But there is a potential and we have participated in this way. And there are many online interest in these issues. So should there come a day when we can engage with them more transparently. And i think that the government has done some important things from their symbolic first few days in terms of reopening this investigation and trying to continue this from that. Including what others are taking in terms of procurement to try to constrain corruption. We talked about it quite openly and transparently. Its part of the speech in terms of what has to be done in afghanistan. Certainly in terms of appointing a rod range of ministers and governors, this is something that there is a common interest in. So we continued to do everything that we can to work with this and others in terms of the importance of their investigation and demonstrating their accountability and we will continue to do so. Im going to make just a quick note on that. And afghanistan is going from a fairly corrupt system to a system that will be professional and transparent and noncorrupt. That is a long hard road to travel. And if the president moves too fast, he will break his politics and he will cause many groups to be disgruntled and to organize against him. So we must be patient and recognize that this kind of transition is difficult. He has to be on that road he has to be on that road, but we have to give him a little slack. If he moves too fast and breaks the politics and loses the government then we lose the possibility of moving to a professional transparent and noncraps system. And that is not good for anyone. And it is finally the question on reconciliation. I wouldnt say that anyone is necessarily optimistic either but nor are they pessimistic. It is truly a matter of evaluating as much information as we can get especially with this potential opportunity. It is currently there right now which we want to be able to take advantage of should we be able to. So its the continuing to try to build a continuing reconciliation process should that become available and the way to do that is to continue to work with the pakistanis, others in the region to track these initiatives as well and see what might be achieved. But clearly the commitment is not only something that most are political left and right and congressional support in terms of safeguards but the remarkable gains that have been made but its truly something because it talks about the right thing and we saw that from the president s inauguration address when he talked about the role of his wife and he talked about reconciliation for the first time. And in all the subsequent times when he talked about it as well and from his actions. The fact that he delivered on the commitment the fact that there is the first woman justice of the Supreme Court that was nominated that was not confirmed but hopefully could take the opportunity to continue in this position. And cognizant of where we started this process. The fact that it is subject to poverty and lack of institutions and capacity, that every step is a calculation between what the policy goals are and the vision of how to get there and what is politically feasible as well. But i have no doubt that that Commission Shares continuing to safeguard the games and that includes cooperating with this entire government with regard specifically to reconciliation they say that it is important and we have said consistently since the beginning, we remember secretary clinton announcing this for any outcome of the process, particularly the embracing of that as well. Thank you, we are out of time. I would like to thank you all for coming. Thank you to steve for taking 10 days to visit. [applause] and last but not least thank you to the ambassador for his Public Service and in his service for the special representative as well, trying to bring peace to afghanistan. As someone who has been working on the region for a long time i have been more hopeful now that we are inching in that direction and so we thank you for that as well. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] on the next washington journal the recent rise in violent crime. And carol rosenberrosenber g on the latest white house moves to shut down the Guantanamo Bay prison. Join the conversation by calling in or posting to twitter or Facebook Page at 7 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan. Tomorrow the political breakfast with robert mcdonnell. He will speak with the politico chief White House Correspondent on policy politics and news. Then we have the remarks live at 8 00 a. M. Eastern here on cspan2. Also the Senate ForeignRelations Committee holds a hearing on a recent report looking at human trafficking. This report talks about the hidden things of workers can encounter when seeking a job. Then another Senate Hearing on disaster protection and recovery over the last 10 years and recommendations for improvements. The Senate Small Business committee holding that event starting live at 11 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan2. Sunday night on q a. Kevin or talks about the financial issue and his job overseeing the largest municipal bankruptcy in u. S. History. If detroit had taken that 1. 