Others physically present in the room for guidance from the office of attending physician, masks must be worn at all times during todays proceedings except for the member or witnesses speaking, please also sanitize yourss seating area we use these chairs as a safety issue in an important matter of order and quorum for this proceeding. For members participating remotely, keep your video function on all times, when you are not recognized by the chai. Members are responsible for mutating and on muting themselves and please remember to meet yourself after you finish speaking. Consistent with House Resolution 965 in the accompaniedr regulation, staff only mute members and witnesses as appropriate when they are not under recognition to eliminate background noise. I see that we have a quorum and i now recognize myself for opening remarks, let me welcome or witnesses as i let the Ranking Member know, ill be going considerably longer than the customary five minutes by my this morning and ill yield to the same amount ofn tie that i consume. Go overo have a lot to before we hear from our witnesses. On the evening ofsi may 15, friday, president notified g Speaker Pelosi as the state Department Inspector general steve linick, the law requires 30 day notice to fire an ig but mr. Lennix last day was technically june 14. The president and the secretary violated the spirit of the law by immediately placing him on leave and locking him out of his office and his email. In the days of follow both the president and secretary pompeo wede clear that the firing came of mr. Pompeo was urgent. I predict today we may hear the refrain repeated that the president has the power to fire and Inspector General whenever he wants to so long as he provides the reasons for the firing to congress. No one is doubting that i dont think in the last four months i have heard anyone say otherwise. The president has that power. But we seen again and again, in the last four years president shows very little reluctance to abuses power. When mr. Linick was removed, the president had been under a firing spree of Inspector General, the executive branch independent watchdog who helped provide accountability and transparency in our government. With that in mind and the need of information to provide to the committee that mr. Linick firing may have been retaliatory in nature, again, something that would represent an abuse of power, the committee launched an investigation into mr. Linick removal and long with oversight reform, the Senate ForeignRelations Committee minority office. While the state department has refused today to produce any oft the record records and we requed related to the firing witnesses have come forward and give us good detail in context. Reports in the press have shared more light on the matter. Heres what we know, mr. Lynn expiring was not as per of the moment decision while mr. Linick was told on may 15 that he was being pushed out his temporary replacement steve acord hegarty been lined up for a month or more in his affidavit to the committee he said mr. Contacted him on april 9 or april 15 saying that mr. Linick was imminent and asking him if he would assume that id responsibility on acting basis. Over the next few weeks mr. Villano in accord spokeas several times included on may 14 and may 16th with mr. Linick removal going forward. We know that the time mr. Linick was fired in his office was conducting two investigations involving secretary pompeos conduct. The first was allegations ofta e secretary misuse Government Resources for their own personal benefit. According to mr. Linick testimony, his team reached out for the office of o the secretay requesting documents in late 2019. Mr. Linick said that at the same timeed and he spoke to other senior officials to let them know he was seeking information in his words his aim was to not surprise the seventh floor, meaning the Department Leadership with news of his probe. Mr. Linick said his office i context eight department executives, secretary lisa about the matter as well. Indeed lisa in her interview with the committee testified in march this year that yg requested documents related to the pompeo travel. Like mr. Winick the Senior Department officials again among the mr. Villano and also mr. Strain. Ms. Ken also stated that every time there is an invitation to mrs. Pompeo that involves travel i get into the undersecretary for management and he makes the determination. The secretaryl, management the. Ms. Ken authorizes to search for the documents but mr. Linick was far before they were turned over to the id. The documents were only sent after ambassador had taken over the igs office. We presume the orgies work on the matter ongoing so we dont know all the details and reports have also alleged that secretary mrs. Pompeo use Government Employees to handle personal errands. Me ms. Tony porter advisor to the secretary, told us an interview the secretary mrs. Pompeo who is not a state Department Employee also had ms. Porter work on it special interest to the secretary which includes making dinner reservations and helping with the pompeos personal christmas card. According to the email traffic including mrs. Pompeo, mrs. Porter and ms. Kenna indicating ms. Pompeo ms. Kenna both understood in assignment to ms. Porter to be of a personal nature to keep the tight circle of Government Employees who worked on these matters, the committee has a large number of complaints to the oig hotline that the secretary mrs. Pompeo were misusing the Department Resources with unofficial matters. This alleged misuse of resources is not just a personal aaron it seems to be focused on the appeal political future. Specifically question a madison dinner a series of dinners the pompeos have posted from the state department on the eighth floor, mr. Porter testified that if pompeo conceived as a way to expand the understanding of state department work. The only problem with explanation is extensive planning and from the state department attending them. The secretary is only department officialin who attends the dinns and no senior diplomats or experts and none of the people on a daytoday basis carry out state department work. Just as secretary of token foreign dignitary requirement in the state department to pay for the dinner and a dozen or so guest picked by the pompeos nearly all republican officials were people tied somehow directly in politics, money orr media. This testimony suggest that the foreign dignity was about the exercise, the Protocol Office with some at times a swapout dignitary for another although the pompeos kept a tight grip on the political side on the guest list, mr. Porter also stated the pompeos began to host the dinners with the daytoday to keep track of all the people and invited the email addresses, mailing addresses, mr. Porter worked for the pompeos for decades involves planning the former congressmans fundraisers and Quality Management tool. While its understandable that the state departmentg Protocol Team to keep track of who was invited to an official event, mrs. Pompeo also had the list sent to her private email address according to mrs. Porter. System thoughtal something more like a political contact tool. These were reportedly paid for out of the state department socalled k fund which can be used for confidential requirements in a foreign affair as well as other authorized activities which further the realization of u. S. Foreign policy objective. This is overseen undersecretary villano. I asked my staff to review the most recent classified reports to congress which was sent a package with classified material and held. That raised an eyebrow to among people who understand state department budget. The pompeos have reportedly hosted about 20 of these dinners and after a hiatus brought on by the covid pandemic they restarted on monday the three more reported in the next few weeks. The Second Department may 2019 use with any emergency provision of the arms expert control act posted more than a billion dollars in arms sales to both countries, the oig finished its work on the matter and reported lastst month. [silence] theres a lot to unpack and its important that we lay it all out. In march of 2015, they launched intervention into the civil war in yemen aimed at countering their rating and back forces that seize control of humans capital. The Obama Administration initially supported the effort with the Logistical Support of partners in the goal state is very Real Security challenges that threaten freedom of navigation in u. S. Troops stationed in the middle east. Over time, it became increasingly clear that the saudis were acting recklessly in the way they were carrying out the campaign with u. S. Weapons. Civilian casualties amounted, humanitarian crisis began burning out of control, the Obama Administration pushed forward on the sale of american weapons to the saudis and their partners. The President Trump took office in early priority of his administration to get the flow of weapons going again and concerned about civilian casualties has not gone away and both sides of the aisle, myself included began putting holds on sales of the most lethal weapons using this war. Most notably sel notified in april 2018 for 120,000 with decision guided, sometimes called smart bombs, Congress Passed legislation requiring the certification of the administration that the saudis were taken adequate steps to reduce the civilian casualties, on august 9, 2018 the saudis Left Coalition blew up the school bus killing more than 25 children and injuring scores more just over a month later, secretary pompeo certified to congress that the saudi and they were undertaking action to reduce the risk of civilians. Congress did not buy it in the hold on the weapon sales remain in place for nearly nine more months of the carnage went on in yemen. They fought until last december and is told us in his interview the congress is concerned about civilian casualties being legitimate. He said many state to permit officials shared the same concerns. How could you not, weer seen all the images, collapsed buildings, mangled bodies, starving children. We in congress challenge administration to provide assurance that the u. S. Weapons would not be used to kill civilians or destroy civilian infrastructure but secretary pompeo wanted a differently forwards after all mr. Faulkner told us they had lots of weapon sales was a major party in the white house. Mr. Pompeo had to be broken in april 2019 and mr. String told mr. Faulkner he told a way to do it, tell the world the sky was falling. Under the arms of the control act and the administration can bypass the normal congressional approval process by declaring an emergency. Mr. Faulkner testified that he was worried about what impact such an action would have on the departments relation of capitol hill. After all senator menendez is in my concern about the civilian casualty had not diminished, nevertheless on may 24, 2019 the state department notified congress that the administration was declaring an emergency and therefore moving forward with 22 arms sales and packages mostly saudi arabia and the uae. As i noticed earlier, the emergency provision exist and will law in the executive branch of the power to invoke their authority. To my knowledge, no one has dsuggested otherwise despite soe of the things that weti heard fm the state department but the question since last may n has bn a secretary pompeo abuse the power when he declared an emergency it was the emergency phony in the pretext of congressional oversight. Those questions are members of this committee in june of last you to look into that decision, the findings of that probe are eyeopening, the oig found consistent with what i just said that the Emergency Declaration did not violate the letter of the law, thats because congres did not define the term emergency. Leaving it up to aon normal Administration Common sense but explicitlyo stated that it did not assess whether there was a real emergency underline that declaration. Frankly they did not need to make that assessment, the facts speak for themselves. Excuse me. The unclassified portion of the report lays out a timeline for the Emergency Declaration in mrt took nearly two months april 3 may 29 aprimay 29, 2019 to makey through the state department seven weeks. In the 30 day congressional review. Under the normal notification process codified in the law. The board also tells usw underneath reactions that the department insisted the oig slap on top released to the public that mr. Pompeo determined on may 4 that he wanted to send the Emergency Notification to congress no later than may 24. An emergency that you can plan for seven weeks in advance is not an emergency, as far as im concerned especially when the regular process wouldve taken less time, i have to note that mr. Cooper testified before this Committee Last year that the emergency required extraordinary action in that may 23, 2019 when mr. Pompeo briefed congress in may 24, 2019 when the declaration was transmitted to us, that testimony was full. The photo indicates that most of the armed packages have not been delivered yet and likely wont be during the calendar year. Again what kind of work time emergency can be addressed that weapons arrived two years later and the answer is obviously none. There was no emergency, Ranking Member mccall and i offered an amendment to last years ndaa that was better to find the word emergency, in my view the department pulled together to get around congress is a secondary threat. Yes i believe it was an