Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Secret Service Faces Grilling Over Breaches

Aired September 30, 2014 - 10:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, I'm Carol Costello. Thank you so much for joining me.

We begin on Capitol Hill where just minutes from now the Secret Service faces blistering questions over recent security failures and the danger that such lapses could mean to the president and to other top U.S. leaders. Due to testify, Secret Service director Julia Pierson, former director W. Ralph Basham and former Homeland Security official Todd Keil.

Driving the urgency, this month's armed intruder and stunning revelations that he got much deeper into the White House than previously thought. It turns out Omar Gonzalez overpowered one Secret Service agent, ran past the stairway that leads to the First Family's residence and was not tackled until he reached the far end of the East Room. So how many levels of security failed to stop Gonzalez earlier and why did they fail? Is the procedure at fault or the people? And the biggest question of all -- is the Secret Service as we know it up to the task of protecting the nation's most powerful and symbolic leader?

We're peeling back the many layers of this story. Our reporters, analysts and guests will joins us throughout the hour to breakdown all the angles for you.

Let's begin with CNN justice correspondent, Pamela Brown, though, she is in our Washington Bureau with what will take place shortly on Capitol Hill. Good morning.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Carol. As you point out, the hearing is about to get under way. There's a lot of anticipation because up until this point, the Secret Service hasn't commented on this latest reporting and we expect to hear from Secret Service Director Julia Pierson.

She will certainly be in the hot seat. And I think what a lot of people want to hear her say, a lot of the Congress members there is her accepting full responsibility of the latest security breach that has really been an embarrassment for the Secret Service and has raised questions about how effectively it can protect the president and what is supposed to be one of the most secure buildings in the world, the White House.

We also expect to hear about security enhancements that have been put into place recently in the wake of this latest security breach and what a lot of us are waiting to hear from her is why the Secret Service's initial version of events.

That Omar Gonzalez was apprehended right after he entered the White House door, contradicts what whistle-blowers have told Congressman Jason Chaffetz, that Gonzalez ran through the first floor and into the east room where the president hosts state dinners. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPRESENTATIVE JASON CHAFFETZ (R), UTAH: Just because something is embarrassing doesn't mean that it's classified and so it will be interesting to see the mix. I don't want to hear the director continue to say "Well, that's classified, it's classified, it's classified." In the United States of America, we are self-critical, this is how we make things better and this is why Congress needs to get involved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So expect Congress members to grill Director Pierson on this latest breach and other breaches in recent years as well as training, procedures and the overall culture in the Secret Service.

And after this public session this morning, there will be a closed classified hearing, Carol, per Pierson's request, in her letter to Chairman Issa, she says, simply put, publicly airing the very security measures employed by the Secret Service.

And the various challenges we confront at the White House complex will arm those who desire to cause injury or worse to the president and first family and doing so would be beyond reckless -- Carol.

COSTELLO: Julia Pierson just walked into the committee hearing room. I wanted to show our viewers a picture of her right now. Shortly, she'll be sitting down and she'll read an opening statement that will last about 10 minutes and then questions will be posed to her by the Chairman Darrell Issa and the ranking member, Elijah Cummings, am I right, Pamela?

BROWN: Yes, that is right, Carol.

COSTELLO: All right, OK, let's continue to watch these live pictures of what's happening on Capitol Hill right now and talk about what Pamela brought up, this changing story from the Secret Service about exactly what went down at the White House.

Michelle Kosinski as that part of the story. Michelle, tell us more about that.

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: We are talking about layers of security at the White House, but there are also layers of questions now. I mean, first we heard from the Secret Service hours after the incident happened that this was an unarmed suspect. They really played up that. They said that was part of the response, that first of all, he didn't appeared to be armed. Then it turned out he was not armed. OK, that sat there until the next day when it turned out he was armed with a three-inch knife.

We went back to the Secret Service and said "what happened? You insisted he was unarmed." And the press office said, well, "our office was not made aware of that until later."

OK. Well, then comes this and this new information is coming out through whistle-blowers. So that just makes a bad situation even worse. Part of the Secret Service story that night was that this suspect was apprehended as soon as he got through those front doors of the White House.

So now we go back to the Secret Service again and say "Wait a minute, you also said he was apprehended right away. Where's the difference in story? What happened?" Now it's no comment.

So that could indicate somebody is trying to cover this up. At what level we don't know exactly or it could indicate there are some holes in the Secret Service's communication system as it gets to the press as well.

