:12:17cases and uh one of my recommendations
1:12:20is that we have a sanity check second
1:12:24opinion somebody else that we can maybe
1:12:27try to reason with I really think it
1:12:29should be outside a particular us
1:12:31attorney's office because um what can
1:12:33happen uh is that you know people are
1:12:36all kind of the careerism or whatever
1:12:38can be a problem there too in the fisa
1:12:40process director Mueller um has uh
1:12:44proposed same type of thing internally
1:12:46in the FBI and I think his idea will um
1:12:51will definitely have results um how many
1:12:54people okay if if you don't approve it
1:12:57and now it has to go up with uh um with
1:13:00our you know kind
1:13:02of uh attitude about having to take it
1:13:05up how many times I think it might
1:13:08actually the pendulum might actually
1:13:09might swing the other way too far so I
1:13:13think that in the fisa process the uh
1:13:15the proposal that we have now that it
1:13:17will be reviewed at a higher level if
1:13:19it's not uh handled I think that's
1:13:22that's already there well the review my
1:13:25concluding comment would be that the
1:13:27review uh is not really adequate unless
1:13:32you have a standard which meets the
1:13:36legal requirement but doesn't impose a
1:13:38burden which is impossible we changed
1:13:41the foreign intelligence surveillance
1:13:43act in the Patriots legislation to add
1:13:47the word significant to a significant
1:13:49purpose of the surveillance is to obtain
1:13:51foreign intelligence information
1:13:54and after we investigated when ho the
1:13:56subcommittee which I chaired we came
1:13:58forward with a recommendation that when
1:14:01a
1:14:01highlevel officer of the FBI like the
1:14:04director took the issue to the attorney
1:14:06general the Attorney General had to give
1:14:08the reasons coming back because the
1:14:10Attorney General Reno personally turned
1:14:13down the fisa warrant in in the W ho Lee
1:14:16case but uh uh this this committee is
1:14:19going to going to get to the bottom of
1:14:20it we're going to find out what's what's
1:14:22going on on and uh so far we have only
1:14:26glimmers of information like an agent
1:14:29Resnik was reassigned from the fisa unit
1:14:33apparently uh removed by the special
1:14:37Court uh where the chief Judge Roy
1:14:39Lambert reportedly excluded him and the
1:14:43question is did that make that unit
1:14:45gunshot the question is did racial
1:14:47profiling make them gun shy and in this
1:14:51kind of a situation unlike or orary
1:14:53cases where courts write opinions and we
1:14:55can tell what happened I've discussed
1:14:57with some of my colleagues uh the
1:15:00possibility of Consulting with chief
1:15:02judge Royce Lambert about uh uh what
1:15:07what went on because we've got to figure
1:15:09out what is fair on civil rights not
1:15:13overreact but not look for 75 to 80% or
1:15:17even 51% you go with Chief Justice
1:15:20Marshall on suspicion has to be
1:15:23Quantified in accordance with the facts
1:15:25of the case but I think that uh your
1:15:28133-page memorandum has started us off
1:15:31on a on a road which uh could produce a
1:15:34lot of fruitful results when we really
1:15:38get down to Brass tax and do it right
1:15:41with an appropriate legal standard uh
1:15:44the language change that's already
1:15:46occurred that you mentioned um has been
1:15:48uh very beneficial that was a a big
1:15:51stumbling block and that change already
1:15:53has produced some results and I as I
1:15:56talked to um Senator hatch I think that
1:15:58maybe there could be some tinkering with
1:16:00the uh aspect of having to prove
1:16:03especially with terrorist groups that
1:16:05this person is an agent of the foreign
1:16:07power uh and kind of use that analogy
1:16:10that we can use other types of
1:16:12information rather than something that I
1:16:15use the example of a membership list but
1:16:17you know a photograph uh a telephone
1:16:19call the same types of things that we
1:16:21might be able to use in a mafia case to
1:16:23put a RICO case together as an
1:16:25Enterprise that we can use that um in a
1:16:28terrorism case to show that they're
1:16:30affiliated with or have connections to I
1:16:33think that would be a good idea but not
1:16:34imposing a standard which is so high as
1:16:36to be unrealistic simply to protect
1:16:39somebody from uh later blame for having
1:16:42made a mistake if you don't do anything
1:16:44no mistake that's why Senator Schumer is
1:16:47thank you and I want to thank you again
1:16:49agent rowy as everyone else has for your
1:16:52stepping forward in doing the nation of
1:16:54service I read your memo it was you know
1:16:57it showed you how long we have to go
1:16:59there's a mindset there that has to be
1:17:01sort of cracked and you your memo does
1:17:04it in both a forthright but also a nice
1:17:06and respectful way and I have a few
1:17:09questions first I I don't know if you
1:17:11happen to hear the uh my conversation
1:17:14with director Mueller on the computer
1:17:16system I I heard some of it I don't know
1:17:19if I heard the exact whole thing okay
1:17:21well the bottom line is that the FBI's
1:17:23computer system is amazingly
1:17:26backward uh I've done a little more
1:17:28research on it or I want to elaborate a
1:17:30little more you can sometimes do a
1:17:33search by term but you can never combine