abuse of power and affront to our system of checks and balances, i believe the department made false representation to this committee but what is is really about, many of us here in congress sold the situation on the ground in yemen and said enough, we thought that before we shift instruments of death oversee an adequate proportion should be in place to ensure those instruments were not being used to Blowup School buses or funeral procession, we did not want the United States to be slaughtering innocence, Mike Pompeo State Department did not see it thated way. His viewers summed up in a sentence from the oig report and i quote, oig found the department and fully assessed risk to implement litigation records for casualty and concerns associated with the transfer ofig pdm including in e secretaries may 2019 emergency certification. Did not assess the risk, did not try to reduce civilian casualties, did not deal with legal concern, this is not describing the saudis or a riot, is describing her own state department under the Trump Administration and under mike pompeo. Think about the funding and the brighter context that i laid out, ask yourself why did they not do those things. Was it an oversight . In the mad rush to get weapons out the door after mr. Pompeo made the Emergency Declaration, did those questions fall by thea wayside, the answer is of course not, the emergency was declared specifically so the state department could avoid answering those questions, how did we know that, those of the precise questions congress was already asking, thats why we held up the arms sales, what are the risks, what are we doing toel reduce civilian death. This is a deeply damning report, now that we seen at the findings of our own investigation into the id firing make more sense, mainly the state Department Officials have been trying for months to suppress the findings, and his testimony mineral enter mr. Linick said mr. Bilotta mr. String attempted toin bullyg him saying the oig should not look into thissa matter. It was a policy decision outside the oig purview, of course its an entirely legitimate for 90 to examine policy implementation for mr. Linick testimony mr. Bilotta seem not to understand the role of independent id. As also quite noteworthy that secretary pompeo refused to be interviewed for the oig review, mr. Linick stated last year, he approached mr. Bilotta, mr. String and deputy secretary vegan about scheduling the interview,. Secretaries team sad they conduct the interview personally and mr. Linick told mr. String that he was amenable to the idea so long as one other member of the oig staff could be present as a witness, the secretary team apparently ignoreden the request and said o mr. Pompeo he was never interviewed by mr. Linick, instead he provided the oig with a written statement that it had never requested, when the pandemic hit in march and the oig was wrapping up its work on this matter mr. Linette considered the issue unresolved and hope to find some time in the future to express the interview to the secretary which he continued to discuss with mrn accommodation mr. Linick was fired and everything mr. Linick said suggested that he considered anat interview with t piece of unfinished business. Mr. Linick temporary replacement mr. Amo akard that he was partr interested in the report according to akard affidavit during his first two weeks on the job both deputy secretary vegan and mr. Bulatao called him expressing mr. Pompeos arms sales would be done. Akard recused himself in the process and from the probe into the misuse of resources, that was sent to mr. Akard in addition to Services ActingInspector General. He retained his role in the state department as the director of the office of foreign missions. In which he s rea reported to mr. Bulatao when secretary pompeo, its easy to see how this would affect his work. Akard began an investigation into a matter of the secretary did not want reviewed akards and the state department could potentially suffer. Our role on this report a little month ago is also now shrouded in controversy. The evening before the oig released a report, it was a background briefing of the press on the reports findings but it was not the oig that held this briefing, is a bureau of Political Military Affairs, specifically mr. Cooper under the Senior State Department cofficial, they sold the page right out of attorney general bill bars playbook the report was not public and the press did not have copies and neither did the congress, nevertheless mr. R of the report but was himself interviewed as a fact witness in the probe tried to spin the media with this most interpretations of the events, the state department tried to take an early victory lap because oig found that they did not technically break the law and the reminiscent of attorneyt general barr going out and saying the Mueller Report exonerated the president. In the next day the unclassified version of the report was released to the public with a number of key reactions. The public version of the report hid the timeline that undercuts the department to claim of an k emergency. In theheac public version the timeline only runs from may 21 when mr. Pompeo briefed congress from may 24 from the emergency certification was sent to congress, he did not know the date stretching back to early april when the Emergency Authority was first to consider other reductions hid the fact that few of the weapons, the time of the oig review has been delivered, the oig has since divided the memoranda showing it was mr. Cooper himself who demanded the reduction working in consultation with mr. Joshua dorset, the deputy and mr. Strings office to reiterate they were all interviewed by oag as witnesses in this manner, in fact he was sent by the Department Early in this investigation and tried to convince my office not to push the documents of witnesses in this matter withoutn disclosing that he was a witness himself, the fact that none of them recused themselves in dealing with the oig w report before it was released is baffling in the labs, finally on the arms sales matter, where the question of the classified annex, a considerable chunk of the oig founded in recommendation are hidden in a classified section with about 40 of that section is also hidden under redaction and not even members of congress are permitted to see behind and again, mr. Cooper decided that members of the coequal branch of government that this committee was authorized and oversee state department should notmb have access to the oig finding, and boggles your mind. To recap, we have to oigs investigations and a potentially and embarrassing for mr. Pompeo in march of 2019 both of these probes are ramping up getting closer and closer to the secretary and the top advisors and then in april mr. Bulataoos tells mr. Akard the steve linick days at idr number, after a few weeks of backandforth with the white house mr. Linick gives outcome in the aftermath mr. Pompeo pushes mr. Pompeos replacement to find out when the arms sales court is going to be ready and when ms. Porter is contacted byfi the id to sit for an interview dealing with misuse of resources, mr. Bulatao assures her that there is no need to rush to get on the calendar. Nowl secretary pompeo and mr. Bulataos version r of why mr. Linick was fired centers on how the daily beast obtained information about a draft oig report dealing with illegal personal practices by brian hook, and other highranking state Department Political appointee. After the article ran senior Department Leadership wanted an investigation into the lead including the possibility that the draft report leaked from the yg. In the reporting and the press was all accurate, the ig did find that mr. Hook engaged in prohibited personal practices discriminated against a career employee, he was not disciplined by secretary pompeo or undersecretary for management bulatao, he was still at the department with press reports that he was leaving. Mr. Bulatao has claimed that mr. Linick did not do what he promised. Which is mainly to chase down. His testimony directly contradicts that imprecise detail. Mr. Bulatao is reporting to the fact that mr. Linick did not turn over the complete findings of the police investigation, the findings include mr. Lincolns office, and still to contrast that as well saying he was concerned that members of the oig staff made in the reportrem were faced with retaliation and guess what, citizen state department finally got hold of that report, they leaked into the daily car, mr. Linick was no dummy, we will get into more of that later but mr. Bulatao i consider the version of events in yourhbu june 1 letter are misleading and i urge you to think long and hard repeating those claims here on the record. And ultimately will be up to the American People to decide which version of events is more credible. Did mr. Pompeo fire his Agency Watchdog because of the way he handled the investigation into unproven allegations of a leak in the oig or did mr. Pompeo fire him because he was getting closer and closer to matters that were embarrassing and mr. Pompeo and his family matter that implicated the state department in the scheme to bypass congress and lethal weapons that might be used for war t crime. For me the ig firing fits into something much kindred. Everything we are looking at, the arms sales, the misuse of resources, firing of the ig followed by the effort to smear him , excruciating process obtained by the state department, cooperate with the investigation, with this investigation and the constantly shifting can conditions inside letters explained to congress how we should conduct oversight, the attacksat on myself and my staff,co the lies mr. Bulatao didnt refuse to hear for you for four months that you would not take yes for an answer, first he wanted to brief us, this is an investigation not a policy concern, we dated information on a formal sitting on the record then we had you scheduled to be here inn july, deputy me the last minute despite the claims i refuse to speak to him. When we tried to reschedule you move the goalpost with new conditions. We had to drop a request for all the other witness under witnesses and have a joint hearing with oversight committee, we could only hear for you for two hours. What this is all about is that you and secretary pompeo think you should be able to do whatever you want and not face accountability or scrutiny of any kind, congress is blocking weapons sales to find a another way round and ideas look at how secretary spends taxpayers money, fire him. The court shows that we have a phony emergency and did not do her Due Diligence to prevent civilians of being killed, covered up, spin and hide into classified annex, react, react, react. Foreign Affairs Committee is investigating, cancel debriefing, call them names, tell them we know better. And you pat yourself on the back that you technically follow the process laid out in the law and many children die which is scheme to make it run around in congress and it was not illegal strictly speaking, congratulations. The highest levels of the state department fundamental misunderstanding as far as im concerned is the way our government is supposed to work. The way Public Service is supposed to work, it explains why mr. Pompeo is potentially facing contempt in this body in which used to serve, i hope we will find a way to avoid that but will have to sue happens. Everyones indulgence, his cup located matters in theth more important members watching understand that all timelines, we have a lot more to cover, i will soon recognize our witnesses for five minutes each for an Opening Statement pending which ill yield her Ranking Member mr. Mccall for as much time as he would like to use. Pgh thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you secretary and secretary cooper and advisor string for your presence and before addressing the substance ofnt todays hearing, i would be remiss if i did not take this opportunity with senior state Department Officials here today to acknowledge that yesterday for the first time in 25 years israel established diplomatic relations with two arab countries, i have the honor to be in attendance yesterday at the white house whenn these historic Abraham Accords were signed, in my opinion this is a game changer for the middle east, its a bad day for iran and it would not have occurred for the extensive the bull medic engagement of this administration. So congratulations for this historic accomplishment, the news of Inspector General and expiring did come as a surprise in Inspector General are an essential tool in helping congress execute his constitutional oversight of the executive branch, any time one is terminated and naturally will raise questions, however, Inspector General like other officers in the executive branch as the chairman stated, do serve as the pleasure of the president. I also want to emphasize that a teampector general has in their investigative work continues even after removal, while i believe the president can comply with the law the president , from previous demonstrations in the determination of mr. Linick, some questions surrounding his removal remain, bathrobe or having the hearing today. I am pleased that all three of your here to shed more light to the public on the president s decision and i do think itll be revealing and i think will understand it better, its important to note that this is not the first Action Congress has taken regarding this matter, over the course of this year the committee has conducted multiple interviews with current and former state Department Personnel spoken to acting Inspector General conducting an interview with mr. Linick himself, my hope is with todays hearing that the key witnesses can answer any outstanding questions so we can put this matter behind us and turn our attention to the pressing matters that we have before us ngior to the end of this congress. I want to thank the witnesses for their service to the state department and to t the nation d to its employees around the world. And i will say forme the member, there will be a classified briefing after this hearing and just given the information i received, i believe itll be very insightful to the members. Insightful for the reasons that were taken by the president and firing mr. Linick, especially as it pertains to National Security and with that mr. Termini yield back. [silence] pursuant to notice the committee is convened today to hear testimony on why the president fired the Inspector General. Our witnesses this morning are the honorable brian bullet tell sorry if i mispronounced her name, under secretary of state for management. Mr. Mark string, the acting state Department Legal advisor and the honorable cooper assistant secretary of state with Political Military Affairs. Asri a manner on this committeee dont swear in witnesses but obviously you are all acquired by law to answer questions from congress truthfully. Without objection, your complete written testimony will be made part of the record of this hearing and i recognize you for five minutes each to summarize her testimony. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member mccall and distinguished members of the committee, i appear here today on the matter of great importance and great interest to both the committee into the department of state, that is a Critical RoleInspector Generals have in reviewing and promoting the efficiency and the effectiveness of the operations of the executive branch. Particularly the department of tate, with your approval i like to submit a written statement for the record and ill try to keep my remarks as brief as possible. Let me start by saying i have the privilege of working with many Inspector Generals over the last 30 plus years. Starting with my service as an infantry officer in the United States army, continuing in my role as the chief operating officer of the Central Intelligence agency and currently now my capacity as secretary of state for management. Through these experiences i have gained firsthandof appreciation for the Critical Role that id plays in the executive branch and an effective ig illuminates. They shine the light on the areas that we need to improve preventing, detecting waste, fraud and abuse so we can collectively achieve outstanding results, we rely on the role of the ig to serve as a catalyst for effective management and internal control especially given the scope and operation in every part of the globe. Unfortunately steve linick did not fulfilly this role, his failures were substantial and numerous and fell into three broad categories. Failure to execute on the mission of the ig, failure to take care of the ig team, and failure to lead with integrity. Let me expand upon each of those, let me talk about failure to execute on the ig, they go t. The ig website youll see what their mission is thats to conduct audits, inspections and investigations, first mr. Linick failed to complete the fiscal year 19 audit of the state Department Financial statement in a timely manner as required by laws passed by congress. The Agency Financial report are a key accountability document and principal board to the president , congress into the murky people to disclose their financial status regarding the assets and resources that youve entrusted to us. If we fail to get the audit right, im not sure how effective we can be an identifying waste fraud and abuse, many that are been in the private sector no if we dont get audits right, then we have a big red flag going on. Second, why did we miss her critical deadline. The ig, mr. Linick failed to select the independent auditor in the spring of 2019. The one selected by the Technical Evaluation panel lacked the experience and the skill to complete the audit so the department had no choice but to remove the lead auditor and restart the annual auditor, theres a risk that we would have no t opinion done by the te it was over. Third, why were we in a position of selecting a new auditor, the independent auditor from the Previous Year that was directly supervised by the ig had to be replaced due to a critical and deeply disturbing failure which requires a classified settings more fully explained. The investigative report that dealt with this failing in august of 17 noted the following, i quote, oversight by the oig was demonstrably ineffective, ultimately placing the Department Information as well as the reputation with capital and operation of the considerable unnecessary risk. So just on this core of conducting independent audit, we have an ineffectiveness for oversight, we had a failure to select the audit and failed to get it in in a timely matter under manner. One out of a hundred plus agencies are to do their financials to omb. Lets look at the second inspections, the total number of id inspections at the overseas post decreased by approximately 10 yearoveryear for the 12 months ended march of 2019, this was all precovered. Lets look at the third mission, investigation, the pull number of preliminary inquiries close, declined, it means we opened it, the ideas reviewing it and they have been able to close it, the total number of preliminary inquiries declined by 27 , year over year ending march 2020. So again not precovered. There is a significant performance issue, let me move to the second broad category that i mentioned, failure to take care of the ig team, first there was a major red flag in the oig department 2019 an annual Employee Viewpoint surv survey, the secretary made a big push to increase our Response Rate and we doubled the total number of responses to that survey from 2017, we have the highest Response Rate in many, many years. Over half of our 38 assistant secretary led bureaus improved or maintain that all three categories yearoveryear. The me make sure you understand xhat those three words are employee engagement, Employee Satisfaction and diversity inclusion. So over half of our 38 improved and all three of those categories, many improved in at least two of those categories or one. There was one out of the 38 bureaus led by the assistant secretary by the same time. Yearoveryear that declined in all three of those categories. That was the office of oig. What is more concerning to me when i t focus in on the satisfaction index which let me tell you what that means, this is the willingness and measures the willingness to recommend the organization is a good place too work. The igs Office Experienced doubledigit decline since 2016, we got a problem, that starts with leadership. Second the failure in leadership resulting in vacancies including the deputy id, the general counsel and it does not surprise me seeing whatci the results of the fed survey, thats a negative trend and folks willingness to recommend that ig is a place to work, no supplies it took a long time before the number two position in a bacon for 12 months. Third the oig failed to provide status on training on the fundamental values of diversity and inclusion so the one team theme we talk about professionalism, integrity, responsibility and affect the og responded, these are not our core values. And again, does not surprise me when i look in specific axis ofe the employee survey, i highlight these three, one question, employees, ig employees are protected from health and safety hazards on the job, the negatives or the neutral responses were 24 worse from the igs and theds department at large. Another question, my organization has prepared employees for potential security threat. 40 of the igs workforce answered negatively or neutral to the question, 40 , the state department we had about 10 negative or neutral, thats a significant redline for me. Is important, id answered with 42 worse with the state department at large. Again there is a leadership challenge, here int the ig, let me hit my third this is the failure to lead with integrity and one that is very concerned, first the ig failed to leak a draft id report in september 2019 to the council of Inspector General on integrity and efficiency, ill call it the Integrity Council, as he was directed to buy the department and instead he hand selected his own investigator, this is a dod ig without informing the department, the deputy secretary informed clinic very clearly that if he encountered any issues with referring this in writing to the integrity committee, the allegations of wrongdoing by him or by his designated Staff Members to properly inform him of any issues, that never happened. Second, he then repeatedly refused to share this report with the department, the report is under the general supervision of the secretary of state by law and is not above accountability, the ig would help the do gid report from the department ofte leadership and as far as we know ig team. E despite there being numerous requests calling into question to see this report. The ig testimony suggest that we never asked for a copy, this is just plain false, third in disturbing the dod report found the email highly sensitive draft report to his personal account on multiple occasions, im not talking about two or three times, talking about eight times in the month of august which is a clear violation of the oigs own it policy, those millions to his personal account were within weeks of the draft report being leaked to the media. This may explain why he refused to provide the report to the department, ig lytic also admitted to speaking to t t. Mr. Quinn find the Principal Deputy and actually mr. Will find is the one that was selected by the ig to conduct the investigation. Nobody recused himself from that. That is a major issue in a major conflict of interest in my mind. Fourth an apparent attempt to shift the blame, ig linick opened his own investigation of the department for the very same issue that we asked him to refer council. Tegrity even though the leak that was in the media was attributed to two government sources involving carrying out the investigation, way anybody in the state department that touches on report, we are going to look at them just as much, everybody needed to be looked at, virtually the id decided to look at ourtire folks just as he wast acting the Integrity Council to look at his team, fifth upon removal he was instructed not to return to his office or to contact his employees without prior authorization, we understand that he violated this instruction and sought access to work product after the removal. Let me conclude, the ig removal was not about retaliation on any specific report or investigation, there have been a variety of unsubstantiated allegations in the media but the secretary recommended removal of the ig because of the awareness of the investigations, nothing can be further from the truth, the deputy secretary of state has issued a letter making clear that secretary pompeo was never briefed on the deputy secretary, the former i deputy secretary ad myself undersecretary management or the executive secretary under any investigation obligation of misuse of Government Resources, this is unequivocally without any factual basis or truth. The committee has fought hours of depositions from her servants with the vast majority of time was spent on issues unrelated to the removal of the Inspector General all three staffers stated multiple times they had no information regarding the removal and all three stated they only found out about after toe removal occurred. Let me just say this removal was about an ig of whom in my mind was increasingly falling short of expectations, ig linick performance failed across all three areas, they failed to deliver and execute on the core ig mission and failed to take care of his ig team and failed to lead with integrity. The ig failure to perform in just one of the critical areas is sufficient to trigger major loss of confidence. The department deserves an ig that illuminates, not denigrates, the department deserves an ig that promotes our shared values, not the moats them, i look forward to your questions on why the recommendational was made for te removal of the ig. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, i apologize for butchering your name before. Okay mr. String. Mr. Chairman andr Ranking Member and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to appear today. The committee initially requested my testimony in connection with my prior position of Deputy Assistant secretary of Political Military Affairs bureau which i left 16 months ago, i understand the Committee Members may also ask questions today related to my current role as acting Legal Advisor for the department, i will do my best to address your questions based on my best recollection consistent with my professional obligations as an attorney and respect for the attorneyclient privilege. The decision to remove a sitting Inspector General is committed exclusively to the president. We have provided the committee with a letter from the office of white house counsel, that describes other president s decision in the case of mr. Linick was consistent with the requirements of the constitution and the federal law as recognized by the u. S. Court of appeals for the District Of Columbia circuit. As a letter notes, President Trumpst notices to congress use language similar to that used by former president obama when he removed Inspector General noting that he no longer had the fullest confidence in his ability to serve as Inspector General. In connection with todays hearing the committee has raised issues related to the secretary may 2019 Emergency Notification. I would like to touch briefly on the notification as well. First, the department fully cooperated with the office of Inspector General review of the secretary Emergency Notification. The oig interviewed 46 Department Staff and receive a significant numberti of documens as requested, the department did not stand in the way of the conclusion of the oig report which ultimately concluded that the emergency certification was properly executed. , in fact we facilitated its completion. Second, as the department explained in his letter to the committee in june 2019, my designation as acting Legal Advisor had to my knowledge no connection to the secretary decision to exercise his emergency authorities under the arms export control act. The designation was set in motion more than a monthau befoe this time when the Legal Advisor announced her departure in apr april, as i recall the office of the Legal Advisor develop thede legal advice through the career attorneys in the Legal Advisor in advance of my transition to the office. I was expected to serve ass a bridge between the former Legal Advisor in the confirmation of a new Legal Advisor based on my significant relevant experience and understanding of the functioning of the office of the Legal Advisor. Leading that team of talented lawyers over the past 16 months has been a distinct honor and privilege and i appreciate their professionalism and commitment to serving our nation especially during these extraordinary times. Thank you again for inviting me too testify today, i look forward to taking your questio questions. Thank you, mr. Cooper. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member mccaul, members of the house foreign Affairs Committee, the topic of todays why did they fire the Inspector General i will provide you the most comprehensive and honest answer i have, i do not know, with that i would like to turn the matters to substance and im glad to have the opportunity to apprise you of the status of our efforts to support or Security Cooperation partners in the middle east. Two weeks after i took office in may 2019, secretary pompeo, certified to you an emergency existed requiring the sale of certain defense articles and services to saudi arabia, the united arab and rent in jordan,d and the days following the certification i sat before your committee and testified that a combination of factors led the secretary to determine the situation constituted an emergency and prompted him to make certification. Including the significant increase in intelligence reporting on threat streams related to iran, the clear provocative and damaging actions taken by o irans government and the need to affirmatively respond to military capability request from our partners as such, any response i provided members, questions during the 2019 hearing including representative 11 must be understood in the contents of my Opening Statement and statement for the record as well as my complete testimony before congress all of which are part of Public Record instantly available on the extended version of cspan or the fullhi version of cspan. Events sent that time serve only to magnify the challenge iran poses to the region and demonstrate the administration is on the right side of history. One can draw from the line of attacks by the iranian supported hoochie on saudi arabia to remaining cruise missiles and drone attacks on key Oil Facilities to attacks on u. S. Forces and facilities in iraq by iran and radiant back malicious in lebanon and so on. By iranian to instability in lebanon and so on. As i wrote to you last month, since the administration proceeded with the sales subject to emergency certifications as the support continued to threaten not only the u. S. Partners, but have directly tard u. S. Personnel and military forces and facilities in the region. And on that note, i would be delighted to read the committee and classified level on a run in them and readyno to do so as son as this takes place is the role of chairman. Let me draw for you another line. From sanctions and emergency certifications dating back over 40 years to the designation of the Iranian Revolutionary guard corps as a Foreign Terrorist Organization the spring. To the certification of emergency arms transfers to our partners. And ultimately, as mr. Mccall reference this morning, the signing of the transformative abraham record. Not 24 hours ago, and barely a mile from where we sit today, this momentous normalization agreement between key american Security Cooperation partners in the middle east. Theres a Common Thread running along all of these actions. Our center partners, the need to establish sheriff capability to respond to and reunion threats. Either direct or from partners conventional or unconventional economic or military and while we may disagree on some of the specifics, of these responses. I know that you mr. Chairman, and as you acknowledged in your Opening Statement that we do cii when it comes to the nature of the threat that iran poses and the need to ensure the security of our keep partners in the region did mr. Chairman, the recent Inspector General report into the emergency arm silk did not question these facts. He did not question the nature and existence of an emergency. Instead, the ig report concluded the secretaries emergency certification was executed in accordance with the requirement of the arms export control act. It is also true however, the ig felt that the department could do more to reduce the risk of civilian casualties in that may as a result of the u. S. Provided arms. That is the finding i not only accept but which i my bureau, the department and this administration take to heart. Which is why we are working to address well before the ig even put pen to paper which will continue to address. In april 2018, President Trump released an updated United States conventional arms transferil policy. After the very first time, very first time ever, explicit policy in the United States to facilitate ally and partner efforts to the United States sales and Security Cooperations efforts to reduce the risk of National Coalition operations causing civilian arm. A year later, in march of 2019, the president reaffirmed executive order 13732, which directs the u. S. Government agencieshe to engage with forein partners and to share and to learn the best practices for reducing the likelihood of an responding to civilian casualties. Including through appropriate training and assistance. So since the cat policy was updated, the department of defense and the department of state have been working together tirelessly to implement this. We see reducing the risk of civilian harm as an enterprise wide interagency challenge. And responded with the Systemic Program of reforms and innovations and examples of which i would like to briefly describe this committee right now. We have created a new methodology to helpic us succes, the risk of civilian harm. Associated with the arms transfers. And made improvements to ensure our decisionmaking is informed by the assessments. The Defense Department has developed a new training curriculum. Both partners and the la some reducing civilian harm. Asas developing toolkit of advisory materials and services essentially distinct to the partner. They also identified a set of solutions to help partners reduce the risk of civilian harm. While also enhancing combat effectiveness. For example, the advanced targeting Development Initiative or 18 vi is Technical Solutions and training intended for partners to deploy news certain u. S. Emissions including precision guidedin munitions. They provide enhanced support to key technical aspects for weapons deployment in their proficiencies. Such as target coordinates, domineering, and the Collateral Damage estimates. These capabilities allow them to hit the intended targets and to do it accurately and to precise damage intended. And do so with the ability to estimate collateral effects in advance and modify their engagements accordingly. With these processes, analytics and toolkits, there now in hand, we also have an increasing our outreach to partners. And engaging with them, proactively and discussions on how they can reduce the risk of civilian casualties to its lowest possible level. The right time for the conversation is now. These are significant and serious efforts. They have been underway for quite some time. Im encouraged that both the kingdom of saudi arabia and the United Arab Emirates have purchased advanced targeting developments. And in doing so, the make clear their commitment to reducing the risk of harm to civilians. Even as they battle an adversary who judging byy the frequency ad accuracy of the gucci drones, and the rockets and even Ballistic Missile attacks would appear they havein no such. And so, for my time as this secretary of state for Political Military Affairs, the department in the administration have identified the right threat, made theit right decisions under the right policies to support the right partners. Its a team of National Security professionals, i am very much proud to be a part of an look forward to your questions. Thank you very much. Now go to the questions. The question part of our hearing. Ill not recognize members for five minutes each. Alltime yielded, for the purpose of questioning. Questioning her witnesses. The q highbred virtual format of this meeting, i will recognize members by the seniority of the committees old making between her alternating between the democrats and republicans. If you mr. Turn, please let her staff now. If you seek recognition you must unmute your microphone. And address the chair verbally. As we start work questioning. I will start by recognizing myself. Okay. Im having trouble with the glasses. We have so much to cover today. But in the outset, i want to correct the record on a few things. I regret that mr. Pompeo has attacked this committee and the staff and myself during the course of this, all of it unfounded. So glad youre all here today. It should not of taken the song from the start. I asked that you appear for transcribed interview to diss thats why the Inspector General inspired it. We are set to reach the committee privately. And think clear while that was not enough fors us. And the investigation has to be done formally and on the record. We need a junior colleagues to speak on the record. And before the democrats and republicans on this committee to answer serious questions about the ig. In the state department offered that you justify immediate accepted the Department Posted on the hearing and condition at your testimony and not talking to anyone else on the record. I hope everyone here today understands that we couldnt not accept that. So again, its good the three of you are testifying now. But frankly we should been able to do this a few months ago. Without this that we have enexperienced. Would you all great that the Inspector General serving an important providing transparency and accountability. I would like to know yes or no. Yes mr. Chairman. Performs a critical spot. Yes mr. Chairman. Mr. Strang. Yes mr. Chairman, i agree. Thank you. Would you all agree that firing and ig, in order to cover up wrongdoings, would be an abuse of power yes or no. Lets start again. If he assumed there is a coverup of any wrongdoing, yes. Mr. Cooper. R. Clarke cooper the signing of the ig the purview of the executives, if there was to cause as to been laid out. There is no coverup. Okay, mr. Strang. Mr. Chairman, and as we described, the ig serves at the pleasure of the president. Okay. Not quite getting an answer. Bute okay. Let me ask you all this. You acknowledge the Congress Wants additional responsibility to connect oversight of the existing Branch Policies and operations yes or no. Yes, i understand the oversight responsibility of congress. Thank you mr. Cooper. Mr. Chairman, yes understand the Article One Authority and oversight ofon congress. Thank you and mr. Strang. Yes mr. Chairman. I recognize the oversight responsibility of the congress. One last thing. You think im conducting this investigation for my own personal, let me answer that question. I dont enjoy this. Any of you know me for a long time. And i understand that is my profounder preference to advance legislation and hold hearings in this committee in a bipartisan fashion. We call this committee the most Bipartisan Committee in congress. And we always say the politics stops at the waters edge. And believe strongly in that. So for me, this is nothing of the most unpleasant way to bring long congressional coverage two to but i will turn to myself why we are p here. We have real concerns on this committee and the firing was an abuse of power. In the four months we have tried to get answers, the state Department Leadership is been insulting and evasive and effectively had a drink you up here. Kicking and screaming itself makes me think that the department has been trying to hide the truth. But at this point, convert all t the excuses and weve heard all the halftruths. We are past shortly and the funny outing so i want to be clear in the hearing room, my hipectation is that you give this the respect it deserves an answer our