But to have this information coming out through whistle-blowers now and have members of Congress questioning not only how on earth this happened in the first place, but why is this information, the real information, so slow to hit the public just adds to the embarrassment there -- Carol.

COSTELLO: All right, Michelle Kosinski, many thanks to you. This is Chairman Darrell Issa, he is reading his opening statement, which will probably last about 3 minutes, then Elijah Cummings, the ranking member will also read an opening statement and then when Julia Pierson begins her testimony, we'll bring that to you live.

I want to bring in now our panel of experts. Ronald Kessler is a long time investigative reporter and author of nearly two dozen books including "In the President's Secret Service." Daniel Bongino is a former Secret Service agent and has written his inside account "Life Inside the Bubble" and Joey Jackson is an HLN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney.

Welcome to all of you and thank you so much for being with me. I want to start with Daniel. You were with the Secret Service. Why the conflicting stories about what went down at the White House, do you think?

DANIEL BONGINO, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Carol, sadly this is consistent with some of my experience there as well, that a very small, insulated group of upper level Secret Service managers who are subjected to outside pressures and, frankly, are too weak to stand up to them, gave a different story.

Now the rank-and-file officers and agents are two different sets of people, Uniformed Division Officers and Secret Service agents are the ones who are disgusted by this and they're the ones who are the whistle-blowers.

They came forward because they want this to change. So it's consistent with my experience as well. The men and women on the ground doing the work, get it done, and the people up top consistently fail them.

COSTELLO: All right, Daniel. I actually want to listen to Darrell Issa's opening statement to see what he has to say about the Secret Service so let's head to Capitol Hill now.

REP. DARRELL ISSA, (R), CALIFORNIA: The committee will come to order.

The Oversight Committee exists to secure two fundamental principles. First, Americans have a right to know that the money Washington takes from them is well spent. And second, Americans deserve an efficient, effective government that works for them. Our duty on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee is to protect these rights. Our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to taxpayers. It is our job to work tirelessly in partnership with citizen watchdogs to bring genuine reform to the federal bureaucracy. This is our mission and today's hearing follows one of the most important parts of that mission.

With $1.5 billion spent by the Secret Service, nearly a billion of that spent on protection of the first family, second family, former presidents and presidential candidates, the United States Secret Service was always considered to be the elite law enforcement agency made up of men and women who were highly regarded, highly respected and highly trusted. The country has placed great faith and trust in the Secret Service.

The agents of the uniformed division, their officers and the Secret Service agents have a monumental task: that of protecting the nation's presidents past, present and future. They do so honorably and not without considerable personal sacrifice. They ensure the safety of the first and second family, yes, and the safety of foreign dignitaries throughout Washington and at times around the world.

They ensure the safety of every man and women who enters the White House and accompanying buildings. But a history of misbehavior, security failures has clearly blemished that record. On September 19th, Omar Gonzalez jumped the north fence, ran across the White House lawn, up the steps of the north portico, and into the front door of the White House. He was armed with a three-inch serrated knife. He entered through an unlocked door, passed the staircase to the presidential residence, and into the East Room of the White House.

Ladies and gentlemen, that was the part of my opening statement that was changed last night when the early false report that in fact he had been apprehended just inside the front door was turned upside down by a revelation that in fact he penetrated much further into the White House. Secret Service officers only subdued him after he was clearly well inside the White House.

An intruder walked in the front door of the White House, and that is unacceptable. Common sense tells us that there were a series of security failures, not an instance of praiseworthy restraint. Inexplicably, Omar Gonzalez breached at least five rings of security on September 19th.

The White House is supposed to be one of America's most secure facilities and in fact one of the world's most secure facilities. So how on earth did it happen? This failure was once again tested -- has tested the trust of the American people in the Secret Service, a trust we clearly depend on to protect the president.

After allowing a paparazzi-crazed reality TV star to crash a state dinner, after engaging prostitutes in Cartagena, after excessive drinking and an agent falling asleep outside his room in The Netherlands, and yes, after the mishandling of the 11/11/11 event, a gunman sprayed bullets across the White House and as reported caused over $100,000 in damage that was not properly reported in real time or understood in real time, it is understandable that morale at the agency appears to be in decline, according to news reports.