1:17:36two terms so you can use Aviation and
1:17:40get a huge amount of stuff and you can
1:17:42use school and get a huge amount of
1:17:44stuff but you can't do Aviation and
1:17:46school you can that's correct I actually
1:17:49I kind of mentioned that earlier it's
1:17:51absolutely right and that just amazes me
1:17:54because as I said to the uh director you
1:17:57can do that on my daughter's computer
1:17:59that she's in seventh grade that we
1:18:00bought her this fall for I think it was
1:18:04$1,400 and um I know we've each year
1:18:08increased the amount of
1:18:09money tell me first because I asked the
1:18:14director this what led to what led to
1:18:18what led to the FBI being so backward
1:18:20and such a fundamental tool in your
1:18:23opinion I mean this is not just
1:18:25typical this is dramatically and deeply
1:18:30atypical
1:18:31worse negatively atypical backward in
1:18:35computers you have given me a question I
1:18:38um of course I have thought about some
1:18:40of these questions I guess in my dreams
1:18:42or sleeping or whatever but that's one I
1:18:44haven't thought about um but just you
1:18:46know your knowledge of the bureaucracy
1:18:49how could assuming that most small
1:18:51businesses and even most most Junior
1:18:53High School students have better
1:18:55computers than the FBI why would the
1:18:58mindset of the FBI be such that as of
1:19:02today this is by the way this isn't just
1:19:04as of a year ago um he director Müller
1:19:08said it would take two years a minimum
1:19:10to bring the system up to snuff but one
1:19:13of the things that troubles me is why
1:19:15wasn't there somebody I mean this
1:19:17doesn't this you don't need to get a PhD
1:19:19in computer science to know that to know
1:19:21that the problem
1:19:23how deep this problem you know the one
1:19:25of the only things that comes to mind
1:19:27and I have you know uh 21 and a half
1:19:29years in so I'm going back to when I was
1:19:31a brand new agent and I worked with the
1:19:33kind of like the people now who uh would
1:19:36have been 20 some years ago when this
1:19:38when we computers first started coming
1:19:41on the scene um there there was um many
1:19:45of the oldtime agents can't
1:19:48type uh they had we had secretaries and
1:19:51stenos who who actually wrote the
1:19:53interviews after you you just dictated
1:19:55it and it got written there I do know
1:19:58there were a number of uh people at
1:20:00higher levels back in the 80s who were
1:20:03kind of opposed to uh computers and they
1:20:06hated them and then and the typing and
1:20:08everything they still have carbon paper
1:20:10over there at the FBI no actually I
1:20:13think when I started they they still had
1:20:15it we had a lot of forms that were still
1:20:17on carbon paper that had to be hand
1:20:18typed uh so I don't quite know why we've
1:20:22never um I just I'm real lucky that I
1:20:24was I took personal typing in in high
1:20:26school because that helps so much that
1:20:28when you can actually do your own
1:20:29especially when you're going to write a
1:20:30letter that you don't have uh anyone
1:20:32else that can see I'm so glad that I can
1:20:35type all right and actually now I should
1:20:38say that with our new agents this really
1:20:41has this is no longer an issue this is
1:20:43this is a function I you know you can
1:20:45have a bunch of Agents out there in the
1:20:47field who don't know how to type but
1:20:49somebody at the headquarters should have
1:20:51said years ago that we it's it's such an
1:20:54obvious tool in crime
1:20:56fighting is it you I mean of course
1:20:59that's recognized now and uh I I don't
1:21:02know exactly how this all developed but
1:21:05it goes back some time as you have noted
1:21:08yeah okay uh let me ask you this I mean
1:21:11I know the others have been watching
1:21:12this we can watch these things on
1:21:14television from our offices they
1:21:17broadcast them
1:21:19um and I know a lot of people have asked
1:21:22you about the
1:21:23culture but let me ask you what would
1:21:27you do if you were a director if the
1:21:29director came to you and said how do you
1:21:31change the
1:21:34culture I mean this is a big deep proud
1:21:37organization that is now reeling you
1:21:40know it's I'm sure it is and there are
1:21:43many many as I'm has been said many fine
1:21:45people and they've done a good job on a
1:21:48whole lot of things but it's been
1:21:49obvious to some of us that over the last
1:21:51several years they've lost not just in
1:21:53this area but in other areas sort of
1:21:55lost its Edge how do you change
1:21:58it what would you recommend from your
1:22:01perspective as an agent in
1:22:04Minneapolis well I think there probably
1:22:07several things that could um be done to
1:22:09improve um the the culture and the FBI
1:22:14uh leadership and the problem of
1:22:15careerism uh our director Mueller has um
1:22:19I keep saying director Mueller has done
1:22:21said this and whatever in many cases
1:22:23this is true uh he has mentioned time
1:22:26over that we need to pick our best
1:22:29leaders we need to pick those best
1:22:30people out there uh in my statement I
1:22:33mentioned the fact that I've seen in the
1:22:35past few years just the opposite
1:22:37happening I've seen a number of great uh
1:22:41FBI agents with great background
1:22:44experience actually stepping down from