questions. And i yield the balance of my time and recognize the Ranking Member for five minutes. Thank you mr. Chairman. On the first talk about policies securities. You talked about this. I think informed the policies, is very important to define who your allies are and who your enemies are. That is why the german i disapprove. And under the Previous Administration because it empowers the largest statesponsored terrorists. I believe the line is argued in the questioning the rebels and if they are the enemy. I think its ironic the timing of this hearing. When just yesterday, when this historic abraham accord that the first peace deal the middle east and 25 years, one quarter of a century based upon the policies of this administration. I know the media may not pay a lot of attention to it but it was historic. And i was there and proud to be there yesterday rated i approved the sale of these weapons. To saudi arabia. To jordan. And who came forward as our allies yesterday. With israel against iran. I also proved it because their precision guided as you mentioned. Actually decreased civilian casualties because of the precision guided weapons. I think the threat from iran is real. And that is why the secretary made this policy decision to sell the weapons as did the president. Wut i want to get a secretary, i think the issue at stake here is was this a permissible firing. Of course the president has legal accounts to say and has the authority but did you have justification to do this. Any excited basically three main reasons. In it which i think would be adequate for theid firing. The first one is of the failure to complete an annual audit mandated by congress. The failure it which actually violated the laws by congress. Can you tell me just on that one alone, what impact that b has on the state department. Thank you. The impact is well while we recognize. They needed to come together to actually help focus and make sure that we did complete the audit, although 60 days later, that it was required to turn in. The goodness of that is a lot of the working levels team from the inspection or the audit team, from the ig came together. The disappointing news is there were no ig leadership. I went to those weekly meetings make sure we got back on track. Not once did i see the ig there himself. He went to we actually got it done. How acknowledge the hard work that the team did and again, there is a missing Inspector General there. It is just absent from the process. , is hard to lead the largest one in department when you can even conduct an audit. Right. That has consequences. Kisser. Serious consequences. Look at the role of the ig conduct is in. A minute audit cannot be done. How can we identify those areas that we have potential abuse. How do we know the assets on the balance sheet, the liabilities that are stated. How do we know where those obligations are going. There are significant areas. And looking at ways for the abuse, then thats when an audit will reveal. The second thing is going to come out in a classified briefing that i can get into. But in your testimony, you said the auditor hundred National Security at considerable risk. And i know you probably cannot comment on that but i just want to reiterate that statement because forat the press reportig this hearing, i think that is very important point. Failure to manage the ig team with keep vacancies. It failed on diversity and inclusion. The idea saying that these are not our core values. I would think on both sides of this audio, both democrat and republican, that those are core values of this nation. The diversity and inclusion. Failed to lead with integrity. It and lick the draft to the media. It is not even shared with the secretary. And then finally, these allegations of personal misconduct. The secretary did not even know about these allegations. Because he didnt see the reports. So the idea that somehow that was to the firing of steve linick is really factually, the evidence does not support thats. Because the report was out given to him. He had no knowledge of these allegations. It so how create some fiction that you fire him because of these socalled allegations of personal misconduct. To me it is mystifying. I am glad you are here. Im glad were going to get through this exercise. But i think this nation and the state department has far more Serious Business in this community does as well. I do appreciate the chairmans comments about this committee are oversight functions. And under article one of the constitution, is embodied in our Founding Fathers with a stood for. But i think it is time to move on. Without a yield of back. Before i call on the next person. I too was at the white house yesterday. I too, think the accords between israel and the United States are good. An important andwhus i commend e president and everybody was involved with it. But obviously, this is a separate issue. That we are talking about. Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this virtual and inperson hearing. And after i asked my questions i will vacate my spot here so that others can ask their question in person. The question before us as why was Inspector General fired. He offers us to rather easily dismissed ideas. First is that the audit report was late. As cochair of the bipartisan caucus and the only professional auditor in this room, i o assure you that was nt the reason. Ifdi you look out the department of defense in other departments, the state department being a few weeks late with his audit report is tiny compared to other agencies and their blades are nonexistent audit reports. But being late with air forces reason to fire somebody, why are we focusing just on audit reports. They are not matters of life and death. State Department Foreign policy in this committees decisions affect life and death in their chronically late. So since you are letting management over there. Since these legallye required reports are incredibly late. Wouldnt you yourself resign if late reports critically necessary for policy matters of life and death, are they tender your watch. But then we are told that we should fire Inspector General because of morality or low morale and surveys. If you had a need integrity, you would also be calling for the resignation of the actor terry pompeo. All of us in this room, no what morale is like to get his state department. We do not have to rely on surveys or maybe somebody does not want to say anything bad that hurts their immediate supervisor because they under their immediate supervisor are all united. The service in the state department is an incredibly difficult and depressing thing to do. And we have people with entire immediate context right here on this committee did if low morale is recent for someone to be fired, look up and down. So the real question here is why was the Inspector General fired. Two possible reasons. One he was investigating the myriad of ways in which state Department Resources were used to meet the political personal needs of secretary pompeo or two, that a bizarre decision was reached to evaded congress on the sale of weapons to saudi arabia and nearby countries. Si agree with mr. Cooper. Which of these two. You say you dont know. I dont know. But i am going to focus on maintaining the law because that is a matter of life and death. This weapon skill. What is theha emergency. Is that Congress Prevent the administration from doing good ones. You see the emergency here is not that imperial presidency which read the constitution. But rather that congress would assert his Constitutional Rights and endanger the imperial presidency. The Ranking Member puts forward the idea that because success was reached an important aspect of the middle east, therefore weve violations of the constitution and the laws, we passed and implemented is retroactively legalized. I read the. Theres nothing in there that says executive branch can ignore congressional prerogatives if they are able to arrange a Peace Agreement with th. Mr. Faulkner testified that the murder and dismemberment was perceived as the emergency. Emergency was Congress Actually might look at these arm cells reach a different conclusion free toss made it hard to get te sales approved of course the president said, he saved the crown princesses but for accountability for the murder. Who you talk to at the white house this Emergency Declaration and the need to issue it to prevent congress from rejecting the arms so. Did you talk to kushner or peter navarro. Thank you congressman for this questions. Just one point of verification. A believe as i recall, congress did vote on these cells ultimately. But to your question. I do not recall in front recall ever speaking with mr. Kushner during my time in the political bureau. I recallth speaking to western navarro but i did not recall speaking to him about any particular Emergency Declaration. And since this is, you been interviewed as a fact witness on this. Is it also appropriate interview for you to be the lawyer in this matter. Thank you for that russian congressman. I take ethic populations very seriously as we all do the departments. We have consulted ive consulted a constant sibley the career designated Agency Ethics official. In department has confirmed that attendance in the meetings by those who are also interviewed was entirely appropriate in this case. If you fax support the view. First the ig review was not investigation of misconduct. On the investigations unit. Rather speak. [inaudible]. All say that if people are going to be fired, because there is w morale, and starts at the top. Yield back. Thank you. Summa think he was determined and i think our distinguished witnesses. Im glad this committee is finally accepted one of your numerous offers to appear before us. Were here today because the members of this committee care about accountability in our government. Ef then that is the case and it is the case, then i have one question. F why are some of my colleagues defending former Inspector General steve linick. Under his leadership, the number of inspections conducted by the embassies worldwide, declined significantly. Former ig also failed to complete an audit of the department in a timely manner and had to ask for an extension. Disappointment of unqualified auditors set the process back even further. He was further investigated by the dods office of Inspector General for being the leak behind a sensitive draft evaluation of statee department official. I find that particularly egregious is the person who was privileged to hold in topsecret security clearance for decades. At the time of his departure, mr. Steve linick was under investigation for leaking to the press. And said material to his personal account. That was egregious, and egregious accusation. When received the Inspector General report on march 17th, which detailed the number of improprieties committed under his own ig rules, he decided nt to inform the state Department Leadership that he had the report. And during his testimony before members in early june, mr. Steve linick denied that this report was even of interest to the department. He then went on to make numerous other claims in testimony that would explain why the report was notas delivered started by blending the department itself is leadership for failing to follow up on the report status. Two then saying that he preferred to relay the results of the reporting person and then to siding covid19 for not conveying the report in a timely fashion. To this end there was no reason for them to keep the report away from Key Stakeholders to finally admitting on pages 124 and 125, of the reiki reported that he knew the Department Leadership wanted the results in the investigation. Heew intentionally sat on an ig report. Think about that for a moment. And Inspector General chose to withhold the results of the important investigation that could compromise his reputation and career. The only mistake this president made in firing steve linick was not doing it sooner. At this hearing serve as yet another example regrettably so that demonstrates how the left waste tax paper in front taxpayer resources and willfully in the name of accountability all the while blatantly ignoring the fact that mr. Steve linick failed to hold himself accountable. There sibley no good reason why steve linick had withheld the Inspector Generalhi report. Instead of providing it to the Department Leadership as he should have. None at all. Myn colleagues in the other side have made numerous incorrect claims and unfortunately for them, acts matter. This committee wants to answer their own question, why did the Administration Part of the Department Inspector general. If i can the answer. Mr. Steve linick was a threat to the principle of accountability in f government plain and simpl. I commend the president for exercising his authority granted by thed u. S. Congress. To remoe mr. Steve linick from office and the fact that members of this committee would defend steve linick, his conduct runs contray to our duty to maintain the public trust. I do have one question. For undersecretary. Does the ig have the legal right to withhold final reports to for the Department Leadership. That is why we had asked the ig to refer this matter, this investigation on his conduct to the integrity counsel. Because the requirements in the ig act was requires that report to come to the leadership of the department and the answer is no. Ctit should not have or does not have the authority to withhold that. Does not have that authority. But he did withhold it didnt. It. Yes