Senate Judiciary Committee holds hearing to examine Biden's Afghan parolee program

[0:00] following to the Taliban. The Biden administration carried out a haphazard evacuation and parole of [0:08] more than 70,000 Afghan nationals into the United States. And we'll talk more about the importance [0:14] of parole and its unique meaning within the immigration laws. But most many of the 70,000 [0:23] Afghan nationals that were paroled in the United States were unvetted and allowed to travel [0:29] throughout the United States, even when we had derogatory information or concerns about them. [0:35] On November the 26th, we'll remember that one of these Afghan nationals, a man named [0:41] Rahmanullah, I'm going to butcher his name, [0:46] Kanwal, carried out an ambush-style shooting against our National Guard service members [0:52] here in the nation's capital. One of them was killed, Sarah Beckstrom. This tragic incident [1:00] first lays before us today. [1:01] It bears the obvious question, how did this murderer come to be let in the United States in the first place? [1:07] And secondly, how do we know that there are no other such Afghan nationals in the United States [1:13] who might carry out another similar attack? To answer these questions, let's take a [1:21] brief walk back in history to the 9-11 World Trade Center attacks in 2001. [1:27] In 2004, the 9-11 Commission issued its final report noting that America [1:33] remains the only country in the world that has ever been attacked in the United States. [1:33] America remains the only country in the world that has ever been attacked in the United States. [1:33] America remains the only country in the world that has ever been attacked in the United States. [1:33] America remains at risk due to gaps in our nation's overall security apparatus, especially [1:39] with regard to the vetting of foreign nationals, as well as information sharing and communications [1:46] amongst the top law enforcement agencies and the intel community. Since 2001, many improvements [1:52] have been made, but America remains at risk. During his first administration, President Trump [1:59] heeded the recommendations of the 9-11 Commission and imposed enhanced vetting requirements on [2:05] aliens seeking to enter the United States. But enhanced vetting for aliens and increased [2:12] coordination between government entities to assess an individual's risk to the United States yields [2:18] little results if the subsequent president and administration deliberately choose to ignore [2:25] these effective measures. President Biden made this choice the moment he took office in 2021. [2:33] He revoked each and every one of President Trump's executive orders to [2:38] enforce enhanced vetting requirements on aliens seeking to enter the United States. [2:42] Similarly, President Biden revoked an assessment of the security apparatuses [2:47] of countries around the globe who had nationals seeking to enter the United States. [2:53] But the bigger blunder came in April of 2021, when President Biden charged ahead with the [2:59] announcement that the United States would withdraw from Afghanistan by 9-11-2021. [3:07] During his first administration, President Trump [3:10] created a strategy for an effective drawdown in Afghanistan based on input from military leaders [3:17] on the ground. President Biden chose to ignore that strategy, presumably to land another rebuke [3:23] of President Trump's policies or to make a political point. Whether President Biden rushed [3:29] forward with full knowledge and deliberation, or was wholly unaware of what was orchestrated [3:36] by his staff under him, is a question best left for another day and another hearing. [3:43] But one thing is clear. Responsibility for the failures with the withdrawal and evacuation from [3:49] Afghanistan lies squarely at the feet of the Biden administration. Not one of the agencies [3:57] during his tenure in office were prepared for the speed with which Kabul fell. Nor were they ready [4:04] for the volume of Afghans who had rushed to the embassy and airport seeking to leave Afghanistan. [4:12] Neither the Biden State Department, the Department of Defense, nor the Department of [4:16] Homeland Security had a proper plan in place. They didn't have enough information on the [4:23] number of people who needed to be evacuated, let alone who most of these people were, [4:29] especially if they were not directly associated with the embassy. There was no real guidance, [4:36] policies, or procedures in place. And as noted in one report, the agencies essentially made [4:42] up policies and procedures on the fly, essentially on an ad hoc basis. One deputy [4:50] inspector general stated uniformly, excuse me, informally, that he believed the bombing at Abbey [4:56] Gate on August 26, 2021, which killed 13 service members, was a direct result of a lack of [5:03] coordination and failure to have the right information about the anticipated volume [5:09] of people who would be coming or who would be considered vulnerable and in need of evacuation. [5:16] Let me say that again. A deputy inspector general said the bombing at Abbey Gate, [5:21] on August 26, 2021, which killed 13 American service members, was a direct result of the [5:31] failures of the Biden administration. The airlift from Afghanistan was the largest in U.S. history. [5:38] The DOD, Department of Defense, moved more than 120 Afghan nationals out of Afghanistan in 17 days. [5:49] One of these nationals were taken to transits. Once these nationals were taken to transit sites [5:55] outside of Afghanistan, known as lily pads in Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait, Italy, and Germany, [6:03] the department generally only had between 10 to 14 days to transport them from those countries [6:11] to the United States. The speed and lack of coordination of the withdrawal was far from the [6:17] only problem. The process by which massive numbers of these foreign nationals was vetted [6:24] and brought to the United States was also filled with flaws. [6:28] Let me turn to Operation Allies Welcome. The young man who committed this heinous attack [6:34] against our National Guard service members on November the 26th was not the recipient [6:40] of a congressionally passed special immigrant visa program. Rather, he entered the country [6:46] through Operation Allies Welcome parole program. You heard me use that term before, and I'll use [6:52] it again. Under this parole program that was created, or this parole program was created as [6:58] an end run around Congress. And that's why I'm here today. I'm here because I'm here because I'm [7:01] here to help you. And the Biden administration in the process let in tens of thousands of unvetted [7:06] Afghans into the country. These individuals had no honorable military service or sacrifice that [7:16] warranted special treatment. In fact, most of them had no immigration status at all, [7:22] which is why they were admitted under this authority known as parole. [7:27] Now when we talk about parole, it's not what most of us think about in the criminal law context. [7:36] or under U.S. immigration law, parole is somewhat like an easy pass, like speeding through a toll [7:42] booth. If we consider the definition of the word, it becomes clear just how foolish the Biden [7:48] administration's actions were. The U.S. Immigration Citizenship and Immigration Service defines the [7:54] word parole as a discretionary decision to allow inadmissible aliens who are not admitted to the [8:02] United States to be physically present in the United States. Or to put it more succinctly, [8:08] parole is a form of entry specially, specifically for people who might otherwise be inadmissible. [8:16] We can put these definitions together in this chart. In other words, parole authorizes the [8:23] Department of Homeland Security Secretary to allow people in our country who otherwise [8:27] would not be allowed in. This discretionary immigration authority was only supposed to [8:34] be used on a case-by-case basis. [8:36] For exceedingly rare and extreme circumstances. Under Operation Allies Welcome, President Biden [8:44] essentially gave an easy pass to hundreds of thousands of aliens who otherwise were not [8:50] eligible to come, or who were not eligible to come, but for this discretionary issuance of [8:56] parole. The Biden administration used parole to allow aliens into the country who were virtually [9:01] unknown, except for the information they provided to us about themselves. [9:08] One thing that struck me after I received several briefings on this parole program was how the security [9:15] vetting process was often based on information that was not accurate and in many cases was either [9:21] incomplete, missing, or completely fabricated. In other situations, agencies relied on records that [9:28] were inaccurate, incomplete, or missing critical biographic data like the person's name or date of [9:36] birth. One State Department inspector general audit highlighted a condition