1:22:47their positions of leadership it's
1:22:49actually gone the opposite direction and
1:22:51for a lot of reason reasons so somehow
1:22:53that has to be reversed we have to give
1:22:56better incentives to getting into
1:22:57management we have to reduce the
1:23:00disincentives we paperwork no one's
1:23:02asked me about paperwork uh I think
1:23:05that's a real problem I think people I
1:23:07asked you about the inverse computers
1:23:09yeah I I think that you know we need to
1:23:12be judicious about that um if someone I
1:23:15go back to the Don't Rock the Boat don't
1:23:18ask a question problem if I say why are
1:23:21we doing this does this really have any
1:23:24value does it serve a purpose it's
1:23:26either one of two things it's just like
1:23:28an a complaint that we can all complain
1:23:30about it but nothing can ever change it
1:23:32just kind of falls on deaf ears and no
1:23:34one like really examines it or um or it
1:23:39might actually be seen if you're
1:23:40criticizing some particular program
1:23:43write up or some particular uh uh
1:23:47inspection thing it actually might be
1:23:49seen as a challenge to somebody higher
1:23:51up and they say they may get mad or
1:23:53whatever so I think to to some extent if
1:23:56we're going to really scrutinize what is
1:23:58necessary and how we can become more
1:24:00effective we definitely need to uh
1:24:04encourage people to say exactly is there
1:24:07a purpose to what this is and you know
1:24:10if there is fine we'll continue doing it
1:24:12can it be done quicker can it be done in
1:24:14a more minimal fashion those questions
1:24:17are not uh are not often are not asked
1:24:19enough it's it's a real bureaucracy is
1:24:22what
1:24:23saying um to uh the day before I came
1:24:26here I had to fill out our ethics audit
1:24:29and uh that meant that I had to name all
1:24:32the people in my office re essentially I
1:24:34had to retype around 60 some names that
1:24:37I'm a good typer but it typus but it
1:24:39still took me like an hour and a half
1:24:41and I was busy as all get out you know
1:24:44three days ago trying to do this and
1:24:46everything but yet I had to take about
1:24:48an hour and a half to retype and
1:24:50actually these names are in a file
1:24:52and all you have to do is open up this
1:24:54file and yet if I would have complained
1:24:57and said why am I doing I actually did
1:24:58complain but um I still I still ended up
1:25:01retyping those and that's just one
1:25:03little example right okay we have a vote
1:25:07there's only about two minutes left
1:25:09that's what up Patrick's back I was
1:25:10going to call a brief recess but I I may
1:25:13come back and ask you a few more
1:25:14questions but I'm just going to vote and
1:25:16I thank you and if I can't make it I
1:25:18thank you double thank you thank you
1:25:20that um
1:25:25we should bring you with us and while we
1:25:26vote agent Raleigh we could probably
1:25:31continue uh we could probably continue
1:25:35the question just grab
1:25:37the um sonographer who's superb here
1:25:42who's done this forever and falls over
1:25:45you could turn the red light off
1:25:49um I don't think I'm taking anybody's
1:25:51time
1:25:54um one thing and I was going to ask it
1:25:57earlier but I didn't want to infringe on
1:25:59the time of the
1:26:01others you said in your letter that
1:26:03there's a perception among Rank and pile
1:26:06agents that there's a double standard
1:26:07when it comes to discipline in the
1:26:09FBI uh I remember hearing that way back
1:26:12in my days when I was a young prosecutor
1:26:16in Vermont and uh working with the FBI
1:26:21then what do you mean by this double
1:26:25standard and if we could wave a magic
1:26:28wand what would we do to get rid of
1:26:32it the uh let me maybe I can think of
1:26:35how we can get rid of it um of course
1:26:37you can just uh we have in the FBI
1:26:40already in the last year or two when
1:26:42this problem has surfaced it's been
1:26:44surfaced by others um at various times
1:26:47and and uh there are examples I I think
1:26:51uh that have occurred in the past few
1:26:53years where higher level management uh
1:26:56did the same uh misconduct or made
1:26:59mistakes and it it was lightly dealt
1:27:03with or or not dealt with at all whereas
1:27:05u a lower level agent would be
1:27:07disciplined and this is surfaced before
1:27:09now in the last year or two even prior
1:27:12to the director there have been attempts
1:27:14just by um policy to make sure that this
1:27:18doesn't happen um I think that they are
1:27:21already is in place with the SC system
1:27:24um they've made some changes to that so
1:27:26trying to to you know remedy the problem
1:27:30that they will have the same uh I'm not
1:27:33sure I don't know if it's U um I know
1:27:37that the oig in some cases now has been
1:27:40given some additional powers to look at
1:27:42things it might require somebody just
1:27:44outside our agency because if you are in
1:27:46the chain of command it's going to be
1:27:49very difficult to ignore that someone at
1:27:51a higher level I I think it's kind of
1:27:53just inherent that that maybe some
1:27:55double standard there have been attempts
1:27:57though in the past year to try to remedy
1:28:00this thank you uh Mr Ry I'm advised that
1:28:03some of the other Senators the
1:28:05Republican side are coming back up the
1:28:07vot of my CR make it and we'll um we'll