sir. The gentleman yields his time. Let me see if i can get something. Then i will ask my questions. So, did you recommend to mr. Pompeo that mr. Steve linick be fired. Or did mr. Pompeo then take that to the president. Did you recommended to mr. Pompeo. I cannot speak about my conversation with the secretary and the secretaries made it it known. It was his recommendation. To the president to remove the ig. I am asking about you did you make that recommendation. My recommendation was from the secretary to the president. So you were just instructed to go fire mr. Steve linick. The deputy secretary had the conversation regarding the removal of the ig. I was part of that phone conversation. Do you have a meeting with mr. Steve linick and you fired him. On a friday night in midmay. That was you. Correct. No sir, thisu is the point is hard to make. There was a phone call on may 15th. In the evening. In which case the deputy secretary of state notified mr. Steve linick, the president had lost confidence in his ability and was removing him from the role of Inspector General at the state department. I was on the phone call. And then proceeded to provide the administratives instructions to steve linick. And i let him know that he would receive a letter is in as we hung up from the white house personnel office. Notifying him of his removal and that he would be placed on 30 days of administrative leave. Any hard and pending final removal date. So that he ever reason why he was being fired. As i just stated, mr. Steve linick. St[inaudible]. Did he get a reason. Yes he was provided the reason that i just stated. What he said he was given one. That he was shocked not to get any explanation after seven years on the job for why he was being fired with no warning. So youre saying that hes a liar. Congress when i am saying is the deputy secretary informed mr. Steve linick, the president of his authority in his discretion have lost confidence in his ability and therefore was removing him from the role of ig. That was the reason provided to mr. Steve linick on friday evening on the phone call. So what confuses me is the fact that after he was fired, i believe it was you that told the Washington Post that it was fired because of pattern of unauthorized leaks. There was not you. Congressman. As a laid out in my testimony, there were numerous reasons why nbelieve personally that the Inspector General failed to perform. Talk about those three core areas where he failed to perform. Yes or no. Did you tell the Washington Post that the reasonar that he was fired was because of a pattern of unauthorized disclosures and leaks. Yes orrwa no. Again, the comments that were made. [inaudible]. Yes or no. I never recall having a direct conversation with the Washington Post. Will i will direct you to that Washington Post because it seems as though, the leak that mr. Steve linick said he was not given any information. But now after reading your testimony today, there are any reasons that are not being given. And i agree with mr. Sherman and that if it was given because he failed to lead with integrity. Then we have to look at the top. And theres evidence by what has taken place by the number of career diplomats and pallets that have left the state department as a result of mr. Pompeo. In the low morale that they are in. One more question. Im running out ofor time. I remind you, i understand that you provide false testimony, that would be a federal crime of a false statement. Did mr. Steve linick tell you that siggy and siggy informed him that siggy was not the appropriate body to conduct the investigation into the lakes. Yes o no. It. The question that i asked, if he had provided a written referral on the integrity counsel siggy, the answer is no he did not provide a written referral instead what he described to siggy was at the state department was looking to investigate his office. And that is not the instruction we provided Inspector General steve linick. What we said as we ares investigating you inspector steve linick weeks of allegations of potential unauthorized disclosures. Thats what we had asked him to refer to siggy. That did not happen. Your letter said that the state department, months later that it was made to siggy. But to a different id. Now again mr. Steve linick testified as a direct statement is true. And that he told the department at the time that siggy did not have jurisdiction and that he didnt or that he had been advised by siggy. That isat a violation. It seems to me sor sir, that the multiple afterthefact reasons from the insinuations that were made by the chairman of the committee, that could this be a coverup. By the secretary and the president. Hecause it seems to me that when you look at the definition of coverup, is an unusually conservative effort to keep an illegal or actor situation from being madete public. And what is taken place and that evidence and killings of innocent individuals in Getting Congress to have the sale of someone laid upon the president s automation, seems to me sir, to be leading to an actual coverup. Ig was doing his job. Was being stopped. By you, the secretary of state in the president of the United States. I yelled back my time. Thank you mr. Chairman. Into them and thank you for being here and your asthma and your patience. You said in the very beginning the critical ig place in the executive branch, is to shine light in areas that need to be improved. And to improve those. And obviously we all think that is a good thing because we want to get rid of waste and fraud and abuse. Think were all in agreement of that. Then you mentioned that the three key missions as a chairman mccall pointed out, execution, protect the teams and laid with integrity. Just for the record, for clarity, were those three things upheld by Ig Steve Linick. No sir. Okay mr. Cooper. Is that you are not sure why he was relieved. Do you feel that Ig Steve Linick lived up to those three mission statements. Based on the information u provided here today. No. Mr. String. Congressman, i believe management laid out comprehensive cases to the failings of the ig on those three metrics. So for the record, Ig Steve Linick did not meet what he was tasked to do. It is been said in this testimony undersecretary blotto and mr. Cooper that the president has personal will to remove and ig it will is that correct is everybody in agreement with that. Yes sir it is to his hauthority. Is executive authority. And his discretion is to act as removing and ig due to lack of confidence in that individual constitutes an acceptable reason for removal of an ig. Sir, the rationale has been upheld by the courts. Yes or. So we are all in agreement with that thiss could because te hypocrisy thatt we see or the deviled standard when we go back to president obama when theyri removed ig in oh nine, it was investigating, gives the ig for the corporation for national anm commercial. Re 9 the commerce, the federal agey overseeing organizations like americorps and the americorps was granted by this agency were granted to this nonprofit, 850,000, as the ig went through. It was a. Ultimately had toas repay 400,0 because the defendant is saint hope was run by cindy sakamoto mayor kevin johnson. It was a large donor to the Obama Administration and they found that the money had been used, supposed to be to the local studentsth to develop buildings enhanced theater and art programs. They found outed however, the money had been used instead to pay staff salaries, political and elections and had them perform personal Services Including washing his car, and general reporting so when this gets exposed, i think mr. Johnston, when after this guy. And he removed him because they said the president obama did not have his full confidence. So the hypocrisy that we are sing here today, is unconscionable. It amazes me, this committee is supposed to be apolitical. We pride ourselves on that but im not saying it. In fact ies havent seen in this volume is chairman. And it saddens me. With what i have heard from you, the relieving of duty of Ig Steve Linick was more than acceptable. It was not President Trump, justin and have confidence in the sky. He failed to meet the required. The gentlemans time has expired. Thank you gentlemen. I appreciate the job you do. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman. Can we just confirm. The committee asked the Inspector General to review the false 2019 emergency that the 8 billion in ourselves. And since then, we have learned that the ig investigative work was donera by the end of 2019. Inside the department, obviously it stops with secretary pompeo. The buck stops there. Hes the one who makes determinations like this. About the emergency. Let me just gone. Mr. Steve linick testifiedus tht in this inquiry, you like always with the gatekeeper for secretary pompeo. This case you help keep the gate checked for any he had been late for an interview with the secretary. And you asked him y for topic areas that he wanted to discuss what werei those specific topics that the ig told you that he wanted to discuss. Congressman, as i recall a conversation, i asked the ig are there any areas i can help you with. This is normal thing that i did during our biweekly. When he responded to me was yes there is. We are complete. We have completed our investigation and that ourselveso except for reviewing the secretary. So did he give you any information on the topics that he wanted. My question to him. Did he give you topics that he wanted to discuss a secretary. Not the time. Ever. I can tell you the circumstances. I dont need the whole story, just want to know the topics. He wanted to discuss the policy decisions that went into that decision. Didnt want to ask about conflicts of interest in the process. Detail you that. We ended up doing. Im just asking. Dont want to know. Did he ask you about conflicts of interest. The questions were written down and we provided answers. Im asking. Not wishing to respond. It did he ask about conflicts of interest. I was not involved with those conversations with the Inspector General. Thats what im trying to tell you. Connecting want to ask about the involvement of the arm cells. Was that make clear to you any point. I was not involved in conversations with the ig. You have no idea what he wanted to speak to the secretary grabbed. I just told you. Nothing specific. Thats what we were asking that was the i conversation were having. In order to schedule time. So when i committed to the idea was a misunderstanding and we will try to get you the time. I am not asking about specific questions im asking did he braceu with you, the topc anymore specifically in what youre telling us now. Now with me. With him then. Was there anyone, the buck stops with the secretary. And youre telling me whether this interview takes place. No with you. Is there anyone that youta are aware of the detail the subject matter that he wanted to discuss with the secretary. He provided a list of questionsit that was then answered. Are you aware of any of the topics that he wanted to discuss. As undersecretary to saidnt. [inaudible]. Are you aware of any of the topics that he wanted to discuss he was focusing on the policy decisions. I understand. To the one who asked about secretary pompeos about previously used weapons of the u. S. Told him to commit possible war crimes. Was that something that he explained. Just a yes or no. Youre getting into something different. Im asking did the Inspector General tell you or anyone that you are aware of, and the state department that he wanted to discuss with the secretary of state, whether secretary pompeo had knowledge to the saudis had previously used weapons to put commit possible war crimes. Or did he wantat to ask about involvement in the arms im not worried about thei other things. Im worried about whether you are aware or was he was he not wanting to discuss withh the secretary. It is just a yes or no question it is just a yes or no question. You are getting into. [inaudible]. I am not i am not. Theres nothing classified. There is nothing about them im not asking about the liberations. None of that has anything to do with the Inspector General simplyn telling you that these f the topics he wanted to discuss with the secretary of state. And im asking you whether he gave you those topics. Again, he was looking at y te policy decisions. It. [inaudible]. Was there the kind of special tiffanys about what i asked about. As a yes no question. Congressman, the questions presented it as you are focused on the policy deliberation. Might understandably understand targeted im asking, when he came to you. In the gatekeeper. When he wanted to meet with the secretary of state, did he provide to you, when the string or to anyone at the state department, and list of topics that he wanted to discuss with the secretary. I dont want general policies. Ics want to know did he give you any specifics. A yes or no. Is there anyone on this panel who can answer this question. Yes or no not seem a difficult. And when all you want to do mr. Chairman, when all you want to do is tell me that he wants to talk about policies. Because vibrated please know thats what he wanted to talk about. Are trying to a figure out why e was allowed to do it. What he was ultimately fired. And you can even tell us one of theset were the issues that he wanted to talk about. If youre aware that he wanted to talk about policy, that is certainly sounds like youre aware of exactly with his policies work. The secretary pompeo deserves to give the American People some