in which the agent was not [9:41] Kabul embassy officials comment about the high level of fraud in Afghanistan as compared to [9:47] other countries. Remember that Afghanistan has been run by a terrorist organization for multiple [9:52] periods of time throughout its history. Given this fact and given that this government controls [9:59] many of the records from that country, can we ever truly rely on any document issued by Afghanistan [10:07] to confirm that any Afghan national is who they claim to be? Even more disturbing were the findings [10:13] from the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General that some Afghan parolees made it into the [10:19] United States even though they had not actually completed their vetting protocols. At least 1,300 [10:27] Afghan nationals were allowed to travel and enter the United States before we even collected their [10:32] biometrics, fingerprints, photograph, in order to run background checks through the various [10:39] government databases. At the end of the day, the Biden administration allowed more than 70,000 [10:45] Afghan nationals to enter the United States. [10:46] We are deeply moved by the fact that the agency is taking its own decisions on the [10:58] purposes of the engaged state of Afghanistan. [11:01] The Afghan authorities will never be able to actually move the nationals into the United States [11:08] using this claimed parole authority. And once these folks were here, the agencies simply lost track of [11:13] them. Today we still haven't located many of the Afghan parolees who were resettled into over the 176 communities across the United States. But thankfully now that President Trump is back in office, he has prioritized vetting of all aliens outside the country and currently inside the country, including parolees. According to the U.S. intelligence, this is an actual [11:19] the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and the national counterterrorism center [11:25] director, Kent. Of the more than 70,000 Afghan parolees President Biden allowed into the country [11:33] through Operation Allies Welcome, 18,000 of them were known or suspected terrorists. [11:42] The NCTC has identified 2,000 individuals with ties to terrorist organizations [11:48] and is actively working with the FBI on their cases. So clearly more needs to be done. [11:56] We need to codify, that is put into law, the policies and procedures that we know need are [12:02] needed to ensure that America has an effective security apparatus and vetting process outside [12:08] and inside the United States. Until that happens, we can't give the American public a 100 percent [12:16] guarantee, which they're entitled to, that another attack will not occur. [12:22] Americans deserve to live free from fear that individuals with ties to terrorist organizations [12:28] are not roaming about our country. We cannot bring back U.S. Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, [12:39] but we can and will do everything in our power to prevent such a horrible incident [12:43] from occurring again. That accountability starts today with this hearing. [12:51] I'm looking forward to hearing from our witnesses this morning. And at this point, let me [12:55] yield the floor to Senator Sanders. [12:55] SEN. SANDERS SEN. I'll yield the floor to Senator Holly for his opening statement as the co-chair of the hearing. [12:59] And then I'll recognize Senator Padilla and Senator Durbin. [13:02] SEN. DURBIN. Thank you very much, Senator Cornyn, and thank you for holding this hearing. [13:08] It's a timely hearing on a vital matter. I will just say that what happened in the waning days of [13:15] the Afghanistan operation and the Biden administration's disastrous withdrawal [13:19] from Afghanistan I think is now well documented. The fact that there was no vetting that was [13:24] properly done, there were no interviews that were conducted that were not done, that was not done, that was not done. [13:25] There were no interviews that were conducted that were standard. The normal background checks were [13:29] waived. I mean, heck, as I think we'll see today and just a little bit when we hear from our witnesses [13:33] from the inspectors general and others, the standard vetting procedures that have been in [13:37] place for operations like this were completely disregarded. And we're living now with the [13:43] consequences of that. Tens of thousands of people admitted into this country. We have no idea of [13:47] their actual background. We have no idea of their potential terrorist connections. [13:50] And in many cases, we now have no idea where they are or what they're doing. [13:56] Who they're connected with or what they're capable of. Sadly, we've seen what some of them [14:00] are capable of in the horrific shootings that occurred here in the nation's capital just a [14:03] short while ago with the guardsmen that Senator Cornyn recognized and mentioned. [14:08] But I think we're going to hear more to even that this story today. And here is the additional [14:12] information, the shocking information that I think that we will find that this Congress, [14:17] which appropriated one and a half billion dollars for this operation on the part of [14:23] then President Biden, the admittance of all of these refugees and parolees. [14:26] Supposed supervision, one and a half billion dollars of that money, [14:31] tens of millions of dollars went to pro terrorist organizations in this country [14:37] that were supposed to help monitor these refugees and move them along the parole system. [14:42] But in fact, took the money and did who knows what with it. This is a story that we have seen [14:47] unfold before our very eyes in Minnesota as we sit here today. And now we're going to find that [14:52] it happened in this case. In this instances in multiple states, tens of millions of taxpayers, [14:57] millions of taxpayer dollars going to organizations that support Hamas that support terrorism that [15:03] had praised the attacks of October the seventh that have consistently defended apologized for [15:09] and justified terrorist attacks around the nation around the world. [15:14] That got money from our own government in order to participate in this boondoggle, [15:21] and I think we need an accounting of where that money has gone to. I think we need an accounting [15:25] of how it has been spent, and I think frankly, we need to get it back. [15:28] And I hope that today's hearing will begin to shed light on what [15:31] has happened. [15:32] The corruption that is still going on the tens of millions or more [15:38] of taxpayer taxpayer dollars that have been misspent, misappropriated [15:42] misallocated and misused. [15:45] And I would just say I think it's long past time for some accountability. [15:48] I hope we'll take a step forward in that today. Thank you, Senator [15:51] corner. Senator deal. Good afternoon. Thank you all for being here. [15:58] Thank you, Senator corner for convening this important and sadly [16:04] timely discussion. [16:07] So I want to be clear. The violence that unfolded just blocks from [16:11] the White House was heartbreaking to members of the West Virginia [16:16] National Guard who signed up to serve our country were targeted in [16:21] our nation's capital. And I think I speak for all of us, both sides [16:26] of the aisle here when I say our hearts are with the families of [16:29] Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolf. [16:32] And the family of Specialist Sarah Beckstrom that we continue to [16:35] pray for Staff Sergeant Wolf's recovery. [16:39] I am heartened to hear the progress that he's making, but the response [16:45] to their horrific ambush. [16:48] Shouldn't be to attack one another to seek to further divide our [16:52] country. It should be one where we come together and double down on [16:57] the values that make our country truly great values of service. [17:03] Of community of diversity and opportunity. Instead, we're seeing [17:08] from members of the Trump administration and even some of my colleagues [17:12] here in the Senate. There's a response. It's truly repulsive. [17:15] They're exploiting a tragedy for political gain, even when it means [17:19] turning their backs on many of the Afghan allies who saved American [17:22] lives overseas. [17:26] Now in preparing for today. My office is heard from veterans who [17:29] shared stories of the history of the United States. [17:33] And I think it's important for us to recognize that we are all [17:36] members who shared stories of the heroism and solidarity of many [17:40] Afghans who served alongside them. [17:43] And asked that we not condemn the many for the inexcusable act of [17:49] one person. [17:50] And I know there's a number of veterans here in the audience today. [17:56] Could the [17:57] Veterans and the battle buddies in the audience. Please stand for a [18:00] moment. Thank you. And I thank you. We thank you for your service [18:18] and for being here today. [18:20] To support the allies who stood