In light of the recent break-in, we have to ask whether the culture at the Secret Service and possible declining morale have an impact on operations, and those are some of our questions today. The appointment of Director Pierson brought new hope that the agency would reclaim its noble image. But recent events have so troubled us that in fact we have called the director here to face some tough questions.

How could Mr. Gonzalez scale the fence? We understand that -- that happens often, people trying to scale that fence.

But how is it that as would ordinarily happen, agents didn't immediately apprehend him? How as he able to sprint 70 yards, almost the entire length of a football field, without being intercepted by guards inside the fence? Why didn't security dogs stop him in his tracks? What about the SWAT team and assaults rifle -- or sniper rifles? Why was there no guard stationed at the front door of the White House? And yes, how much would it cost to lock the front door of the White House?

The Secret Service must show us how there is a clear path back to public trust. The purpose to today's hearings is to gain answers to the many questions plaguing the Secret Service.

Today, we will hear from experts on both -- both the agency's protocol, foreign and domestic. But most importantly, we will hear from the Secret Service director herself on her plans to improve the agency's performance.

Americans face real danger as we serve interest abroad, especially those stationed at our embassies. It is a time of great peril. We are engaged in a battle against ISIL as we speak.

But that is not limited to foreign soil. Americans know that the next attempt to take White House may not be by a crazed solo knife- wielding veteran with PTSD; it could well be a planned attack from a terrorist organization.

The fact is the system broke down on September 19, as it did when the Salahis crashed the state dinner in 2009, as it did when Ortega Hernandez successfully shot the White House on November 11, 2011, as it did in Cartagena when agents paid for prostitutes and compromised security, as it did in the Netherlands in 2014.

We cannot further allow this. But more importantly, as I said to the director before today's hearing, the Secret Service relies on two important skills -- or facts.

Their skill, their capability to protect the president must be at the highest level, because they cannot succeed 99 percent, because 1 percent failure is not an option.

But they also rely on the good faith belief by most people that they shouldn't even try, that this is the hardest target on Earth.

We need to make sure that that second hardest target on Earth is true again, both in reality and in the minds of anyone who might take on the Secret Service to get to the president or the first family.

And with that, I recognize the ranking member for his opening statement.

REP. ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, (D), MARYLAND: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

We begin today's hearing with an obvious premise: No individual should be allowed to scale the fence at the White House, sprint across the North Lawn and burst into the residence of the first family with a weapon. No one.

Our goal today is also clear, to determine how this happened and make sure it never happens again. This is our watch.

This recent incident unfortunately causes many people to ask whether there is a much broader problem with the Secret Service.

Last night, the Washington Post reported Omar Gonzalez made his way into the East Room, much further than the Secret Service previously disclosed.

Another report in this weekend's post about a shooting incident in 2011 raises even more questions about the competency and culture of this elite agency.

What concerns me most about this report is that agents said they were hesitant, agents in this agency said they were hesitant to raise security concerns with their supervisors. Ladies and gentlemen, something is awfully wrong with that picture.

The Secret Service is supposed to be the most elite, protective force in the world, yet four days went by before they discovered the White House had been shot seven times.

Then in 2012, there was the prostitution scandal in Columbia. Although it had little to do with tactical protection issues, it seriously damaged the agency's credibility.

The Secret Service must not only carry out its duties with the highest degree of excellence and effectiveness, but it also must maintain a reputation which matches the performance.

As the chairman has said, much of what deters people from trying to pierce the protective veil of the Secret Service is the reputation, and that reputation must be one of excellence and effectiveness.

Today's witness, Ms. Julia Pierson, was appointed as the director of the Secret Service last year to help restore the agency's standing.

She has had a distinguished 30-year career with the agency, and to her credit, she immediately ordered an internal review and agreed to testify.

With respect to the recent -- most recent incident, I have key questions for the director that I know are shared by many people across the country. Did the Secret Service have specific protocols for handling this type of specific perimeter breach? If so, were those protocols followed in this case, and if they were followed, do they need to be changed in light of what happened?

If the protocols were not followed, why were they not followed, and how can we have confidence that they will be followed in the future?

I also want to understand what happened prior to the incident? Gonzalez was arrested in Virginia two months earlier on July 19th.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to enter into the record an inventory sheet that was provided to us by the Virginia State Police.

It lists the contents of this car, which included an arsenal of 11 firearms, including sniper rifles and a sawed-off shotgun. It also...

ISSA: Without objection, the entire report be placed in the record.

CUMMINGS: Thank you very much.

