Hearing of the House Judiciary Committee - Oversight Hearing on the Federal Bureau of Investigation

Interview

Hearing of the House Judiciary Committee - Oversight Hearing on the Federal Bureau of Investigation

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPTS

REP. HANK JOHNSON (D-GA): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Director Mueller, it's good to have you here today.

Jose Padilla, a United States citizen, was seized in Chicago on a material witness warrant and moved to the Navy brig in South Carolina, where he was held in solitary confinement, denied access to an attorney and subjected to a host of harsh interrogation techniques, including days of sleep interrogation, during which time the Department of Justice defended his detention before various courts. He's also alleged that he was subjected to mind-altering drugs.

Now, the FBI did participate in the interrogation of Mr. Padilla, did it not?

MR. MUELLER: Yes.

REP. JOHNSON: And you were kept informed about the nature and the results of the interrogation, is that correct?

MR. MUELLER: Me personally?

REP. JOHNSON: Yes

MR. MUELLER: No.

REP. JOHNSON: Did you --

MR. MUELLER: Not specifically. I mean, I may have been upon occasion informed that he was being interrogated. I don't think I was informed of what information had come out of him.

REP. JOHNSON: Did you know that he was being subjected to days on end of sleep and sensory deprivation?

MR. MUELLER: No, and I'm not certain that I understand the question. But by answering the question, I'm not -- I don't mean to affirm that that is exactly what happened.

REP. JOHNSON: Well, let me --

MR. MUELLER: I'm not certain that --

REP. JOHNSON: Let me restate the question.

You've testified that you were aware that the FBI participated in his interrogation and that while you were not directly informed about the nature and the results of the interrogation that you may have had some discussions about it. Is that correct?

MR. MUELLER: I know he was at a brig in South Carolina. I knew that he was probably being interrogated. The specifics of it I did not know.

REP. JOHNSON: You did not know anything about the sleep deprivation? You were not informed about that?

MR. MUELLER: I did not know.

REP. JOHNSON: You were not informed of any use of mind-altering drugs?

MR. MUELLER: No. And again, Congressman, I'm not certain that that is accurate. I know Mr. Padilla was charged and convicted in court in Florida, if I'm not mistaken. And many of the assertions and allegations were raised in the course of that prosecution.

But I do believe he was successfully prosecuted and was recently sentenced.

REP. JOHNSON: I'm aware.

Did you ever express any disagreement with the policies surrounding the detention and interrogation of Mr. Padilla?

MR. MUELLER: No, but again, I go back to -- I did -- the specifics in which you alluded, I was not aware of.

REP. JOHNSON: Thank you.

In your Senate testimony, sir, you admitted that the FBI is no longer vigorously fighting white-collar crime and drug cases. For example, you mentioned that 800 agents have been shifted off of fighting white-collar crime, and 2,000 cases are not being done as a result. And you also mention that 900 agents were shifted off of drug cases.

With violent crimes on the rise, what else besides money do you need to pump up our internal crime-fighting capability?

MR. MUELLER: Let me clarify one thing. What I said was that we shifted 800 agents, I believe it was, from smaller white-collar criminal cases, and that, generally, those are cases under a certain dollar amount which we could not handle.

We quite clearly have addressed the Enrons, the WorldComs, the (BellSouth ?), the larger white-collar criminal cases, as we are addressing the subprime mortgage cases. But we have to prioritize.

We did shift 900 agents from doing narcotics cases over to national security. To backfill, you will quite obviously need the agents, almost 2,000 agents, to backfill those that have been moved over. But it also takes the infrastructure, the training facilities, the information technology, the associated intelligence analysts that go with building up that capacity on the criminal side of the house.

REP. JOHNSON: So have those potential capabilities been requested, those assets --

MR. MUELLER: Over the years, we've requested additional resources. And in many cases, we have gotten those resources. But generally, they've been -- they have been accorded on the national security side of the house.

REP. JOHNSON: What performance measures does the FBI have to assess its progress in implementing its counterterrorism policy and the effects of this priority on its traditional law enforcement crime- fighting mission?

MR. MUELLER: In terms of -- we look at a number of metrics when it comes to counterterrorism. The most obvious metric is the stopping of any terrorist attacks. The -- but also, the number of individuals that are under investigation; the number of cells that may have been disrupted, although it may not be public; the number of agents and analysts and the caseload they have. Most important is our work with our counterparts on the joint terrorism task forces, how those joint terrorism task forces are doing, the contributions of state and local to those task forces; as well as overseas, our relationships with our overseas counterparts, whether it be in Denmark or Germany or the U.K. or Spain or places like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, all of which contribute to our ability to protect the country from additional terrorist attacks.

We look at the number of IIRs, intelligence information reports, that we disseminate on a daily, weekly, monthly basis to the rest of the intelligence community; our participation in the National Counterterrorism Center, to the extent that we have analysts participating in that. Those are just to mention a few of the metrics that we look at in terms of our war against terrorism.

REP. JOHNSON: Thank you, Director Mueller.

And my time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source