Transcripts For CSPAN3 Hearing On U.S. Park Police Clearing

CSPAN3 Hearing On U.S. Park Police Clearing Protesters From Lafayette Square In... July 12, 2024

Opening statements at hearings are limit to the chair or the ranking minority member or his designee. This will allow us to hear from our witnesses sooner and help members keep to their schedules. Therefore im asking for unanimous consent that all of the members Opening Statements be made part of the hearing record if they are submitted to the clerk by 5 00 p. M. Today. Hearing no objection so ordered. Without objection the chair may also declare a recess subject to the call of the chair. As described in the notice statements, documents or motions must be submitted to the electronic repository hnrc. Mail. House. Gov. Additionally please note in all full person meetings members are responsible for their own microphones. With our fully inperson meetings members can be muted by staff only to avoid inadvertent background noise. Anyone present in the hearing room today must wear a mask covering their mouth and nose. The speaker of the house and the sergeant at arms acting upon the recommendation of the attendant physician require face coverings for all indoor gatherings over 15 minutes in length such as this committee meeting. Accordingly to maintain decorum and protect the safety of members of the staff the chair will not recognize any member in the hearing room to speak who is not wearing a mask. According to house rule 17 and Committee Rule 3d, the chair retains the right of recognition of any member who wishes to speak or offer a motion. This right includes the responsibility to maintain decorum. As should be noted it is permitted by the sergeant of arms through his guidance that exceptions for members briefly removing their masks to facilitate lip reading by viewers who are deaf or hardofhearing. Finally members or witnesses experiencing technical problems should inform Committee Staff immediately. With that i will now recognize myself for the Opening Statement. Today we continue examining the june 1st decision by park police to remove Peaceful Protesters around the area of Lafayette Square. At our hearing last month witnesses told us that Law Enforcement officers assaulted Peaceful Protesters and journalists without warning using tear gas and batons. We heard that the clergy at st. Johns church were forced off their own property for President Trumps own photoa op. Many questions remain unanswered. Who gave the order and why, who ordered police to gas and assault nonviolent protesters. Was it a premeditated plan to dominate the baltal scene as an Administration Official describes it . Buzz the nonviolent crowd given a clear warning and a safe way to leave . We hoped the administration could help us answer these questions at the june 29th meeting. They refused to testify, so im very glad that mr. Gregory t. Moynihan, acting chief of the u. S. Park service is here with us today. Were also fortunate to welcome major adam demarco. Your presence here is very important and shows much courage, and i thank you for your decorated service to the country which includes your participation here today. As the events have shown Lafayette Square was a test run for what is an illegal and ongoing crack down by the Trump Administration that is being inflicted in cities across this country and attempts to escalate those confrontation rather than deal with and admit what did occur on june 1st what was wrong the administration is doubling down on its response to unarmed civilians in cities like portland, and despite the mayors demands in portland that they leave but we saw with civilians being abducted off the streets without probable cause and without insignia or identification on the part of Law Enforcement that took them away. And questions continue about chicago, albuquerque, new mexico, where the president has threatened to use a similar tactic. President trump has said hes sending these forces because they are run by democratic mayors. This raises a crucial question. Was this park police led assault on june 1st motivated by partisan hostility directed from above to those demanding justice for george floyd and so many other black men, women and children and a very Diverse Group of people exercising their First Amendment rights from the washington, d. C. Region. My friend and our friend john lewis made one of his last public appearances at the scene of parkland protesters only six days before the june 1st incident. He spent his life doing what most of us know is the right thing, fighting for fair and equal treatment of black american and all americans. And i believe its all our duty in congress as americans and as human beings to assure others fighting dont suffer the same brutality mr. Lewis had to endure for his quest of fairness and equity for all people. I think we can do better and we can be better, and thats why were here today. Now let me now turn to the designee for the Ranking Member. Sir, the floor is yours. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Were here today really at what can only be apt to the democrats political theater regarding the events at Lafayette Square. Even just the nature of todays title that somehow the u. S. Park Police Attacked Peaceful Protesters is ludicrous. The assertion that these were peaceful protests is completely ignoring the facts. We know there were acts of arson. There was vandalism. There were assaults on Police Officers in the days leading up to june 1st. This is even acknowledged by the democrats second Panel Witness in his written testimony which states the witness learned that federal Law Enforcement officers from park police and u. S. Secret service had sustained injuries. However, todays hearing title does aptly note there are some Unanswered Questions. I was confident these would remain because the one witness that might be able to answer it was not in the previous hearing and the majority knew that and continued with the hearing for show. Were honored to have you with we appreciate you testifying before the committee. You might not have all the answers today but well probably be able to provide some of the facts that were missing from the previous hearing on this topic, so were grateful for that. My hope is well be able to see beyond the bias scope thru which the democrats are viewing these actions and establish a truthful history of what happened on that day. For example, we need more details about the warnings provided and the opportunity protests were given to disperse. In the last hearing democrats claim there were no warnings heard, but a cnn reporter Kaitlyn Collins live tweeted, quote, park police are warning protesters to leave. Theyve given three warnings over a loudspeaker that tweet came at 6 32 on june 1st, so who are we to believe . But we cannot talk about the events of june 1st in a vacuum. What plans were made prior to june 1st about expanding the perimeter . How did the levels of violence and distraction factor into the decision . We should also compare the scenarios to other protests that have occurred in the city. Americans frequently exercise their rights to assemble and protest in washington, d. C. We have a number of examples from the womens march, march for life, march for our lives just to name a few. The difference between those events and the events at Lafayette Square are the acts of violence and destruction. While the predetermined narrative surrounding the events at Lafayette Park and other events occurring through our nation outlines a story of Law Enforcement squashing rights the reality of the situation is quite different. In this case and in others Law Enforcement agents acted to secure an area and restore peace taking reactive measures after acts of violence and destruction. The provokers, the true call prts responsible for thwarting peaceful protest are the vandals and rioters. Bad actors have hijacked an Important National conversation to push their agenda of violence and disorder. If were looking to lay blame those are the individuals you 1st. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Now, we will turp to our first panel. Mr. Gregory moynihan has been with the park police or the department of interior Law Enforcement over 23 years. Thank you very much, chief, for being here today. Ill just remind the witness under our Committee Rules you must limit your oral statement to five minutes but that your entire statement will appear in the hearing record. The light confirms when you have one minute left and when your time has expired. The chair now again thanking chief moynihan for being here with us today recognizes acting chief moynihan for his testimony. Sir, the floor is yours. Chairman, Ranking Member bishop and members of the committee, my name is greg row moynihan, and im the acting chief of police for the United States park police. The United States park police is the oldest uniform federal Law Enforcement agency in the United States and provides Law Enforcement Services Including the protection of visitors and park resources to designated National Park service areas. Primarily in washington, d. C. , new york city and San Francisco metropolitan areas. Here in washington that includes the National Mall in Lafayette Park on the north side of the white house at 8th street between 15th and 17th street northwest. Each year the United States park police facilitates hundreds of First Amendment demonstrations and special events in and around the district. Some with permits and some with not. To ensure the safety of the public and the protection of National Cultural assets. In facilitating these demonstrations the park Police Partners coordinates with numerous Public Safety and Protection Agencies within the National Capital area. In the days following the death of george floyd videos from witness and cc tv became public and ultimately led to protests in cities throughout the United States and abroad. The district became the focal point for demonstrators. And one of the most highly concentrated areas of protest was in and around Lafayette Park, which is recognized as a public forum for speech and assembly. The park police is accustomed to managing large and occasionally unruly demonstrations throughout Lafayette Park and as well as throughout the National Capitol area. We have obligations to protect the safety of peaceful demonstrators, maintain law and order and keep our Law Enforcement officers safe. Beginning on friday, may 29, public use of Lafayette Park violent demonstrations occurred between may 29 and june 1 and included projectiles aimed at Law Enforcement officers including bricks, rocks, frozen water bottle, lit flares, fireworks and 2 by 4 sections of lumber. The violent protesters injured 50 officers from the United States park police alone. 