It also included the contents of his car, which included a small arsenal of 11 firearms, including sniper rifles and a sawed-off shotgun. It also included a map of Washington, D.C., with, and I quote, "a line drawn to the White House."

According to the Virginia State Police, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives concluded that there was no information in Gonzalez's history that prohibited him from owning the firearms. Yet, he was severely mentally ill, and a military psychiatrist reportedly treated him for post-traumatic stress disorder and paranoid schizophrenia.

Mr. Chairman, I hate to even imagine what could have happened if Gonzalez had been carrying a gun instead of a knife when he burst inside the White House. That possibility is extremely unsettling.

Today, our work faces two challenges.

First, the Secret Service has not yet completed its internal review. I understand that the director will provide us with a status update, but the final results are not yet in.

Second, some of the information is classified, so we cannot discuss it in public. The very last thing we want to do is give people like Gonzalez a road map for how to attack the president or other officials protected by the Secret Service.

This does not mean the committee cannot obtain the information. The director sent a letter on Friday, offering not only to testify here today in the public setting but also to provide all of us with a classified briefing.

The chairman has now agreed to hold the classified session in a separate room directly after this hearing concludes.

Let me close on making this very final point.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is not a Democratic issue. This is not a Republican issue. This is an American issue.

This is also an issue of national security. The vast majority of men who serve and women who serve in the Secret Service are dedicated, experienced public servants who are willing to lay down their lives for their country.

And on behalf of a grateful Congress and a grateful nation, I thank everyone of them. They have an extremely difficult job, and like others in similar positions, they are required to make instant life-or-death decisions in extremely stressful situations.

Last year, for example, the Capitol Police shot and killed an unarmed woman with a 1-year-old girl in the backseat of her car. Some praised their quick responses. Others criticized their actions.

But they acted based upon their firsthand experience right here in the Capitol when another deranged individual burst through the doors and killed two Capitol Police officers.

The Secret Service has a high-profile job, but it is critically important, and it requires accountability so that the spotlight is rightly on their actions today.

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the testimony. I thank you for bringing us back for this hearing, and I look forward to the questions I've already raised and others being answered.

With that, I yield back.

ISSA: Thank you, Mr. Cummings. I now recognize the gentleman from Utah, Mr. Chaffetz, the subcommittee chairman on National Security for his opening statement.

REP. JASON CHAFFETZ, (R),UTAH: I thank the chairman, and -- and I also thank the ranking member, Mr. Cummings -- his statement. He is absolutely right. This is not a Republican issue, a Democrat issue. This is an American issue. I don't want it to be the political football.

But we in the United States in America are self critical. It's one of the beauties of our nation is we do hold ourselves accountable. And so, I appreciate, Chairman, you holding this hearing.

We have wonderful men and women who serve this nation. They do it patriotically. They do it -- they put their lives on the line. They walk away from their families and their spouses. They don't know what the day's gonna bring them, and they do so in a very, very honorable way. And we thank them for their service and their dedication.

But I have serious concerns about the current leadership. I have concerns about training, and I have concerns about protocol. And that's what I want to get out today.

Since the current director has taken on this role, it's important to note that she was chief of staff since 2008. And so her last several years it's not good enough to just simply excuse this as something we were trying to clean up before because she was the chief of staff starting in 2008.

I'm concerned about leadership and the mixed messages that are sent to those that serve in the Secret Service. For instance, after the fence jumping incident, the Secret Service was very quickly -- very quick to put out a statement that -- that honored the -- the officers and agents for their quote, "tremendous restraint".

Tremendous restraint is not what we're looking for. Tremendous restraint is not the goal of the objective. It sends a very mixed message. The message should be overwhelming force. If one person can hop that wall -- hop that fence and run unimpeded all the way into an open door at the White House, don't praise them for -- for tremendous restraint. That's not the goal. That's not the -- that's not what we're looking for.

If there were alarms that were inside the door that were muted or silenced, I want to know why that is. Who makes that call and decision? That, to me, is a leadership decision.

I think at some point we need to go back and review the 2013 inspector general's report, which actually said there's not a problem here, but has over 1,000 indications of security concerns. In the opening statement, say we have to be 100 percent right all of the time. Everybody agrees with that. And yet the inspector general's report is pretty damning when it comes and looks at how -- what the agents are feeling like happens within the -- the agency itself.