answers to these questions. And from mcallen and accountability. All of that time cutting you off, you may have gotten the answers that they were looking for. He said ultimately. [inaudible]. Im asking and he has no question. I am not going to argue with you. Have gotten the answer youre looking for they were able to develop. In terms of why t he was fired. I think sir, you put out a really good reason. And quite honestly i think had you not fired him, we may be here at this very moment attacking you for not firing him and for not having everything done on time and it is the season we are in. And appreciate you all being here. Thank you mr. Chairman. Rolling this hearing. Oversight in the executive branch is something that we do. Its a core of what we do. And i believe we should be using this precious platform not for politics but for advancing Foreign Policy priorities. We have the russians meddling and yet more european elections potentially even in our, the piece deals being signed. Communists trying to continue to grossly violate the human rights of the users. In hong kong, yes we are using this time to debate something in the past administrations have done. Which is to fired Inspector General for failing to do the job. We need this committee hopefully maybe after the election to get back to focusing on big important things going on around the world. It further, secretary cooper, first set up the political military and American Foreign policies. And support the priorities, and why is it important that the state department maintain the authority over the arms sales. Is not juste the authority over the arms has come also the authority on title 22 and title ten Security Assistance print so the whole package. If one looks at the arms transfers, the arms sales and the Security Assistance, this would be including International Military education training. All of thosee things are implements to actually achieve our foreign oc objectives. Essentially are commissions forward have a hosted toolkit available to them. These implements that reside within the political military portfolio are some of the most significant rated some of the most tangible implements of Foreign Policy that we provide. There often there to make sure the partners able to form a security standpoint, not only provide for their security, their sovereignty in any cases, theres a shared burden or adversity that they are facing on our behalf. And in some cases the partners actually prosecuting on ourur behalf. So the whole total of the package of what is available. It is to enable the partners and bring them close together and its alsoa essentially the greatest level of burden sharing. And i would go back to the security systems. Even the Security Assistance that resides under the bdepartment of defense authoriy at thes end of the day. There state department and concurrence on that because we want to make sure regardless of excess defense article read something new. We want to makeak sure that actually does contribute to those ways i and means of a strategic end. Summa me ask you something. If do have non friendly competitors out there that can fill this ifan we dont. Absolutely do. We are looking at our adversaries in our competitors like beijing. You mentioned them earlier frames why we have tailored some of our Foreign Military assistance. It and financing to encourage partners to come closer to the United States. To be interoperable with our forces andnd say say nato allie. What we have specialized programs. In more recent one, the chinese influence fund. All of these again are part of the broader toolkit that we make available to our submission. In any cases, there is a sweet of these tools it also are tied to arms transfers. The me ask you also wrote quickly. When we t talk about, theres bn over 200,000 deaths. You estimated nearly 2000 them were combat related civilian casualties. How is iran attempting to address non combat related deaths. There is as i mentioned in my testimony, there is no function, no rule of law, Armed Conflict is being followed by tehran. There is none of that. If anything, we have seen a direct threat to civilian populace. Its again something that has to have more detail and in a classified state. But we do know that we talk about the wrist to civilian infrastructure, the hutus, have no parameters. Thank you and i yelled back. Thanknt you. Can hear me. Yes, i can hear you fine. Since the beginning of the conflict in march in 2015 in yemen, it is clearly risen to worldwide humanitarian crisis. 24 million people, 12 million children, all in humanitarian needed. 1,207,030,500 children targeted. So im about to ask some questions. About documents and transparency and information. And a lot of to focus on two things. Fortyfour children targeted and killed. Another image just within the last three months. Almost a dozen other children killed. One strike occurred during the celebration of a newborn boy. He did not survive. He did not live to be one weekold so with that inno min, i would like to ask questions. Only get correct is a could. I am. And you oversee information provided to congress at our request. Correct. That is part of the scope of the responsibilities. And indeed and includes congressional documentations. Correct. Correct. This was under the Obama Administration at the request of an gauzy. They programmed 4 million so that they could respond quickly to investigations. And indeed then Congress Pompeo on the committee sought thousands of thousands of documents produced. Does thatt congressional documet today. Xist elements within the has responsibility for document to share with. [inaudible]. The state department told us that 8. 1 million on this department has been established. S so lets take a second to explain what the American People gee getting for the money. Tammy documents as the state rep department produced into the Presence Communications with vladimir putin. I dont know with the actual numbers are afraid of having to take the question for the record decorated and respond back. If you dont know if that is fine. How about our request into the intelligence surrounding nuclear biological weapons. How any documents were produced in the request. Again, for specific topic you want, im happy to take this questions for the record. Okayn, coming to documents ta subpoena issued and allowed the delay in the arms production for ukraine. Suffering under russian aggression. How any. Me speak more broadly. We just finished. Because i think this will help you out. The total number of documents in our request related to security threats against the investor rated how any. Again. Our team produces. The answer is zero documents to this committee. Zero. So the state has spent 8 million and the purpose is to produce documents to congress. With the proper jurisdiction and yes secretary pompeo got to see those documents immediately with the impeachment trial that ended in the political for President Trumps political opponent and with those concerns in the senate. And friends with Rudy Giuliani and how many pages of that investigation . And 16000 pages just for that. And that this committee has made it clear we wont stand for the secretary of state pompeo of dedicated nonpartisan professionals for campaign purposes. Your time is expired. I ask unanimous consent to place my statement of how it occurs that that you fired him for not providing information yet you are not providing core information and indeed, sir under that criteria you established you should be fired yourself. I feel one i yield back. It would be nice if he could give any of his answers just now as we were listening to my colleagues working their way down the 2020 resistance bingo card it would be nice if he was actually able to speak. We remain responsible with a hyper partisan attempts to take down the administration at any cost including the impeachment debacle and now the charade to score points at the expense the secretary pompeo. It is said the committee has been embarrassing itself with the rhetoric dividing that committee and congress and the hehemm i have transcribed dlmost all the interviews and they reveal no one who testified to speak to the secretary pompeo about the arms sales to saudi arabia when susan pompeo travel he said he was not aware of Ongoing Investigations with his correspondence with this committee. There is zero evidence with the Conspiracy Theory he was aware or attempted to influence the ig investigation. The Opening Statement lays out the poor job and december 13 and then to discipline for trumps topping and with former ig investigation into political retaliation against career employees at the state departmentar and didnt take it seriously enough to exhibit inappropriate behavior under the ig rules and four inconsistent reasons and said that he did not share with the department because nobody followednt up and then because he wanted to tell the deputy secretary in person and then cited covid19 he failed to fill out the core mission asking to have the internal investigation by the council and Inspector General on integrity and efficiency that they cannot conduct investigation if there is the investigation into the ig office shouldnt be shopping around to investigate their office wentz finalized they send a copy as requested . No they did not. Did you speak about the Ongoing Investigation . I did not. It wasnt necessary i to fire him because of the Ongoing Investigation because he had no knowledge of the work by the ig. As you lay out in your testimony there are numerous reasons you recommended firing mr. Leonard the president has the ability to hire and fire this investigation has been nothing more than a fishing expedition and democrats are still sitting here with nothing at the end of the hawk. I hope after today this is closed and to call on secretary pompeo to resign be fantastic to say thank you for all of the progress from yesterdays ssec announcement eliminate isys caliphate. Recognizing israelis sovereignty from go on heights. Which is the middle east and just a recap of some of that i dont want to see secretary pompeo fired i want to say thank you i wish you could do your job to make america greater than ever i yield back. Thank you mr. Chairman. It is pretty where to hear my colleagues talk about this but i appreciate the fact to hear them say our main job is oversight and the reason i love the United States is pounding on the rule ofin law and to talk about the checks and balances im not a lawyer l but i do believe its accurate for lead Legal Counsel. So i know the rules that suggest we have to keep our documents and emails that pertain to policy decisions and even if that communication happened on gmail even around those policy decisions and i know our republican colleagues know that even after the secretary of state leaves office it is still our responsibility to conduct oversight and even set up a special committee to do investigations because they understood that. So this is for all the stateto Department Employees whether five months or five years there will be an a administration that will look back and identify documents that are less policy decisions. So your recommendation . Those that keep the documents they dont destroy them and that is the letter of the law. Thank you congressmen. Yes document preservation is something we take very seriously under the federal records act we take significant steps to ensure rcompliance. So with a new administration any employee that would destroy records or documentation or correspondence as it pertains to policy decisions whether a gmail server or elsewhere that is illegal iss that correct . The destruction of documents would not be consistent with the federal records act. Would it be illegal to destroy documents . To destroy federal records that are required to be preserved under the federal records d act . So just the message is that oversight doesnt stop we will continue to conduct oversight and look into how decisions better understand and that there is nothing there but the fact to work with anything to talka about and those who are approved and wrote those decisions legitimately we cooperate and then go back and look so for every state Department Employee we heard from lead Legal Counsel any destruction of documents or correspondence even with a gmail server or account d is considered illegal and we will be looking into that. That is a concern. Im out of time i will yield. The gentleman yields. I lasted for a second. Thank you and then all of the discussion about the Inspector General i want to return to the madison dinnersn i think as many of you probably saw this article in the newspaper. The czar dinner so dinners in the madison room with the secretary and his wife they are restarting this week using taxpayer money i would like to present some statistics that have beenpa reported. 29 percent came from the corporate world another 25 percent came from the media which is conservative media. 