shoulder to shoulder with all [18:24] American service members. [18:28] So today, let's set the record straight about what's really happening [18:31] across the nearly 200,000 who resettled in America. Each and every [18:37] Afghan refugee had to complete multiple rounds of extensive vetting. [18:43] That's fact vetting, not just before entering our country, but even [18:48] after they arrived. [18:51] I'm not going to sit here and say that the withdrawal was an [18:53] effort. [18:54] The withdrawal of our forces and evacuation of our allies was [18:56] perfect. [18:57] But under incredibly difficult circumstances, the United States [19:00] government came together to respond. [19:03] So that we would not leave our allies behind. [19:06] The separate involved numerous agencies from the intelligence [19:09] community. [19:10] The State Department, Health and Human Services, the FBI, the [19:14] Department of Homeland Security, including customs and border [19:17] protection. [19:20] Together, they set up vetting at the military bases. [19:23] Where people were sent before being allowed to come to the United [19:26] States. [19:28] And here's something that my Republican colleagues won't tell you. [19:32] If someone didn't pass vetting there, they did not leave those bases [19:37] to enter the United States. [19:40] We also know that very took place at safe Haven military bases here [19:45] in the United States. And that's all before the vetting that takes [19:48] place when someone goes to the immigration system with the U. S [19:51] citizenship and immigration system. [19:54] And in the case of the CIA's so called zero unit fighters. [19:58] The vetting went even further because Afghans were vetted by our [20:01] intelligence community. [20:03] Before they even joined the unit. [20:07] So to suggest that Afghan refugees aren't vetted thoroughly is a [20:10] pure fabrication. [20:13] To fit a tragic act of violence into a false narrative. [20:16] By this administration. [20:19] The United States is not the only country in the United States that [20:22] has vetted the U. S citizenship and immigration services. [20:25] And sure enough. [20:28] In the case of last the shooter from last fall, it's clear that [20:32] this was not a failure of vetting. [20:36] It was a failure of counterterrorism with professionals diverted [20:40] from their critical missions. [20:44] To instead of carry out mass deportations. [20:47] And it was a failure to support a veteran by pulling back resources [20:50] that normally support the resettlement process. [20:53] So let me be more specific. [20:56] Let me be more specific. [20:57] About this case reports indicate that long before November 26. [21:01] Mr. [21:02] Like like home wall was displaying an alarming change in behavior. [21:05] This is public. He was isolating himself for long periods in a dark [21:08] bedroom. [21:11] Retreating from his English classes, his job, his family, only [21:15] leaving to set out on long solo road trips. [21:18] A family member of his reached out to the authorities to request a [21:21] move. [21:22] For Mr. Like a wall. [21:24] And it was a failure of counterterrorism with professionals diverted [21:28] from their critical missions. [21:29] This is public. [21:30] And it was a failure of counterterrorism with professionals diverted [21:32] from his English classes, his job, his family, only leaving to set out on [21:33] long solo road trips. [21:34] A family member of his reached out to the authorities to request a [21:35] move for Mr. Black and wall, citing his isolation and fear for his [21:36] safety. [21:37] After being assaulted and requiring hospital care. [21:39] Mr. Like a wall reportedly even reached out to a CIA [21:42] Run group chat. [21:44] For a zero unit veterans asking for help. [21:47] But went unanswered. [21:53] To the combined failure of counterterrorism teams. [21:55] To see and intervene on these clear red flags. [21:59] And the failure of a system that dodged away. [22:02] Doge the way Mr like and wealth access to case management and mental [22:07] health support absolutely contributed to the horrific tragedy that [22:12] unfolded in our nation's capital just before Thanksgiving. [22:17] The investigation into the shooting is obviously ongoing and would [22:20] be irresponsible for us to today to speculate about motive or cause. [22:25] But we can't say for certain that it did not occur because Mr [22:31] like a wall was not vetted, but also want to make one of the point [22:35] as I close for nearly two decades. American service members relied [22:39] on our Afghan allies and some of the most dangerous situations [22:42] imaginable on the battlefield as interpreters and as members of the [22:45] CIA's zero units. So let's make no mistake. They too are veterans [22:48] of America's war in Afghanistan. [22:51] And I want to take a moment to thank the chairman of the International [22:55] Security Council. [22:57] And I want to take a moment to thank the chairman of the International [23:00] Security Council. [23:04] And I want to take a moment to thank the chairman of the International [23:05] Security Council. And I want to take a moment to thank the chairman [23:09] of the International Security Council. And I want to take a moment to [23:12] thank the chairman of the International Security Council and the [23:15] Kommgraat United Arab Emirates [23:17] so black history made Immigration Subcommittee for his past [23:20] consistent support for asked Afghan siri recipients, not only [23:23] welcoming them to Texas. But by joining me in introducing and [23:26] passing a bill to speed up the Immigration process for Afghan [23:29] interpreters, urging us all to quote. [23:33] Make sure these heroes are able to efficiently immigrate to the [23:36] United States to start a new life. [23:37] punish all Afghan allies or all immigrants for that matter for [23:42] the sins of one is outrageous. But sadly, that's exactly what's [23:47] happening. I urge you all to reject that kind of scapegoating and [23:52] cynical politics at the sensitive moment for our nation. Thank you. [23:58] Since the ranking member mentioned me by by name or identified me [24:03] as such. I would reiterate the fact that the shooter in West Virginia [24:06] and tens of thousands of others did not come in through any [24:09] congressionally passed legislation, but rather through this claimed [24:13] of parole authority, which we will [24:17] Hear more about in a moment, and that is significant. And I would [24:21] just say, finally, that all of us were misled by the Biden [24:24] administration that they would protect the safety of the American [24:28] people. First and foremost by properly vetting the safety of the [24:31] American people and protecting the safety of the American people [24:34] and protecting the safety of the American people and protecting [24:37] every alien that was admitted into the country. Obviously they [24:40] misrepresented that to us. We relied upon it. And I guess you could [24:43] say shame on us for believing the Biden administration would actually [24:46] do their job. Unfortunately, I neglected to recognize the chairman [24:49] of the full committee without whom this [24:53] Hearing would not be possible. So I will turn to him and ask him [24:56] if he has an opening statement. He'd like to make. Well, I'm the [24:59] chairman of the immigration subcommittee, and I'll say who is the [25:02] president of the immigration subcommittee. And I'll say who is the [25:10] president of the immigration subcommittee. And I'll say who is the [25:12] president of the immigration subcommittee. And I'll say who is the [25:15] president of the immigration subcommittee and I'll say who goes next. [25:16] But if you want to [25:18] Defer to Senator Durbin, then that's I'll respect that decision. [25:20] Very good. Thank you. Senator Durban. Thank you. Chairman Holly [25:24] Chairman Cornyn I want to acknowledge as others already have veterans [25:27] who were here today and all veterans who served our country so well. [25:30] This hearing was scheduled in the aftermath of a horrific tragedy. [25:34] On November 26 when the gunman ambushed two [25:37] National Guard members here in Washington [25:40] I offer my deepest condolences. [25:42] to the family of Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, [25:45] who lost her life in that attack, [25:47] and I'm keeping Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolfe [25:49] in my thoughts and prayers, as I'm sure many are. [25:52] At the outset, I want to note my disappointment [25:54] that there are no witnesses here today [25:57] representing the executive branch agencies [26:00] that are responsible for vetting immigrants. [26:03] There are many questions we would ask them. [26:05] The lead question is obvious. [26:07] Why did the Trump administration's USCIS grant asylum [26:11] last year to the shooter [26:13] just months before this deadly attack? [26:17] We do have witnesses from several inspector general's [26:19] offices, but President Trump illegally fired the heads [26:23] of those two offices, and I'm concerned these officers [26:26] may now be reluctant to criticize [26:28] Trump administration action. [26:31] Unfortunately, the administration has used [26:33] the heinous actions of one person [26:36] to paint an entire community as a threat to America. [26:39] Two days before this tragedy, [26:42] the administration ordered a review of all refugees [26:45] who entered the United States under the previous president, [26:48] requiring a re-interview of nearly 200,000 people. [26:53] 200,000. [26:55] After the shooting, the Trump administration announced [26:57] a flurry of additional measures [26:59] to crack down on legal immigrants. [27:02] They halted all asylum decisions [27:05] and announced a plan to re-examine green cards [27:07] for immigrants from 39 countries [27:10] the president has deemed countries of concern, [27:13] including Afghanistan. [27:16] The administration also began canceling [27:17] naturalization interviews and ceremonies [27:20] based on an individual's country of origin, [27:23] and they suspended visa and immigration processing [27:26] for all from Afghanistan. [27:28] Listen to what Chris Purdy, a veteran who served in Iraq, [27:32] said about the Trump administration policies, [27:34] and I quote, tragedy should not be used [27:37] to flatten complex realities, erase years of lifesaving work, [27:42] or cast suspicion on an entire community [27:45] that stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States [27:47] in our longest war. [27:49] Afghan allies are extensively vetted population. [27:53] They were vetted in Afghanistan before they were hired to work, [27:56] to stand beside and help protect our troops. [27:59] They were vetted again when seeking safety [28:01] in the United States. [28:03] Sometimes that vetting went on for months and longer, [28:06] and again after they arrived through a rigorous, [28:08] recurring process involving multiple federal agencies. [28:12] These allies served alongside America's service members [28:16] through two decades of war. [28:18] They risked their lives and many gave their lives [28:21] to serve the United States. [28:22] We support our troops. [28:23] So what happened to these allies, these friends, [28:26] those who stood behind us when they needed our support? [28:30] Let's look to our veterans for that perspective. [28:33] The Iraq and Afghan veterans of America [28:35] conducted a survey of their members last fall. [28:38] More than 70% of the respondents disagreed [28:42] with the following statement. [28:44] Disagreed. [28:45] Since 2001, the United States government [28:47] has done enough to support our Afghan allies. [28:50] It is obvious to those who served [28:52] that we owe so much more to these allies. [28:53] When asked about the detention of Afghans [28:56] who were going through the immigration process, [28:59] 70% of respondents agreed that the detentions brought them, [29:02] quote, a deep sense of personal shame or moral injury. [29:07] They know that we treated them badly. [29:10] Our service members need to know that when they're [29:12] in the line of fire and depending on foreign allies [29:15] to protect their lives, that the United States will stand [29:18] by those allies after the confrontation. [29:20] Who will put their lives on the line for our service members [29:24] in the next war, after watching our treatment [29:26] of Afghan allies who were detained and deported [29:30] to a country where they could be imprisoned or killed [29:32] for their work with us? [29:34] America is better for those service members [29:36] having returned home, and America is better [29:39] for their Afghan allies who now call our nation home. [29:42] It is time for us to stand behind those [29:44] who put their lives on the line for our service members. [29:47] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [29:49] Senator Grassley. [29:53] I want to thank Senator Cornyn and Senator Hawley [29:56] for their leadership and coordination. [29:59] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [30:00] Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for participating [30:04] in this joint subcommittee hearing. [30:06] Today's hearing follows an Afghan national's vile attack [30:10] on two national guardsmen, which killed Sarah Beckstrom [30:15] and Andrew Wolf, was critically wounded. [30:20] We're forever grateful for these guardsmen's bravery [30:23] and service to our country. [30:25] In 2024, law enforcement arrested an Afghan national, [30:30] conducted a terror attack on Election Day, [30:33] and just days after Sarah Beckstrom and Andrew Wolf [30:37] were attacked, law enforcement arrested another Afghan national [30:42] in Texas who posted online threats to bomb [30:46] and kill Americans. [30:48] The last administration failed to enforce our immigration laws [30:53] and to appropriately vet Afghans as they, [30:58] that they brought to the United States. [31:01] President Biden and Vice President Harris, [31:04] after their administrations botched withdrawal [31:08] from Afghanistan, stood up a massive immigration [31:13] parole program, Operation Allies Welcome. [31:18] A staggering 70,000-plus Afghan parolees entered [31:24] the United States through the program. [31:27] Immigration parole's intent is careful consideration [31:32] on an individual case-by-case basis. [31:37] President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas, however, [31:40] failed to enforce our immigration laws and granted [31:44] parole en masse to a large swath of folks at the border [31:50] and elsewhere, including Afghan evacuees, many of whom [31:54] didn't even serve alongside U.S. forces in Afghanistan. [32:00] The Biden-Harris administration invited other Afghans [32:04] into the United States as a special part of Special Immigrant [32:09] Visa Program. [32:11] By 2022, some in Congress wanted to create a pathway for permanency [32:17] of, for tens of thousands of Afghans, both those issued an SIV [32:24] as well as those merely paroled into the United States. [32:28] The scope of these efforts continues to go far beyond those [32:33] who dutifully, [32:34] served alongside our troops and aided in their mission. [32:39] Since 2021, I've warned the Biden administration, [32:43] my congressional colleagues, and the American public [32:46] about the failure to vet Afghan evacuees. [32:50] For years, the Biden administration had known [32:54] vetting vulnerabilities from the people. [32:57] The multiple inspector generals released reports detailing [33:02] the Biden-Harris administration's [33:04] stark vetting failures. [33:08] Initially, the Biden administration failed to vet [33:11] evacuees against all available Defense Department tactical data [33:18] prior to being paroled. [33:20] But even if all the databases were searched, there's arguably [33:27] never be a full vetting. [33:30] The Afghan government, national and local, isn't known to be [33:34] the most organized and diligent. [33:36] But it's only possible if the database and intelligence [33:38] work together. [33:39] If our government don't possess all known security risks, [33:45] running names against the database won't do much good. [33:52] Last year, on September 9th, DHS Secretary Noem said [33:57] that as of August 12, 2025, thousands of operation allies [34:06] welcomed parolees. [34:07] Those who were not in the same background as me, [34:07] are not the same as you, are not the same as me, [34:07] and they're the same as you. [34:07] or potential national security risks. [34:11] Clearly, problems persist in our own backyard. [34:15] More recently, on January 7th of this year, I wrote to the Department of Justice, FBI, [34:23] Department of Homeland Security, State Department, CIA, and the Department of Defense. [34:30] In that letter, I made public new records. [34:33] Those records show that the Biden State Department had recommended a special visa, [34:40] immigration visa, for Afghan nationals charged with shooting the two National Guardsmen. [34:47] According to the Biden State Department, the terrorists pose no threat to national security, quote-unquote. [34:54] Last year, I also brought the USCIS and the FBI personnel for bipartisan briefing as part of my oversight. [35:04] The briefings further discussed the inherent failure in the vetting system of the previous administration. [35:12] The American people deserve to know the information that the members heard during these hearings [35:17] and have asked the FBI to declassify certain information. [35:22] Still today, some proposals ask Congress to simply rubber stamp these abuses of parole. [35:31] Instead of using more proper pathways like refugees, [35:34] more effective immigration programs, [35:37] the Biden-Harris administration took drastic shortcuts, [35:40] and America is less safe as a result. [35:43] Carving out exceptions and pushing poorly vetted parolees to the front of the line is not the answer. [35:51] Addressing