Very concerned about the 2011 incident. I'm thankful for "The Washington Post" and Carol Lenning and she did in the reporting there. It's best I can tell, from the spot report, as well as the -- the article in "The Washington Post" the event in 2011 where eight shots were fired at the White House, you had no less than five Secret Service agents report that they thought they heard shots fired. You had somebody on Twitter report that they saw somebody shoot at the White House. There were two people in two different shuttle vans who reported that they saw somebody firing a weapon at the White House.

Blocks away moments later somebody crashes a vehicle and an assault rifle is in there, and yet the -- and the Secret Service is on the scene, and nobody ties those two together. I don't understand that.

Later, the Arlington county police actually detain this person. He had been positively identified based on what would that (ph) vehicle was there, but nobody put it into the system to put him on the watch list.

Consequently, when the Arlington county police pull him over, they take his picture, and they let him go. And it was only the Pennsylvania police five days later that actually find this person. Now he's serving some 25 years in jail, but he could have done a lot more damage.

If the directors' -- truly going to take full responsibility, I think your opening statement and the goals you have should also talk about leadership. Because as I talked to the whistle-blowers at the Secret Service and others, they're concerned about leadership.

I'm also concerned about training. As I look at the 2015 budget request from the White House, on page 39 there's a basic class totals. And I want to run through these numbers because it's important on the training aspect.

Under special agent basic classes in 2009, there were eight classes. In 2010, there were eight classes. In 2011, there were five classes. Two thousand twelve, there were no classes. In 2013 there was one class. In the uniform division basic class, 2009, 11. Two thousand ten, there were 11 classes. Two thousand -- sorry, 2010, 11 classes. In 2011 there were six classes. Then in 2012, there was one class. Two thousand thirteen, one class.

And you look at the budget line appropriation for this, it didn't go down. It was -- it's maintained basically the same. Why did that training diminish?

And then finally, Mr. Chairman, I worry about protocol. Again, I mentioned tremendous restraint is what the -- what the Secret Service touted. That's not the objective. If you project weakness, it invites attacks.

We want to see overwhelming force. If a would-be intruder cannot stopped by a dog or intercepted by a person, perhaps more lethal force is necessary. And I want those Secret Service agents and officers to know at least this member of Congress has their back.

Don't let somebody get close to the president. Don't let somebody get close to his family. Don't let them get into the White House ever. And if they have to take action that's lethal, I will have their back.

In this day and age of ISIL, and terrorists, and I -- IEDs, and dirty bombs, we don't know what's going on underneath that person's clothing. If they want to penetrate that, they need to know that they are going to perhaps be killed. That's the message we should be sending every single time, and that's the kind of Secret Service that I expect.

I thank them again for their -- their service, their dedication. We love them. We care for them. But we need better leadership. It's not happening. I yield back.

ISSA: Thank the gentleman.

We now recognize the gentlelady from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, for her opening statement.

DEL. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, (D), DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for this hearing.

My respect for the civil -- for the Secret Service goes back to when I was growing up as a child in the District of Columbia and continues profoundly to this very day.

But today we must ask, recent events call for and -- recent unprecedented events call for an unprecedent -- unprecedented response.

First, an increasing number of White House jumpers, including the most recent this month, was able to get deep into the interior of the White House. Before that in 2011, multiple shots into the living quarters of the first family discovered only four days later not by Secret Service investigation, but by White House staff.

Beyond these failures, in the core mission of the -- of the Secret Service to protect the White House and the first family is an unsettling failure to disclose, perhaps even understand, what has occurred or to promptly investigate.

Together, this combination of failures suggest strongly that the time is ripe for a 21st-century makeover of the Secret Service. I do not regard this matter as a mere question of personnel. I believe it goes far deeper than that.

Moreover, the stunning events have occurred during a period when the United States, and by definition, the White House and even the president, are being targeted by domestic and international terrorists. According to threat assessments, this president has had three times as many threats as his predecessors.

Just as troubling have been indications of unwarranted secrecy in the Secret Service. The Secret Service is not a secret society. If there is a willing avoidance of needed transparency, that in itself poses a danger to the White House.

For example, when noise is heard that some believe could be gunfire at the White House, others believe is automobile backfire, and still others believe is gun -- gun -- dang (ph) gun fire, isn't it the job of the Secret Service to presume -- presume -- such a sound is gunfire until an immediate investigation shows it was not?

When line officers close to the sound have to become whistle-blowers has active suppression of information become yet another threat to the White House?