14 percent were diplomats or foreign officials and those were interchangeable and every Single Member of the house is a republican and two dozen of these dinners have been held since april 2018 when mr. Pompeo took office as secretary of state and three more are planned to be held not at the madison room but at the white house. Does that sound accurate to you . Congresswoman i have access or i am not involved in the invitation or execution of the madison dinner. That we dont have any indication that democratic members have ever attended because foreignpolicy is not supposed to be political partisan politics stops at the waters edge and they mbiticized anoucr for making this political we have no democratic members that have been invited as far as we know. I think American Foreignpolicy is a reflection of the broad strapped spectrum of american society. Secretary pompeo has the strongest foreignpolicy. Yes or no any democrats . And its supposed to be about foreignpolicy . Im not involved in the madison dinners. Is anybody involved at the table . Apparently not. No maam she was the firm on the former person from the campaign and then to plan the madison dinner aside from she says normally it is herself with the Protocol Officer they said it up but do not go behind the closed doors. That state Department Staff have Security Officers and so it took a lot of time and effort because that was the appropriate ease of their time. A sta h going words that . V yet i wonder what taxpayers benefit is from these dinnerse . For mr. And mrs. Pompeo the chairman of the Opening Statement laid out nepotism and mismanagement and as i was looking to see more examples of dictatorships around the world the country had a history of condemning is important we take and a moment to apply the men and women who continue to serve this administration and to work around enacted legislation or to fire those brave enough to investigate their wrongdoing. I have questions that secretary pompeo made. If he knew he was investigating him he had no knowledge. Its not possible my recommendation was not for any retaliation because i dont know. Im not active so thats the end of the retaliation. That wasnt true want involve the role of by passing a congressional arms sale it is the New York Times revealed they knew that the Inspector General was investigatingot the issue because he refused and instead chose to answer writtenon questions the other one by asking state Department Employees to run personal errands. He told us he spoke to you and then requesting documents related to secretary pompeo and his wife and said that you would not be surprised in and why they were requesting the documents. She testified under oath when he told the committee this. Let me clarify. He never have i ever been talk to nuyou in 2019. But i find this hard to believe but then to have a conversation with the Inspector General you were told he was abusing hiss office. But you were aware of these document request . No. And then another word of investigation for the secretary. Those ones that i read and did you say i find that difficult to believe. He is one of your closest friends. So it was recommended to this was a big step a in the parenting but then the secretary mentioned he would make a recommendation. I am preserving but if you fire the Inspector General was investigating you it looks bad. You mustve given him some advisor told him still you keep alluding to the fact that i knew about the investigation. You said you knew about the preliminary inquiry e,. About travel. I welcome that investigation. We have to get that right there is no issue of investigating travel although i was surprised when the secretary mentioned he would do that because i wasve surprised it took him that long. Frankly it does not add up he was not telling the truth he is also misleading the public just as you try to obsolete k the reason why he was fired and stymied everyone except is based on his best friend coming to congress to tell us what happened and i yield back to thank you gentlemen for being here and your testimony today. Since the beginning of his presidencys term many have been concerned about President Trumps undermining the rule of law including use of the state department and secretary of state to do it and also his disregard for the oversight function of the legislative branch and thats why you have that have been fielded today. One of the chief complaints he was not give you the information you needed to do your jobse you are also not giving us the information we need to do our jobs. In so doing permanently changing the balance of power between executive branch and legislative branch by burying everything in a disregard or to go to court raising a number of department and then to go to the rnc and those that are directly so the use of staff infection i have yet to get answers from the oudepartment and then to give the answers in the following counting of the end on expenses occurred to israel. If its clear nothing has been done wrong and why not send over submissive use of a hearing but the next time you have republican or democratic president the please know i am requesting two things. Number one, average are currently that they exist in the protected and not destroyed at any time. Second, if we dont wrap up this investigation i will make sure they continues past november and january. Beir and the secretary of state was making known his remarks in the personal capacity. I understand he issued the statement. I respect to that. But we are entitled to engage in the site function and for us to do our jobs. Please. Give us what we need. But it shattered those decades long norms they keep the state Department Data politics that raised serious concerns that we also learned check with her on trevor 19 asked the president to speak at a Campaign Rally but ultimately he back down in light of the existing guidance. This is correct. Thank you for the question and then responding to the committees request but when that issue came up it was reviewed. I dont know the details congressman that it was an issue i yield back. Thank you for your testimonyd and then to support the cia a about a full of the war crimes and en. It is starting up as a military one of my responsibilities. Its unclear to me the officials and farmers have thats why the Obama Administration halted and then to use target and site but then in the marketplace, hospitals and recently a school bus filled with children. But then in 2016 the state department concluded americanin officials could be charged with work was. I have been asking for a copy of the me of two years and with that memo. Would you like me to repeat my question . No thank you have a set of. See were not aware. Congressman . I dont recall hearing about the 2016 memo and tell the press. We were aware of the memo . I was confirmed i am not aware of the 2016 memo. The New York Times reported some at the military bureau have seen this memo. Have you . I want to go back to the beginning of the hearing today citing the Trump Administration and reaffirming the executive order to commit to enabling and training to prevent civilian casualties and g going back to spring of 2018 for the updated policy which specifically addresses the need to mitigate and reduce the risk of civilian casualties i am very familiar that sorry have that targeting the initiative for the direction of president sf trump so the issue is not new and has faxed several administration and the work continues. Thank you for those efforts they know it hasnt worked because that school bus filled with children was struck by a precision guided munitions. Th y the oig found that they failed to reduce casualties through legalfire concerns associated wh munitions and those made in 2019 emergency certification. Do you agree with the findings and why not . What i agreed to is more to be so with that process and Decision Point with that requirements the partners in the uae and for didnt have one had been identified to Congress Additional work needs to be done. The gentle man yields back. Thank you mr. Chairman and ever other witnesses. Stuff on talk about tony porter to answer the questions about the secretarys misuse of official resources. How long have you known her and what are her official duties . I have known ms. Porter for roughly five years. Official duties . She serves as a special advisor to the secretary in that role is to help maximize the productivity and the impact of our Foreign Policy expert on behalfug of the department. She is an employee of the state department. The taxpayers pay her 140,000 per year. Im sure that you know and say Public Employee she has a legal obligation to use her official time and honest effort to perform official duties which to all of us means when the government pays t. You you have to be working for the government. So mrs. Pompeo is not a Government Employee some running errands for her could not be considered an official duty. Is that a fair statement . That she is not a employee thats accurate. Who is running an errand for her . Those running errands. What Public Employees choose to do on their own time does not have any other guidelines thats up to them but running errands for officials is not an official duty. It would it be considered legal for the secretary or anyone to direct ms. Porter to work for mrs. Pompeo . Would it be legal for her to do work for susan penn payout. Pompeocgal l ar tt i have not reviewed the transcript. Is it legal for anyone at the state department to direct ms. Porter to do work for suzanne pompeo yes or no . Is not a hard questiona a. I have not reviewed the transcript. You know what im asking yes or no you not willing to answer we know the answer we know the law provides the information i encourage coerce or request a subordinate to use official time to perform those other than required a in the performance of official duties or to be authorized in accordance with law and regulation. Thats how it reads she arranges private dinners for the pompeos and their family. If thatsme true is that appropriate use of her time when she is on the clock . With private dinners. You are referring to an item in the transcript. Is that legal in a hypothetical. I understand you want a legal conclusion. Every one of us in the city iscknows thees question answer other than you in exchange for her sixfigure salary she walks her dog and drives it to doggie daycare. Of these appropriate activities to be done on the clock . One more opportunity. I have not reviewed the transcript what the employee chooses to do on his or her personal time. You said the same thing five times in a row the executive secretary said she and the diplomats only assist mrs. Pompeo if she is on purposes but then she said she spanned out official time sending out their christmas cards. Its hard for all of us to go back to her districts at a time like this with people are struggling making ends meet and explain to them why are secretary of state cannot do what everybody else does find the time to do it themselves but not on the taxpayers dime. I yield back. K. Thank you chairman come in 2016 the seventies had a funeral and killed hundreds of civilians they admitted to this and said they did this without taking any precautionary measures were you aware of this . What time frame . 2016. I was not in the government during that period of time. Are you aware of it . I have a vague recollection but i was in private legal practice. Congresswoman i cant say in myke previous capacity National Security enterprise i were aware of actions in yemen dating back years. Were you aware . Yes or no. I was aware of the houthis threat with the ongoing civil war that did bring the death. With the actions of saudi arabia killing hundreds of civilians spent the answer to your question is we could do better to mitigate civilian casualties of your talk about a particular entity and 16 i cannot. Reclaiming my time the Obama Administration includes precision guided missiles because they were afraid it would be used to kill civilians and 2017 the Trump Administration decided to resume the arms sales it is not unique written assurance that they would comply with the law of war are you aware of this . Congresswoman i believe this can go into potentially classified information im not comfortable talking about that item. Okay. We can assume the Trump Administration was also concerned saudi arabia could use weapons that we sell to them to target civilians would you consider targeting kicivilians . The specific targeting of civilians would be very concerning. Concerning or a crime of war . I am confused. With specific intent to target noncombatants that would be inconsistent with a variety of laws. So it seems odd we should seek that assurance that they are not targeting civilians but we are still selling weaponss to them and they are confessing to commit such crimes. Can you give me another specific example be sought such assurances . We seek assurances for a variety of reasons from partners around the world. We are aware of those issues that you raise and take them seriously not just the state department but interagency in the Us Government is focused on continuously and comprehensively addressing these issues through the training measures including training and other forms of assistance. So june 112018 they targeted and destroyed doctorsas without borders, a Treatment Facility in yemen. On august 9, 2018 the weapon from the United States that we sold to them they killed dozens of children. In june 2018 senator menendez put a hold on certain future arms sales to target civilians. Are you aware of this . Do you think these are legitimate concerns . Just so i understand are these of the concerns expressed by members of congress . Yes that they targeted and destroyed Doctors Without Borders and targeted the school box on bus. I was aware of concerns at that time. Mr. Chairman is it possible to take a fiveminute restroom break we have been doing this for three hours. Five hours you can have five minutes we will try to get through this before votes come up. You fiveminute. [inaudibleai conversations] [inaudible conversations] we will continue