1:28:12stand in recess for a couple minutes so
1:28:14they come back give you a chance to
1:28:16stretch your legs you can talk to your
1:28:17husband if you'd
1:28:19like thank you we're stand on recess for
1:28:21a couple minutes
1:28:32no I mean I don't want to cut anybody
1:28:34off
1:28:35but want to wrap it
1:28:51up
1:29:20e
1:29:30we
1:29:32could begin Senator wi is
1:29:35here
1:29:37and we can
1:29:39U Senator W chairman thank thank you
1:29:42very much uh agent rally thank you very
1:29:45much for being with us today thank you
1:29:48for your your letter your testimony uh
1:29:52most particularly thank you for your uh
1:29:54over 20 years of service to our country
1:29:56and to the FBI I know that you one of
1:30:01thousands of dedicated FBI agents we
1:30:04just appreciate your work um turn I
1:30:09talked this morning a little bit to the
1:30:12director and I said that the your letter
1:30:16and your testimony
1:30:18uh but for the facts of this particular
1:30:23case uh probably could have been written
1:30:25by by many agents uh that I sense a
1:30:28great deal of
1:30:30frustration
1:30:32um with agents those who devoted their
1:30:35life to the FBI in regard to the
1:30:38bureaucracy that you have outlined in
1:30:40your in your letter so I thank you for
1:30:43coming forward with the specific
1:30:45recommendations um let me talk a little
1:30:49bit about those recommendations but also
1:30:51try to get a better understanding of how
1:30:54your office Works um for example how
1:30:59many fisa cases would you have in a in a
1:31:03year or possible fisa cases I I'm not
1:31:08quite sure um really I not even quite
1:31:12sure I can answer that from a national
1:31:14security standpoint other than to say
1:31:16our office would probably be one of the
1:31:17offices that would have far less than
1:31:21other offic is uh in the in the country
1:31:24so relatively few is maybe the best I
1:31:26can say you're you're the legal counsel
1:31:28yes I'm our our um legal counsel in our
1:31:31office uh some offices have more than
1:31:34one but an office such as ours with
1:31:36about 115 agents or so we uh just have
1:31:40myself now there's a similar thing of
1:31:42course in regular criminal cases for
1:31:45title three intercepts wi Taps and uh
1:31:49even in those cases they can be
1:31:51different types of CRI crimes um they we
1:31:53we also in those cases would not conduct
1:31:55nearly the the number that other offices
1:31:59with the mafia and bigger drug cartels
1:32:02or whatever but we do have a few of
1:32:04those uh a year do do you think without
1:32:07getting into the specifics or the
1:32:09numbers or anything do you think that
1:32:10that in any way impacted how this matter
1:32:13was handled the fact that our office um
1:32:17actually I'm not suggesting it does I I
1:32:19just don't know your office is I I don't
1:32:22want to comment specifically about this
1:32:24case um but I I don't think really our
1:32:28agents in Minneapolis um we have some
1:32:32top caliber agents uh some of our agents
1:32:36have come from other intelligence they
1:32:38have other intelligence backgrounds and
1:32:41um I really don't think it would have
1:32:43made a difference um our we really have
1:32:45top-notch
1:32:47people let me ask you
1:32:50um looking at this particular casee has
1:32:54it been your experience
1:32:57that you've had other problems not
1:33:01directly related to this case or not
1:33:04using this case even as an example but
1:33:07you talk about you know in your very
1:33:08lengthy letter you talk about the
1:33:10bureaucracy you talk about the
1:33:12frustration obviously that just didn't
1:33:15uh that letter just didn't come up from
1:33:17from this particular one
1:33:19case I mean you've had other
1:33:22problems correct um and not only so
1:33:25would it be excuse me would it be fair
1:33:26to say this is this is not unusual but
1:33:29for circumstances unusual National
1:33:31Security matter is unusual horrible
1:33:33tragedy is unusual
1:33:35but I I've heard typical in a sense yeah
1:33:39I and also as you mentioned in your at
1:33:41the start that uh this could be the
1:33:43complaint of uh any number large number
1:33:46of Agents around the country from the uh
1:33:49responses I've received um from field
1:33:52agents and other divisions uh up till
1:33:55now and hopefully you know cross our
1:33:57fingers it it's going to start improving
1:34:00that th this has been the experience in
1:34:02many other types of cases uh the
1:34:04bureaucracy has been a problem hitting
1:34:06roadblocks internally and again
1:34:09externally it can be um in criminal
1:34:12cases as well is a problem and uh I
1:34:15think we need to think maybe somewhat
1:34:16creative ways of of trying to uh
1:34:19remediate this um if I can I don't want
1:34:22to take up all your time but I didn't
1:34:24give a a tremendous answer to uh um
1:34:26Senator Schumer earlier when he asked
1:34:28we'll take that from his time even
1:34:30though he's gone but he he asked is not
1:34:33laughing so it ties in a little bit with
1:34:35your question so we'll give you 30% and
1:34:37him all right but I do have a couple
1:34:39more I'd like to get in so uh you know
1:34:41when when you're talking about the
1:34:43probable cause uh and why this is kind
1:34:46of come into this issue it's kind of
1:34:48complex where the mindsets start to