the executive branch's prior abuses of parole is. [35:58] That's why I've reintroduced my Immigration Parole Reform Act this Congress. [36:05] Similarly, recent proposals to expand the SIV program do little to address the thousands already here who weren't adequately vetted. [36:17] Thankfully, President Trump's swift work to protect the American people and vet those coming here or intending to remain is welcome course of correction. [36:28] I look forward to this hearing on what happened, what went wrong, and how this administration can address this issue moving ahead. [36:39] Again, I thank my two chairmen, subcommittee chairmen, for their work on this hearing. [36:47] Mr. Chairman, before I turn to the witnesses, I'd ask that Senator Coons be allowed to make brief opening remarks. [36:53] There's been three Republican opening statements. [36:56] A third Democratic statement is in order. [36:58] This committee has always practiced parity. [37:01] Senator Coons is more than welcome to use his time to make any statement he wishes to make. [37:06] We've had two opening statements per side, and then the chairman, without whose assistance this hearing would not be possible, [37:14] was of course allowed to make an opening statement, but we need to proceed with the hearing. [37:21] At this time, I'd ask unanimous consent to introduce the following two documents. [37:27] Mr. Chairman. [37:28] If you'll wait until the end. [37:29] Mr. Chairman. [37:30] If you'll wait until I make my request. [37:32] I ask unanimous consent to introduce the following documents into the record of December 3, 2025 by press release from the Department of Homeland Security, [37:41] titled Miles from Nations Capital. [37:43] ICE arrests ISIS-K Afghan terrorist who was released into the U.S. under Biden's Operation Allies. [37:51] Secondly, a December 4, 2025 DHS press release titled ICE arrests criminal aliens from, illegal aliens, [37:59] from Afghanistan into our country by the Biden administration. [38:04] And finally, a January 14, 2026 statement from Mike Ho, co-president and director of Federal Relations for Numbers USA, [38:13] outlining the danger to Americans' national security and public safety when the Biden administration released unvetted Afghan nationals [38:21] into the United States through parole and noting, listing some of the Afghan nationals who attempted to commit terrorist attacks, [38:29] on U.S. soil, as well as other criminal Afghan nationals. [38:34] Without objection, those will be admitted as part of the record. [38:38] Yes, sir. [38:39] Mr. Chairman, if I could also enter into the record a number of letters. [38:42] Please. [38:43] I would like to submit for the record a letter from Afghan EVAC, an organization that's helped thousands of Afghans who directly supported U.S. troops to get to safety. [38:54] I also have in my hands letters from 1,200 SIV holders who work directly with our troops in Afghanistan. [39:00] A letter from hundreds of Afghans stranded in Qatar. [39:03] A letter from 200 members of the Afghan Air Force. [39:06] A letter from a retired U.S. Air Force captain. [39:09] Each of these are a testament to the harm this administration's current policies are causing to those who served alongside us. [39:17] Just this past week, I had a chance to sit with an Afghan who spent eight years fighting alongside our special forces as an EOD tech, [39:25] someone who has resettled into the United States, who is working, [39:29] who has been committed to the military, [39:30] who has been granted asylum, [39:32] and he and his wife are terrified that he will be picked up and forced to return to face the Taliban, [39:38] who didn't just threaten his life, [39:40] but have murdered a member of his immediate family as retribution for his brave and dedicated service. [39:46] He saved the lives of two American soldiers in a firefight. [39:50] We should not turn our backs on folks like this who stood with us. [39:54] I'll close. [39:55] As Afghan EVAC has said, [39:57] there is no greater threat to the future [39:59] of U.S. military operations than the perception that America abandons its partners once the shooting stops. [40:05] I believe the Taliban is cheering what is happening today, [40:08] and those who are being forced back to Afghanistan I think will be an enduring stain on our nation. [40:13] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [40:14] The question, of course, is where does the public safety of American citizens, [40:19] where does that fit into our colleagues' analysis here? [40:23] Of course, allies who assisted us, who are properly vetted, who are not a threat to public safety, [40:28] are welcome into our country. [40:30] We do want our allies to work with us in future conflicts, [40:35] but to let tens of thousands of people into the country unvetted, [40:40] many of whom did not serve with our United States military, [40:44] is just flat irresponsible and puts public safety of the American citizens at risk. [40:50] That, for us, this side of the aisle, is a non-negotiable requirement. [40:55] At this time, I want to introduce our witnesses. [40:58] Mr. Chairman. [40:59] First is Averyn Baker, senior official performing the duties of inspector general for the U.S. Department of State. [41:06] I want to thank Mr. Baker, who is currently serving as the senior official [41:10] performing the duties of inspector general at the State Department. [41:15] He leads a global workforce whose mission is to prevent and detect waste, fraud, and abuse, [41:20] and mismanagement, and to promote efficiency in the programs and operations of the department [41:27] and in the U.S. agencies. [41:28] A seasoned senior executive with more than two decades of oversight experience, [41:35] Mr. Baker previously led more than 80 inspections and evaluations, [41:40] improving the efficiency of department operations while identifying hundreds of millions of dollars of findings [41:46] with monetary benefit to American taxpayers. [41:50] Before this current position, Mr. Baker was the assistant inspector general for inspections, [41:55] where he led the OIG's worldwide program. [41:57] To conduct independent assessment of overseas posts, [42:01] spearheading efforts to streamline the inspection process through data automation, [42:07] risk analysis, and dynamic planning to address emerging oversight challenges in Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Israel. [42:16] Craig Adelman is the deputy inspector for audits of the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security. [42:25] In this role, he helps oversee the audit, [42:28] functions of the DHS Office of Inspector General, [42:32] which conducts independent performance and financial audits of DHS programs, [42:37] and operations to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability. [42:42] Before becoming deputy IG for audits, [42:45] Mr. Adelman worked as a senior program analyst for DHS, [42:49] conducting performance audits on information management and related issues. [42:56] Finally, [42:57] Mr. Michael Roark, [42:59] April 1, 2019, [43:01] the Department of Defense inspector general completed a reorganization of its evaluation components. [43:07] Intelligence and special program assessments, [43:09] policy and oversight, [43:11] and special plans and operations were merged into the evaluations component. [43:16] Mr. Roark was named as the deputy inspector general for this new component. [43:20] Mr. Roark has served with the Department of Defense as inspector general since June 2000 [43:30] in a variety of staff and leadership positions. [43:32] Becoming a member of the senior executive service on September 21, 2014. [43:38] Mr. Roark obtained his undergraduate degree in business from Virginia Tech [43:42] and his master's in policy management from Georgetown University. [43:45] In 2004, he completed a detailed assignment to the Iraq Coalition Provisional Authority inspector general. [43:52] Thank you all for appearing here today. [43:56] If you'd please rise so I can administer the oath. [43:59] Mr. Chair, as they rise, [44:01] the ability for Senator Coons to enter into the record the documents you referenced. [44:05] If you raise your right hand and repeat after me, [44:07] I state your name. [44:08] I solemnly swear that I will tell the truth, [44:12] the whole truth, [44:13] and nothing but the truth, [44:14] so help me God. [44:17] And all the witnesses said yes. [44:19] I'm sorry, was there additional records? [44:24] The documents referenced by Senator Coons are those entered into the record. [44:28] Without objection, I beg your pardon. [44:30] Let me turn to Senator Hawley to begin our questioning. [44:34] Thank you all for being here. [44:35] Thank you very much, Senator Cornyn. [44:40] Thanks to all the witnesses for being here. [44:42] Mr. Adelman, if I could just start with you. [44:44] You are the deputy inspector general for the agency charged with overseeing the Afghan parolee program. [44:49] Is that correct? [44:50] That's