5 billion filed in 2005 and 2006 when the stock market went down 6700 if it had invested in a dow jones index, the stock market is now trading at almost three times what it was. Not only would they have tripled their money but they could have paid attention sinful and then gone back into the business of declaring the 13th check and in addition to the 12 year deal. So it could have fixed itself if they had any sober management Going Forward. Ista sunday night on q a. Earlier today Michael Horvitz tes testified on oversight issues at the Justice Departmentdocume including recent denial of access to documents wanted by the igs office. This is about two hours. I have [inaudible conversations] som before the two of us give oure Opening Statements i have been told that there are some peopleoffices. From the Inspector General offices, i would like to have all of the people that are igs are acting igs please be ableor to stand. I would like to thank you folks for doing the job that you do ofu veryuch making sure that the laws are faithfully executed. We spend money according to the laws. Re thank you for your hard work for you are a very important part of government being responsible. So thank you for being here. The Inspector Generals act ofn the 1978 created this as independent objective units within the taxpay executive branch and since then the american taxpayers have relied oigner ig is to carry out three important tasks. That includes conducting audits and investigations of agency the programs and to promote the efficiency and effectiveness of heads programs and also to Keep Congress and agency heads informed about program operations, and the need for corrective actions. To help them achieve these goals, we authorize inspectorre generalsco to access all recordsdepartment belonging to the respective agencies. Two weeks ago the justice te Departments Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion d claiming the word all does not actually mean all. Today we are going to examine how this opinion is hindering the work of the Justice Departments Inspector Generalral and threaten all inspectors. This means what it says. That the department of justice is legally entitled to all of i the department records. If Inspector General deems the agenc document relative to his job and to do his job the agency should turn it over immediately without hesitation or review. Dar according to the department of2010. Justice Inspector General, the department did exactly that prior to 2010. However in 2010 the federalun bureau of investigation suddenly changed that practice after the of ig uncovered some embarrassing claimed information about the fbis misuse of letters. They claimed that they had the right to refuse to provide the ip information in over a dozen and con categories including information related to wiretaps, grand juries and Consumer Credit. They claim the attorneys would deputy review material first and then have the attorney general or Deputy Attorney general decide what could be released here and congress do not intend this to be a litigation style standoff inside a department. It is a waste of time and money for two divisions of the same Government Department to be fighting over access to the departments own records. The departments current practices are exactly the opposite of what the long ins visions. Under the law and Inspector General must be independent because agencies cannot be trusted to investigatepermission themselves. E if they have to ask for permission from senior leadership, they would not be truly independent. It does not allow the attorney general or the fbi to prohibit an that the Inspector General tomin completing an Investigative Agency but onlyce in certain limited circumstances. When that step is taken, it must be done in writing to the igo and the ig must forward that written notice to congress. The fbi would have us believe that this is what they would have us believe. An instead of written notice being to required, it it needs written permission to comply with an desi investigation. This is simply not how the law was designed to work. The ig testified to congress multiple times about thesesentiall problems since taking office in 2012. Congress took action to resolve the dispute essentially bolded andd underlined this of the act6a that ensures access to records. No, not literally. Declared no section 218 of this years Justice Department departmentig act declared that no funds should be used to deny them inspect timely access to all records. Was a section 218 also directed the Inspector Generals report within five days whenever there was a failure to comply witheceived this ironman. In february and march wei received for polls report that fbi the fbi refuse to comply. I wrote twice about these kevin notices and have not received answers to most questions. Is so mr. Kevin perkins thehael assistant director is here to account for these matters and also here is michael horowitz,practif t the Inspector General of the Justice Department and i would like to find out what the practice of the fbi was prior to this and whether that complies with the procedures that is thelaw. Argued to be mandatory. Because we have to realize that the fbi cannot be above the law. It has an obligation to comply not only with the Inspector General but also with ees restrictions that the congress places on appropriations, time meaning that employees cannot legally be spending their times with holding and reviewing documents before providing them to the ig. Been however, this is exactly what the ei has been doing. And now the are actuallys of endorsing it. They needed 60 pages of tortured that logic support its claim that neither this or 218 means what was said. Not surprisingly last thursday the Appropriations Committee generalhat sai authors wrote a joint letter to the Deputy Attorney general that said the following. That the interpretation ofong. Section 218 and the subsequent conclusion of the committees intentions is wrong. Ns as anythi for them to determine the intentions as anything other than supporting their right to gain full access to timely and complete information is disconcerting. We expect the department and all of the agencies