1:34:50change and I know I know director Muller
1:34:52today mentioned something which uh
1:34:54struck me as a little odd or a little
1:34:56actually I kind of bristled a little bit
1:34:58at it he said well maybe someone
1:35:00suggested maybe we should give our
1:35:01agents training in probable cause well
1:35:04first of all that would fall to me and I
1:35:06am I am here to say that the agents who
1:35:09have 20 years in the FBI who have done
1:35:11search warrants and title 3es and any
1:35:15number of things really really are quite
1:35:18quite familiar with with that standard
1:35:20of probable cuse um I don't think that
1:35:24uh that would really serve any purpose
1:35:25to give some kind of you know esoteric
1:35:28training all
1:35:29right but there are some improvements
1:35:31you know to the uh writing where you
1:35:34know the people on the scene uh should
1:35:36be given some credit for their
1:35:38observations because those are firsthand
1:35:40observations and they in writing an
1:35:42affidavit that should really be of of
1:35:44primary importance and there shouldn't
1:35:47be any rewriting of an affidavit further
1:35:49up the chain um unless it's grammatical
1:35:53or really not of any substance okay one
1:35:56of the recommendations you made I would
1:35:58like to read to you and then I'd like
1:35:59for you to comment on uh number nine
1:36:02development of confidential sources and
1:36:04assets just recently in the wake of the
1:36:07Whitey bulgar Scandal the guidelines for
1:36:09development of confidential sources and
1:36:11assets have been extremely restrictive
1:36:14and burdensome while some of the
1:36:15measures undertaken to monitor the
1:36:18informant process were necessary were
1:36:21necessary they have now gone too far if
1:36:24not reviewed or trimmed may result in
1:36:26reduced ability on the part of the FBI
1:36:28to obtain intelligence you want to
1:36:29explain that a little bit um I'm not the
1:36:33person in my office who's the informant
1:36:35coordinator but um we've all of course
1:36:38in the wake of this uh new guidelines
1:36:40and informants been given new um
1:36:43additional paperwork that needs to be
1:36:45completed additional um items that need
1:36:48to be conducted before opening sources
1:36:51before certain sources can do certain
1:36:53things I think it should maybe be
1:36:55reexamined I think I I am one of the I
1:36:58have to tell you where I'm coming from
1:37:00because back uh back in the 90s we
1:37:04actually had an FBI agent who murdered
1:37:07his informant and um to me it's it's
1:37:10kind of like other scandals it seems
1:37:12like we should have done something back
1:37:14then and nothing occurred after that
1:37:16incident um we did not have a policy in
1:37:19the FBI in the 90s that prohibited
1:37:23social or sexual relationships with
1:37:26informant I found I find that just
1:37:28unbelievable because most law
1:37:30enforcement agencies had such a policy I
1:37:32think if we would have had a strong
1:37:34policy if we would have had some
1:37:36accountability and some good oversight
1:37:40perhaps all of these additional things
1:37:42that later transpired wouldn't have
1:37:44occurred and maybe now when you whenever
1:37:47these things happen it's just inevitable
1:37:49that sometimes it goes a little too far
1:37:51okay and we might have some additional
1:37:52paperwork that's let me ask you one last
1:37:54question in your letter you mentioned
1:37:56the problem that agents have with the
1:37:58perception that sometimes they try for a
1:38:01title three warrant and then then if
1:38:04that fails go for a fiso warrant which
1:38:07requires different proof but an easier
1:38:10standard U let me ask this does that H
1:38:12do you think that happens a lot no I
1:38:15don't are these suspicions reasonable no
1:38:17I don't think it actually happens in in
1:38:19real life uh I do not I've never seen
1:38:22where uh you try for something to do it
1:38:25criminally and if you fail you pursue
1:38:27the intelligence method I have never
1:38:29seen that but do I think that there
1:38:31could there is a perception out there
1:38:34sometimes I do think that there is a
1:38:35perception that this this smell test or
1:38:38whatever exists I don't think it's
1:38:39correct but I think it does exist okay
1:38:41good thank you very much we appreciate
1:38:43your testimony you thank you Mr chairman
1:38:45thank you very much Senator Kyle thank
1:38:47you Mr chairman um agent rally I had
1:38:51leave to vote just as uh Senator Schumer
1:38:53was beginning to ask you a question that
1:38:55I wanted to ask you and it related to
1:38:56your answer to Senator grassley's
1:38:57question about the computers I just want
1:38:59to uh maybe a quick response you had
1:39:01testified in response to Senator
1:39:03Grassley that it would be nice uh to
1:39:05have the new uh computers um I I'm not
1:39:08sure you wanted to leave us with the
1:39:09impression to me nice is nice but not
1:39:11really necessary and I just wondered if
1:39:13that's really the impression you wanted
1:39:14to leave us
1:39:15with if so fine I just want to give you
1:39:17a chance to respond to well the ability
1:39:20to um conduct research in of our records
1:39:24um as I described where you're putting
1:39:26word just like you would on Lexus Nexus
1:39:28for instance where you're putting
1:39:29connectors and stuff uh I guess nice is