correct. [44:51] In 2022, your office found that President Biden's DHS allowed some Afghans into the country before they were fully vetted, [44:59] including, if I remember correctly, one who had been liberated from prison by the Taliban. [45:04] Do I have that correct? [45:05] That's correct. [45:06] I think we're going to see this exhibit maybe over the side of my shoulder here. [45:09] I just want to read directly from your report. [45:11] CBP allowed some evacuees to enter into the United States who were not fully vetted. [45:15] CBP paroled one evacuee into the United States who had been liberated from prison by the Taliban. [45:21] CBP paroled another evacuee who posed national security concerns. [45:26] Now, early reports by the inspectors general at DOD and the FBI found that over 50 known or suspected terrorists had entered the United States. [45:35] As a result of the Biden administration screening or lack thereof. [45:38] And last month, the director of national intelligence said that 2,000 Afghans in America may have ties to terrorism. [45:45] That is a very, very big number. [45:47] So I just want to talk a little bit about how this happened and see if I can get your help in doing that. [45:52] Let me just start with testimony that this committee, the full committee, the Judiciary Committee previously received in 2021. [46:00] Then DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified that. [46:03] Yes. [46:04] The administration had a rigorous vetting process in place. [46:10] I think we've got a quote of his here. [46:12] We have taken steps. [46:13] I'm quoting him now to make sure that the vetting program is indeed rigorous. [46:17] Now, he said this may have been in response to a question for me. [46:21] He said that indeed the vetting did deviate from normal refugee screening. [46:25] That was an understatement. [46:27] But he went on to say we have taken steps to make sure the program is indeed rigorous. [46:31] So you investigated the vetting process. [46:35] Did you find that the Biden administration's DHS had a formal vetting process in place that they followed carefully? [46:42] Mr. Chairman, could you answer? [46:44] There's a question for the chairman. [46:45] Are we intentionally bypassing opening statements by the witnesses and questions? [46:50] No, we'll come back to opening statements after Senator Hawley is through. [46:53] The department did not have a formal process at the start of the O.A.W. [47:00] Okay, can you just say that one more time? [47:02] The department at least could not provide us with a formal screening and vetting process at the start of the O.A.W. process. [47:08] The department did not have a formal screening and vetting process in place. [47:15] The most that the Biden administration did, according to your investigation, was to run Afghans' biometric and biographical information, I think is what you found. [47:22] Like their names and dates of birth and other biographical information they may have supplied. [47:27] Is that correct? [47:28] Is that broadly correct? [47:29] That's correct until December of 2021 when they began requiring in-person interviews. [47:34] So until that time, for the first several months, they were relying on the DHS? [47:37] They were relying on biographical information supplied by the Afghans as well as some biometrics. [47:44] Now, your office found that that approach was severely flawed, partly because many Afghans did not know their birth dates. [47:52] Is that correct? [47:53] Explain this. [47:54] That's correct. [47:55] There was missing information from the O.A.W. population, including first, last names, and date of birth. [48:01] There was about 11,000 to 12,000 that did not know their date of birth. [48:04] How many, sorry? [48:05] Between 11,000 and 12,000. [48:06] Okay. [48:07] 11,000 and 12,000. [48:08] 11,000 and 12,000 who did not, which is a cultural thing, I think, but obviously presents an issue for us when doing vetting. [48:14] So 11,000 or 12,000 who were admitted for whom we didn't even have their date of birth. [48:19] That's pretty extraordinary. [48:21] Let me ask you this. [48:22] Did the Biden administration require Afghans to show identification at ports of entry? [48:28] The department requested identification, but not all Afghans had formal identification, such as a passport. [48:34] We found over 30,000 that did not have formal identification. [48:37] Could you just say that number one more time? [48:38] How many who didn't have identification? [48:40] I believe the number is actually 36,000. [48:43] 36,000 who could not show identification at a port of entry. [48:48] Here's a quote from the report. [48:50] CBP's concepts of operations allowed its officers to admit or parole evacuees into the country without presenting proper identification documents. [48:57] 36,000 of them. [48:59] That's astounding. [49:01] And then my understanding is to do the bare bones background checks that were actually performed, [49:08] DHS, the Biden DHS, sent a list of Afghans to the Department of Defense and the FBI. [49:13] That process would normally take months. [49:15] Would it surprise you to hear that the DOJ's inspector general found that the list of evacuees was submitted to the FBI via email and the FBI was given two hours to respond? [49:29] I can't confirm that. [49:30] I can just say that it was there's very limited time to conduct the screening and vetting of those evacuees. [49:35] Yeah. [49:36] Here's the quote. [49:37] It's over my shoulder. [49:38] I think. [49:39] And then the other thing I want to add. [49:40] If you are a refugee, the Department of Defense has done an extensive investigation of the number of refugees that were submitted to the FBI via email with only two hours to respond. [49:48] Let me just ask you finally, I know my time is about expired. [49:53] Just when it comes to interviews. [49:54] Normally refugees, SIV applicants are required to attend an in-person interview. [49:59] Mr. Edelman, did DHS systematically interview evacuees before they were admitted? [50:04] Was this, were all the evacuees interviewed? [50:07] No. [50:08] All of the above should have been done and the fact that tens of thousands [50:11] were admitted without so much as an ID without a birth date. I think [50:14] it's really no surprise why we are where we are. Thank you, Mr [50:18] Chairman. [50:19] Let's go back and allow the witnesses to make an opening statement [50:23] for further questioning and Mr Adelman will recognize you first for [50:26] that purpose. [50:28] Thank you and good afternoon. Chairman Grassley, Cornyn, Holly [50:33] ranking members Padilla and Durbin. [50:36] And members of the subcommittees. Thank you for inviting me here today [50:39] to discuss the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector [50:42] General's critical oversight work of the federal government's efforts [50:45] to resettle Afghans under Operation Allies Welcome. In the summer [50:48] of 2021, the United States withdrew military and diplomatic personnel [50:52] from Afghanistan. The prior administration then launched Operation [50:55] Allies Refuge and shortly thereafter directed the secretary of [50:58] Homeland Security. [51:00] To lead interagency efforts known as Operation Allies Welcome or [51:03] O. A. W. To help resettle vulnerable Afghan nationals. [51:06] More than 77,000 Afghan nationals have been resettled in the last [51:10] year. [51:11] More than 70,000 Afghan nationals were paroled into the United States [51:14] through O. A. W. Between July 2021 and September 2022. [51:17] Pro is a discretionary and temporary immigration authority used [51:20] for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit. [51:23] The recent shooting of two National Guard members in Washington, [51:28] D. C. [51:29] Allegedly involving an Afghan national who entered the country through [51:32] O. A. W. [51:33] Has sharply focused public attention on how DHS screened and vetted [51:36] this population. [51:37] Since 2021 DHS OIG has conducted a series of audits and evaluations [51:43] in which we identified. [51:44] Systemic concerns about the department's ability to carry out one [51:47] of its most fundamental responsibilities. [51:50] Ensuring that individuals granted parole or temporary protection in [51:53] the United States are properly screened vetted tracked and monitored. [51:57] We've issued seven reports on the subject since 2022 and we continue [52:01] to examine the department's performance related to O. A. W. [52:04] My testimony today focuses on our issued reports. [52:08] Which collectively assess DHS's performance from initial screening [52:11] and vetting to the ongoing processes for re vetting and monitoring [52:15] individuals over time. [52:18] Our most consequential audit report on this subject OIG 2264 examined [52:22] DHS's ability to screen vet and inspect Afghan evacuees. [52:26] We found that DHS encountered significant obstacles that prevented [52:29] CBP officers from consistently accessing complete and accurate data [52:33] when