to fully comply218. With section 218 and to provide them with full and immediate access to all records and documents and other materials in accordance with section 6a of the ig act. But only a few pages of the olc chatty actually discusses the idea. E op most of the opinions analyzedisclosu just three Legal Provisions whose general limitations onride the disclosure allegedly overridel ces the laws of the Inspector General access. Those provisions relate to the title iii wiretap, grand jury and fair credit reporting. S its unclear why so much ink was spilled on just these three provisions given that the fbi has cited nsiearly a dozenozen provisions with holding records and there are dozens if not hundreds of applicable nondisclosure provisionsli throughout the u. S. That can also limit the Inspector General o access under the tortured logicre statutes of the olc opinion. That opinion argues that nondisclosure statutes like th these trump the act unless Congress Makes it extra clear that they dont. By specifically mentioning those statutes by name in the act. Mention think about that for a moment. According to the olc this would have to mention each and every nondisclosure statute by name insure acces before the doj would believecords. That Congress Really meant toimply ensure the access to allnon records. And thatht is simply unworkable. C we do not even have a list of those that need to be listed. But they are listing specific exemptions to hundreds of other nondisclosure statute and that is why we use the word all. To cover everything without having to list each potential ale to exception and so it really is that simple. Nd m the members should be able to refused ask the legal consul about this and other questions with opinions. A unfortunately the department refuses to provide a witness from olc today. In response to the invitation of they say that the head coun mr. Thompson, is out of the country today. Listen but personal from the Inspector General from across the country are here, as you can see to listen to this and to help usus. Understand it. And i think all of you for joining us. In mr. Thompsons absence and we were asked to provide an a alternative witness from his office. But the department claimed that they do not have enough time to prepare for the testimony. After 14 months since working in dis may of 2014 the office was not ready to discuss it publicly. Deputy agriculture and that is very astonishing. I also invite the Deputy Attorney general to testifyls access about procedures that sheas announced to improve this access to records. Appear when she was being confirmed if asked if she would appear before the congress. All of the people say yes, and i think now they ought to say maybe they will appear. The four days after the olc opinion, she updated these procedures tot ty comply with the opinion. But these new procedures added th further delay and uncertainty toe note a the situation. The committee notified her ofnd this the hearing with plenty of advanced notice and move thent said sh original datae this week. Unfortunately the Department Said that she was unavailable to testify. So an associate attorney attempted to answer questions. I also have dave smith, acting quesons. Inspector general. Because that department follows the a olc opinion and denied access to that Inspector General. This is a sign of things to come in terms of the olc opinion that they will have four ids to document this across government. We have three witnesses on the second panel to the dust the implication of the opinion. This includes the project on government oversight, former joini Government Services administrator. I want to thank them for joining us today. Le beforeah i call on senator leahy i want you to know that he and i might have some differences of opinion on issues before the ihink congress. H but when it comes to him and i for working together on oversight ia think that we are hand and glove and particularly i think them for help when he was chairman of the committee to make amendments to the false claims act that needed to be made so congress can do the oversight and other issues as well. Thank you, senator. Overlooks thank you. Sometimes the press overlookst the fact that many know theseicans ancrats d things. And we tend overlook the fact that republicans and democratsator actually Work Together on a number of things in this body as the senator might have in this they way. Hen while youre doing this we pass a will talk about this as i wrote. While hes doing that we will talk about a lot of stuff. [laughter] actually the senator and i trans have done things on transparency the and accountability for a long time and its why we are doing things today. The past two weeks we have thought to protect the committees jurisdiction overload is the cornerstone transparency with freedom of information act and that that will includes weakening the freedom of information act. And we have done a lot of and bipartisan efforts as well and i to have worked very closely on this we are making sure that the open government laws are protected. We have taken this position weather weve had republican or democratic administration. We are an amazing country and itral to makes us a stronger and better country. The Inspector General is central to the mission and we have talked about it all here today as we have worked long hours andol i have met some of you onoperate occasion and i applaud the work that you do. You have played a crucial role in ensuring that we operate effectively within the scope of the law. Dent o this is more important than the department of justice and the department of justice policies. And this includes heraf constitutional rights. To for