1:39:32not the word when it comes to
1:39:35intelligence and you really have these
1:39:37critical Snippets out there um it's it
1:39:40would be more than nice I think it's
1:39:41necessary it may not in other cases be
1:39:44all that uh critical but in intelligence
1:39:47I think it is thank you very much I I
1:39:49assume that uh that most most of us
1:39:51would agree with that you had what I
1:39:53thought was a very uh interesting
1:39:55recommendation in your statement and you
1:39:57haven't had an opportunity to discuss it
1:39:59yet it's the public safety exception in
1:40:02the Coral's case and I wonder if you
1:40:03would U uh describe a little bit why you
1:40:07think that would be important and
1:40:08particularly in the context of terrorism
1:40:10that we're concerned about here um thank
1:40:13you for giving me that opportunity it's
1:40:15uh a little issue that's uh come up
1:40:17before actually in criminal cases we've
1:40:20had kidnapping we've had uh cases where
1:40:23someone's life can be right on the line
1:40:27and we have a there is a case that makes
1:40:29this really constitutional to uh I
1:40:32shouldn't say ignore Miranda but
1:40:35disregard it in order to for public
1:40:37safety reasons the only problem with
1:40:40that case is it's the loaded gun in a
1:40:42grocery store and when you start
1:40:45mentioning applying it to other cases
1:40:48such as in a terrorism case when we
1:40:50might want to interview someone there
1:40:52may well be I I always think of the bomb
1:40:55and someone ready to P push it down uh
1:40:58obviously Miranda is a safeguard and
1:41:00it's a a good Safeguard in many cases
1:41:03but there can't it's like everything
1:41:04else there may well be a time when it
1:41:07should be um you know overridden and
1:41:10that would be to Save a Life um as it
1:41:13stands now there's a case about that so
1:41:15it is constitutional I think that it
1:41:16wouldn't be overturned if there was a a
1:41:18statute about it uh the only problem
1:41:21with a case is like anything else it's a
1:41:23case in order to to give timely advice
1:41:25to someone you got to run to a computer
1:41:27and and pull it up and I think that many
1:41:30people have kind of forgotten that case
1:41:32and many courts have actually limited it
1:41:34to its facts so I think that um we have
1:41:37cases that come up from time to time and
1:41:39do do you think we should at least try
1:41:41to write some kind of a narrow uh Public
1:41:43Safety exception um I do I I I contacted
1:41:48after September 11th I called some
1:41:50staffers about this because I think it
1:41:52is an important issue and I think it
1:41:54definitely has the potential to repeat
1:41:55itself and other it it it's not often I
1:41:58shouldn't you know I know people will
1:42:00get alarmed if we say we're going to
1:42:01violate Miranda but I don't think that
1:42:03it is it's something that comes up all
1:42:05the time but there are these cases um
1:42:08the one I referred to in the in the it's
1:42:10the most dramatic one there's a baby in
1:42:12a duffel bag in a forest that's been
1:42:14kidnapped that morning and that is the
1:42:17type of thing of course that doesn't
1:42:18arise too often but when it does our
1:42:21agents really need to be somewhat feel
1:42:23somewhat safe that they can that they
1:42:25can proceed right now after Dickerson
1:42:28after the Dickerson case there's comment
1:42:30there are commentators that are
1:42:32speculating that civil liability exists
1:42:35for the agent so in addition to having
1:42:38the the the statement suppressed which
1:42:41in a case like this really if it's
1:42:43saving a life we would goes back to your
1:42:46um prevention versus prosecution we
1:42:48wouldn't care about the prosecution we
1:42:50would care about the the item the
1:42:52statement being suppressed we would want
1:42:54to save the life might even get sued
1:42:56right now the agent might even get sued
1:42:58possibly excuse me do you have to pay
1:43:00for your own uh liability insurance or
1:43:03umbrella coverage or anything of that
1:43:05sort if it's my recollection that uh we
1:43:08get $50 reimbursed from the Department
1:43:11of Justice for our uh liability
1:43:13insurance if I think that's right I'm
1:43:15not sure we get a portion of it I think
1:43:17it's $50 but a but a liability insurance
1:43:19policy would protect agents uh working
1:43:21in the course of their employment would
1:43:23cost a lot more than
1:43:24$50 um couple hundred is it is it a I
1:43:28think it's a couple around a couple
1:43:29hundred a year and um that kind of civil
1:43:32liability protection um you go back to
1:43:35your chilling factors even if agents
1:43:38don't even want to be sued it's like
1:43:40every you know any other person that the
1:43:42suit itself is a real uh chilling factor
1:43:46of somebody aggressively trying to save
1:43:48a life we're I'm I've been an advocate
1:43:51of trying to have the the government pay
1:43:53for the insurance for people who are
1:43:54working in the line of their uh their
1:43:56Duty um you uh testified earlier that um
1:44:02um to something I thought was very
1:44:05important and it maybe didn't quite
1:44:06receive the U um degree of attention
1:44:10that I I think is warranted and it had
1:44:12to do with the new guidelines from your
1:44:14experience as an agent on the
1:44:17line um and you said you had also gone