11 of my officers were transported to area hospitals, and three of them were ultimately admitted. The unprecedented and sustained nature of violence and destruction associated some of the activities in Lafayette Park and surrounding areas required deescalation. And into sunday morning may 31 the u. S. Park police decided to temporarily restrict access to the park and the adjacent streets and sidewalks by ordering and installing antiscale fencing across the north side of Lafayette Park. The installation of the fence met deescalation goals while enabling First Amendment activity to continue. Once we made that decision ings tlgz of the fence was dependent on two factors. First, we were required to have sufficient officers on scene. An assessment of the violence and danger presented by the crowd led to a clearing of the park and the installation of the fence. The park police has faced criticism, however, interest installation of the no scale face on the north side of Lafayette Park was a key tactic tat served to deets clescalate violent behavior of bad actors. New York Daily News i believe the United States park police acted with tremendous restraint in the face of severe violence from bad actors who again caused 50 of my officers to require medical attention. The decision to install the fencing was in furtherance of commitment of that deescalation. Thank you and i look forward to answering questions the committee may have. For the testimony im reminding the members of the rule imposing a fiveyear lim m limit on questions. The chair will recognize the chairs of the subcommittees and then proceed on a first come first serve basis going forward. With that let me turn to mr. Huffman for your five minutes, sir. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Chief moynihan, welcome. You have spoken a lot in your testimony about the time frame from George Floyds murder until june 1st, and youve talked with respect to Lafayette Park about the period between your words between may 29th and june 1st. This committee and hearing is focused entirely on june 1st and the crinology matters. Are you suggesting some of these violent incidents by protesters, the throwing of caustic liquids and bricks and projectiles and harming officers occurred on june 1st . So, yes, sir, i am. From june 1st and throughout that opragdsal period we sustained violence from a number of bad actors in Lafayette Park and 8th street. Can you provide this committee with documentation of that because that directly contradicts other firsthand evidence we have including video. Now, did that happen before or after 6 35 p. M. Where your officers and others began advancing on protest snrz. The level of no, did the violence youre referring to happen before 6 30 p. M. . Yes, sir. I understand the question and the violence we were subjected to was throughout the entire operational period. We really do want to see that evidence, sir. Mr. Moynihan, youve been with the park police so after 13 years of litigation you ended up almost 13 million to Peaceful Protesters you had invanced on with forceful means. As part of that legal settlement the Service Police were required to make significant policy changes. Are you familiar with that sentiment . Yes, sir. And there are four significant parts of that legally enforceable commitment your agency made. The first is officers must be positioned in the rear of the crowd so they can actually hear the warnings that are given before the police advance. The second is that they need to use sound amplification as needed, and third, that they need to warn the protesters that they are in violation of a specific law. Theres a subsstant requirement part of that warning. And fourth, maybe most significantly for june 1st the arresting officers positioned in the rear of the crowd are required to a verbal and or physical indication to the officers in the front giving that warning so that your officers can confirm it was audible and it had been heard by the protesters. Were all these procedures followed on june 1st all right, i want to get your direct answer. And you say everyone of those procedures is followed. Im going to ask to play a video that we believe suggests otherwise, mr. Chief. So id like staff to play the clip. A voice on a loudspeaker briefly cuts through the noise. The announcement appears to come on the southeast part of the park. Even on the front lines of the protests the words are drowned out. Protesters turn to one another in confusion. Mr. Moynihan, could you understand the warning recorded in this video . Could you hear it . Was it audible to you . You must have super human hearing because i dont think any of us could hear it, and wouldnt you agree just from our own eyes we could see protesters who were clearly confused who didnt appear to be told they could be danced or or in violation of a specific law. Do you feel that was understood by protesters as evidenced by that video footage . I think when you take into account video footage theres context. And based on other video i viewed from june 1st and specifically around this time frame throughout the first warning through the third warning you can see a number of demonstrators leave the area and heed the warning that was given from the Incident Commander chief moynihan, we do look forward to getting the evidence that backs up

© 2025 Vimarsana