1:44:19back and reviewed more historic
1:44:21documents in the course of your
1:44:23employment um you view these new
1:44:25guidelines as very helpful to doing your
1:44:28your job and you indicated that you
1:44:32didn't think the American people had to
1:44:33be fearful that they would be uh abused
1:44:36by the uh by the agents and you use the
1:44:38specific example of being able to go
1:44:39into a meeting and if there were
1:44:42discussion of threats of Terror then
1:44:43that would be very useful and if there
1:44:46weren't then that was the end of it is
1:44:48kind of the way you you U uh put it uh
1:44:51would do you want to amplify on that at
1:44:53all because I think this is a very
1:44:54important point for people to understand
1:44:57I I think that um when uh a certain
1:45:00guideline might be somewhat relaxed in
1:45:02this case and of course director Mueller
1:45:04has explained that uh surfing the net is
1:45:07something any kid can do uh going into
1:45:09any meeting is anything a local law
1:45:11enforcement or anyone can do I think
1:45:14that it's it's the the real um Crux of
1:45:17it is in how it's done uh we also have
1:45:20the C the ability to collect information
1:45:23so just by undertaking uh to keep your
1:45:27ears open uh and walk into that meeting
1:45:30and then if something does transpire you
1:45:32can act on it that doesn't mean we get
1:45:34overboard and start recording things and
1:45:37and mishandle that ability it really
1:45:40goes into the the the capability to use
1:45:43it but judiciously because I think it
1:45:46increases only the potential for uh it
1:45:50does perhaps increase the potential of
1:45:52uh of going further than we have before
1:45:55but it I don't think it necessar I think
1:45:57we can have our cake and eat it too is
1:45:58what I'm saying here I think training I
1:46:01think we can have we with training we
1:46:03can do these items and we still can
1:46:06avoid interfering with people's rights I
1:46:08appreciate it very much thank you than
1:46:10you Sor sessions the most patient man in
1:46:13Washington thank you Mr chairman and I
1:46:14think this has been a good hearing IO uh
1:46:17we've had a good high level discussion
1:46:19some um and Witnesses and talking about
1:46:22important matters and U agent rally
1:46:25thank you for what uh you have
1:46:28done I know uh it's an unusual thing but
1:46:32it was an unusual
1:46:33circumstance before director meller was
1:46:36um confirmed he and I talked uh at his
1:46:40confirmation hearing we talked and I
1:46:42asked him questions and they focused on
1:46:44the very things you raised in your
1:46:46memorandum I just raised questions
1:46:49concerning uh um matters such as uh
1:46:52defensiveness on the part of the FBI
1:46:54unwillingness to admit mistakes some
1:46:57arrogance uh too much bureaucratic
1:46:59blocking and particularly in Washington
1:47:01that undermined um effectiveness of
1:47:04Investigations in the field and I asked
1:47:07those questions based on my experience
1:47:08as 12 years as United States Attorney
1:47:10and two as assistant I believe that Rec
1:47:14that is consistent with the overwhelming
1:47:18view of federal prosecutors through
1:47:20throughout the system and I believe if
1:47:22you have noted it's consistent with the
1:47:24views of the agents in the
1:47:26field so to that extent your letter uh
1:47:30in the public hearing that's come about
1:47:32here I believe will strengthen his hand
1:47:36in being able to make the kind of
1:47:38cultural changes that need to be made
1:47:40and and I love the FBI I know you do and
1:47:43so we want to see it reach its highest
1:47:46and best potential not hurt it in any
1:47:48way I think to my own personal view that
1:47:51we hurt the IRS I think that has been
1:47:53damaged by some of the things that were
1:47:55done and we don't need to damage the FBI
1:47:57we need to strengthen it and help it
1:47:58reach its fullest potential but just
1:48:01back to this problem we were
1:48:06facing a a comp it seems to me that's
1:48:10always a good excuse that the computer
1:48:12system wasn't up to
1:48:14dat
1:48:16uh if you have been given the point
1:48:18person to monitor intelligence of of the
1:48:22United States wouldn't you create a
1:48:24system in which uh important documents
1:48:26from the field would come to your desk
1:48:28personally within hours of the time they
1:48:30were sent forward and isn't it uh unwise
1:48:34or inadvisable as as apparently occurred
1:48:37with regard to the Arizona memorandum
1:48:40that some clerk sent it off to a
1:48:42different section and it never even got
1:48:44to the supervisor um there isn't that a
1:48:47PO way to run a shop well as a General
1:48:50matter I'm not speaking to the uh any
1:48:52particular case but as a general matter
1:48:54of course obvious it's obvious that um
1:48:57we want the important items that need to
1:49:00be acted on to really get to the right
1:49:03place um and if we do have a focal point
1:49:05at a central location it's it's very
1:49:08clear that they have to get that in get
1:49:10that information there is a problem of
1:49:12of when there's a lot of Intelligence
1:49:14being gathered and the ability to
1:49:18distinguish the wheat from the chaff
1:49:20and that isn't easy at when you first
1:49:23get this information so that is I think
1:49:25one of the reasons for having an
1:49:27intelligence analysis where we can
1:49:29really attempt to get these important
1:49:31things that need to be acted on uh as a
1:49:35distinguish between something that's not
1:49:37so important yeah well I think director
1:49:39moner's new organization will do that
1:49:41and I don't think there's anybody there
1:49:43that's not going to be reading important
1:49:46documents from the field um I think
1:49:48those documents could have been recogniz
1:49:50iiz as being important before September
1:49:5211th and uh had um and I don't think we
1:49:55can say with certainty as you pointed
1:49:57out that uh they could not have helped
1:50:00us avoid September 11th probably not but
1:50:03possibly can I say one more thing
1:50:04because I just thought of something I
1:50:06you know the one way that of recognizing
1:50:09importance um really and this can't be
1:50:12underestimated the the the person who is
1:50:16experiencing firsthand the event um okay
1:50:20I'm just going to speak generally but if
1:50:21it's a flight instructor or whatever it
1:50:23is and this thing is real um that's not
1:50:27a good example but I'm just saying that
1:50:29if it's a uh somebody who has
1:50:31experienced it firsthand many times is
1:50:33in the best position it's not the person
1:50:36uh five levels up and what often happens
1:50:39is it's gets lost in the translation
1:50:41absolutely the person here who sees it
1:50:44feels it eats it really knows it's
1:50:46important someone further up the chain
1:50:49and again the message by that time has
1:50:51maybe been diminished or whatever
1:50:53doesn't recognize the importance all
1:50:54right let me ask you this
1:50:57um it's odd to me that the investigative
1:51:01agency the agency designed to protect
1:51:04Public Safety and I've seen instances
1:51:06where this occurred in the Department of
1:51:07Justice and not just the FBI don't you
1:51:10think they shouldn't be uh negative
1:51:13about things that might impact Public
1:51:15Safety that they should be positive and
1:51:18help the people in the field succeed Ed
1:51:20rather than putting down and throwing up
1:51:22roadblocks they ought to be helping them
1:51:25recognizing that you are on to something
1:51:27important and uh maybe uh helping you
1:51:30legally or through intelligent searches
1:51:33around the country and World helping you
1:51:35to succeed if you don't Advocate if the
1:51:38Department of Justice does not Advocate
1:51:40and take it to court before a judge who
1:51:42has a final responsibility who is going
1:51:45to make uh Advocate it uh well that's I
1:51:49I had forgotten to mention my point was
1:51:51was a footnote in my letter about the
1:51:53the judges and I think our system
1:51:55actually was originally designed to to
1:51:58let a judge it goes to uh Senator
1:52:00Schumer's question too all these
1:52:03perceptions of where probable cause May
1:52:05lie our system really was designed to
1:52:07let a judge make those determinations
1:52:10not someone not you know other levels
1:52:12before you even get to a judge uh when
1:52:15in doubt if and especially when Public
1:52:17Safety is on the line I think we need to
1:52:20let judges look at these things and then
1:52:23uh make their determination I I totally
1:52:25in fact I've heard from a prosecutor who
1:52:29uh you know many prosecutors might be uh
1:52:32uh am antithetic to you know you know
1:52:35someone it's even the second opinion
1:52:38idea they may say well I don't want
1:52:39anybody second guessing me but um I've
1:52:42actually heard from a prosecutor about
1:52:43that point about going you know when in
1:52:45doubt when in doubt take it to a judge
1:52:47when lives are at State especially is
1:52:50not a minor was not a minor matter this
1:52:52was a matter that dealt with potential
1:52:55loss of life and uh I think you should
1:52:57Advocate not take the now you've
1:53:00expressed an opinion in your letter that
1:53:02there was clearly probable cause at some
1:53:04point before September 11 how confident
1:53:07are you of that uh I'm not going to get
1:53:10into the because of course these um
1:53:12issues are before the other committee
1:53:14and I'm just not going to comment at
1:53:15this time about
1:53:17it well you say in your letter that um
1:53:20probable CS existed in your opinion
1:53:23that's correct I actually still stand by
1:53:25that or I didn't expect that letter was
1:53:26it a close call you know that letter
1:53:29actually the fact that everyone here is
1:53:31uh aware of that I didn't really know
1:53:33that would happen because I gave it to
1:53:35the Joint intelligence committee and I
1:53:37um I think I have to be very circumspect
1:53:39at this point because there are ongoing
1:53:41proceedings um I might say senator T is
1:53:44one of the things we we made it very
1:53:47clear agent Raleigh has been
1:53:49extraordinary early forthcoming as has
1:53:52director Mullen his office we did uh
1:53:55agree that we would be careful for
1:53:58limiting into issues that involve an
1:54:00ongoing an ongoing case this is I would
1:54:04point out that some of
1:54:06the me you're raising

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Coleen Rowley Testifies Before The Senate - 6/6/2002 - Part I by Jon Gold, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 18,426 words across 2,613 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.