determining evacuees and visibility and parole eligibility. [52:37] In many cases critical information such as full names dates of birth [52:42] and travel document data were missing incomplete or unreliable. [52:47] We also found that CBP permitted at least 35 individuals to travel to [52:51] the United States without passing both biometric and biographic vetting [52:55] processes. [52:56] And DHS did not collect full biometrics for nearly 1,300 individuals [53:01] before arrival. [53:03] Further CBP paroled two individuals who were later determined to be [53:06] national security risks which resulted in their subsequent apprehension [53:09] and removal from the country. [53:11] Our more recent work examined DHS's handling of derogatory information [53:15] about O. A. W. Parolees who remained in the country. [53:18] We found the department uses the same techniques as the department [53:20] uses a fragmented siloed process in which no single component has clear [53:24] ownership of identifying, resolving, and acting on derogatory information. [53:28] This meant that individuals whose benefit applications were denied due [53:31] to derogatory information could remain in the United States indefinitely [53:34] without enforcement consequence. [53:36] We continued this work in 2024 by examining DHS's oversight of parole [53:41] exploration across multiple humanitarian programs including O. A. W. [53:45] We found DHS lacked a well-defined process to track the end of parole [53:50] and did not routinely initiate enforcement. [53:52] We also found that DHS did not initiate enforcement actions when an [53:55] individual's parole expired. [53:57] As a result, DHS did not have assurance that former parolees were lawfully [54:00] present in the United States after parole expiration. [54:05] We've issued 17 recommendations intended to help the department fix these [54:08] weaknesses. [54:10] We recommended DHS assign centralized ownership of vetting and derogatory [54:13] information resolutions and real-time tracking of parole status. [54:17] Our findings do not assert that better processes could have prevented [54:20] specific incidents. [54:23] The current processes for vetting and tracking individuals who entered [54:26] the United States as part of O. A. W. are not sufficiently reliable. [54:30] Our findings have been consistent. [54:32] DHS was not adequately prepared to manage the scale and complexity of the [54:35] Afghan evacuee crisis while maintaining strong national security controls. [54:39] Through our oversight work on this subject, we identified vulnerabilities [54:42] to the American public if the department cannot properly screen and vet [54:46] individuals entering the United States, resolve risk indicators, or ensure [54:50] accurate records. [54:53] Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. [54:54] I look forward to answering your questions. [54:56] Mr. Baker. [55:01] Good morning, Chairman Cornyn and Holly, ranking members Padilla and Durbin, [55:07] and members of the subcommittees. [55:09] Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. [55:12] First, I want to acknowledge the tragic events that have brought us here. [55:15] We remain hopeful for Staff Sergeant Wolf's recovery and are encouraged by [55:19] reports of his progress. [55:21] Our deepest sympathies go to his family and the family of Specialist Beckstrom, [55:25] whose life was suddenly and tragically taken. [55:28] The nation mourns for him. [55:29] We all know the loss. [55:31] My remarks will focus on the oversight work of the State Department's Office of [55:34] Inspector General, particularly our work related to the screening, vetting, and [55:38] relocation of Afghan nationals. [55:40] This work spans multiple years and touches on a range of programs and [55:44] processes. [55:45] We've issued a total of 11 reports on the screening, vetting, and relocation [55:49] of Afghans from 2017 to 2024. [55:53] Afghans have entered the United States through three major pathways, humanitarian [55:58] parole, refugee status. [55:59] refugee status, and the special immigrant visa program. Our office is focused primarily on the [56:06] Afghan SIV program, which Congress created in 2019 to resettle Afghans who worked on behalf of the [56:13] U.S. government. The SIV process included a review of eligibility, a petition phase, [56:19] and a final visa application. State department personnel collect applicant biographic and [56:25] biometric data, submit data for vetting, and conduct in-person interviews. Only after all [56:31] these steps are complete is a visa issued. Even after a visa is issued, final admission is [56:37] determined by the Department of Homeland Security at the port of entry. State OIG has identified [56:43] long-standing challenges with the Afghan SIV program. Prior to the evacuation of Kabul in [56:49] August 2021, the program faced chronic staffing shortages and relied on outdated technology. [56:57] Factored [56:57] that contributed to a growing backlog of SIV visas. During the evacuation, State OIG found [57:05] that the lack of reliable data and inconsistent criteria for identifying at-risk Afghans [57:10] severely hampered planning and execution. After the evacuation, [57:15] the State Department experienced an influx of Afghan SIV applications, [57:20] greatly expanding the existing backlog to almost 155,000 in December 2022. In response, [57:28] the Department increased staffing, deployed new software tools, and expanded interview locations. [57:34] We also examined how Afghan SIV holders fared after arriving in the United States. [57:41] State OIG found that the vast majority of Afghan SIV families secured housing and enrolled their [57:47] children in school within 30 days of arrival. However, employment rates were lower than those [57:52] of other refugee populations, and resettlement agencies reported persistent challenges in [57:57] addressing mental health needs, mental health needs, and mental health needs. [57:59] Locating affordable housing and providing language support services. [58:04] In January 2025, the administration suspended refugee admissions and has not reopened the [58:10] program to Afghans. In June, the President restricted visa issuance and entry for Afghan [58:16] nationals except for visas issued under the SIV program. In November of last year, [58:22] the State Department expanded that suspension to include Afghan SIVs. [58:27] Looking ahead, several SIV program [58:29] areas require attention. Leadership gaps, fragmented information systems, [58:34] and limited coordination among agencies continue to hinder the program. [58:39] We also have ongoing investigations into potential fraud, and we are working closely with other [58:44] government agencies to ensure accountability. We remain committed to ensuring that our oversight [58:49] leads to meaningful reforms that protect our national security and honor our promise [58:54] to those who stood with us. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to your [58:59] questions. [58:59] Vice Chair McKinney great, Mr. Chair. This brings me to my next question. [59:00] Thank you Mr. Baker. Mr. Rourke. Good afternoon Chairman Cornyn and Holly and ranking members [59:07] Padilla and Durbin and distinguished members of the subcommittees. Thank you for your inviting [59:12] me to discuss our previous oversight work on the DoD's supporting role in screening displaced [59:17] people from Afghanistan. In June 2021 the DoD tasked the Army's National Ground Intelligence [59:23] Center or INGIC to support the Department of State's request for assistance for special [59:28] immigrant visa applicant processing. Later beginning in August 2021 the DoD supported [59:34] the Department of Homeland Security as the lead agency responsible for biometric screening of [59:39] Afghan evacuees traveling to the U.S. and overseas military locations. DHS's Customs [59:45] and Border Protection conducted a portion of the biometric enrollments for Afghan evacuees at [59:51] overseas staging bases and stored is collected information in its ident database. The DoD [59:57] completed the [59:58] remaining enrollments and screened its information against the DoD automated biometric information [1:00:04] system or ABIS. [1:00:07] The DoD OIG issued 21 audit and evaluation reports related to the DoD support for displaced [1:00:12] persons from Afghanistan. [1:00:14] Today I will specifically discuss two of those reports on the DoD supporting role in enrolling [1:00:19] and screening those displaced persons. [1:00:22] In our first report from February 2022, we determined that the National Counterterrorism [1:00:26] Center was not using all DoD data to vet Afghan evacuees prior to their arrival in the U.S. [1:00:34] Specifically the NCTC did not have access to some DoD biometric and contextual data [1:00:39] in the ABIS database such as tactical operations debriefings and reports or fingerprints from [1:00:46] improvised explosive devices or access to intelligence databases used by the DoD on [1:00:52] a classified network. [1:00:54] This occurred because CBP enrollments were forwarded to the NCTC. [1:00:58] By the National Targeting Center for vetting purposes and were compared against the DHS [1:01:03] IDENT data, which did not initially include all biometric data in the DoD ABIS database. [1:01:10] In addition, the Army's Ground Intelligence Center had agreements with foreign partners [1:01:14] that prohibited sharing some ABIS data with U.S. agencies outside the DoD. [1:01:20] In August of 2021, because all Afghan evacuees were not being screened with all available [1:01:26] data. [1:01:27] In the DoD's ABIS data. [1:01:28] The Army's Ground Intelligence Center took it upon themselves to expand their analytic [1:01:33] review of Afghan evacuees. [1:01:36] By September of 2021, the NGIC had identified 31 Afghans with derogatory information from [1:01:43] DoD databases who were already in the U.S. [1:01:46] By November of 2021, NGIC had identified 50 Afghans in the U.S. with potential significant [1:01:52] security concerns. [1:01:54] NGIC developed informal procedures to notify both the DoD and interagency stakeholders [1:01:59] about these individuals. [1:02:01] As a result, the U.S. faced potential security risks if individuals with derogatory information [1:02:06] or security concerns were allowed to stay in the country. [1:02:09] In addition, the U.S. government could mistakenly grant SIV or parolee status to ineligible Afghan [1:02:14] evacuees with these concerns. [1:02:17] One of our two recommendations remains unimplemented, specifically that the Undersecretary of Defense [1:02:23] for Intelligence and Security develop procedures for sharing derogatory information on Afghan [1:02:27] evacuees with the DoD and interagency stakeholders. [1:02:29] Thank you. [1:02:30] Our second report from June 2023 determined that DoD personnel supported other agencies' [1:02:37] requests for screening Afghan evacuees by conducting biometric enrollments of approximately [1:02:42] two-thirds of all Afghan evacuees at the intermediate staging bases overseas and conducting follow-up [1:02:48] counterintelligence screening interviews of Afghans who are identified as a match to [1:02:53] the DoD biometric watch list. [1:02:56] In addition, Du Renier announced squeeze on nuisance, offering data from a specific [1:02:57] and continuation-basedати 여�بر Nuton in-depth analysis from the crossovers from USSA [1:02:59] to та audience that believe there was a coordination interesting Anatomy at West Georgia. [1:02:59] Add視 Haz جين [1:03:00] assessments of all watch list encounters and biographic analysis of more than [1:03:05] 84,000 Afghan evacuees records and sent out rapid notifications to a wide [1:03:11] distribution list to identify evacuees who may pose a threat to national [1:03:14] security. However, in our report we did note that the INJIC did not consistently [1:03:19] follow its guidance and procedures when deciding to retain or remove some Afghan [1:03:24] evacuees from the biometric watch list. As a result, INJIC may have removed some [1:03:30] Afghan identities from the Buhl, which is the other name for the biometric [1:03:34] watch list, that should have been retained on the list. This is important [1:03:38] because the DHS used the biometric watch list as one consideration for its [1:03:43] screening and vetting analysis to determine whether Afghan evacuees should [1:03:46] be allowed to travel to the U.S. Of our eight recommendations, one remains [1:03:51] unimplemented, specifically that the Under Secretary of Defense for [1:03:55] Intelligence should revise or replace DoD policy to reflect the transition of [1:03:59] responsibility to the U.S. and the United States. [1:04:00] This is important because the INJIC does not have the capacity or the [1:04:02] capabilities for the management support and requirements of the DoD biometric [1:04:05] watch list. This concludes my statement and I would be happy to answer any [1:04:08] questions you have. Thank you. Senator Durbin. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous [1:04:13] consent to enter into the record a letter from then-Senator Rubio and [1:04:17] Senator Warner to President Biden asking him to ensure the safety and security of [1:04:22] Afghans who work closely with our intelligence agencies and partners. [1:04:26] Without objection. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to ask a general question here. [1:04:30] I'm sure you've heard this before. I'm sure you've heard this before. I'm sure [1:04:32] each of you have reviewed a lot of evidence and made recommendations, as [1:04:35] inspectors general do. [1:04:37] Did any of you make the recommendation for the policy we currently have, [1:04:42] which stops the processing of all immigrant and visa applications for [1:04:46] individuals with an Afghan passport? I think I'll go ahead and take that [1:04:55] question, Senator, since the State Department is primary responsibility [1:04:59] for issuing visas and immigrant visas. [1:05:02] I'll say in our position as the inspectors general, we do not make policies [1:05:05] decisions that the agency does, and this is a policy decision that the [1:05:11] agency, rather than we. [1:05:16] Do the others have anything to add to that? Mr. Edelman? [1:05:20] No, I agree with his assessment. [1:05:22] Mr. Rourke? [1:05:24] I agree. [1:05:26] So here's my dilemma, or my challenge, and I think it's been noted this [1:05:31] afternoon. I sat through, I don't know how long it was, Senator Cornyn, but [1:05:36] we had a period of time in the SCIF with Classics Committee members who were [1:05:38] involved with classified and secret information trying to get to the bottom [1:05:42] of this. It's a serious, serious situation involving the loss of life and [1:05:47] serious injury, and we're trying to figure out what went wrong. What did we [1:05:50] do that was wrong? And the thing that kept recurring to me was the fact that [1:05:55] the individual, the shooter involved with the National Guardsman, had been [1:05:58] identified as a person with problems, serious problems. Mr. Edelman, well, for [1:06:04] all three of you, this man accused in the tragic shooting of two National Guard [1:06:12] members. We've not seen any indication there was a failure in actual vetting. [1:06:16] Instead, there was a failure to respond to urgent requests made by his family [1:06:20] members and volunteers about deteriorating mental health. Mr. Baker, you made [1:06:24] reference to that already. Isn't this a real gap in the process that we can go [1:06:29] through and check the boxes, one after the other after the other, and miss the [1:06:33] obvious problem that could have led to saving the life of this National Guardsman [1:06:39] and the one who was injured? [1:06:41] I can't talk to the assessment of the particular person. [1:06:46] I can't talk to the assessment of the particular individual. Overall, I would [1:06:49] say that the interview that's conducted when someone applies for benefits would [1:06:53] be an opportunity to get to know the person and see if there's any challenges [1:06:57] there. [1:06:58] These are over a period of time, as I recall. This isn't day after day. It [1:07:03] could be a matter of days, weeks, maybe even longer between interviews. And in [1:07:08] this situation, where I understand the shooter, his material situation, his [1:07:13] physical situation at home was deteriorating, and he was showing this [1:07:16] bizarre conduct, driving all over the United States, making statements that [1:07:20] worried even his family. How could we miss something like that? That seems to [1:07:24] me to be getting to the heart of whether or not this person is safe in this [1:07:28] country or safe for others. [1:07:30] We have looked at the continuous monitoring of individuals who remain on [1:07:37] parole. We found that DHS continues to do a poor job of sharing information [1:07:43] between their different components, whether it be CBP, USCIS, and ICE, and did [1:07:48] not have agreement on what type of guidelines would lead to enforcement [1:07:52] action during our reporting process. [1:07:54] And I might say that we're talking about an agency which has diverted massive [1:07:59] resources now to a totally unrelated undertaking involving the city of [1:08:04] Chicago and the city of Minneapolis and other places. Mr. Baker, what's your [1:08:08] impression as you consider this gap in asking the very basic questions of [1:08:13] what's wrong with this man? [1:08:15] I can't, like my colleagues, speak to the individual's [1:08:19] case, but I can go back to the work that we've done. The State Department was [1:08:24] responsible for the first, I believe, 30 to 90 days of resettlement activities, [1:08:30] which included providing services to evacuees pending a transition to the [1:08:35] Department of Health and Human Services, which carried that forward. Our work did [1:08:41] find significant challenges with mental health support and screening, in part [1:08:47] because [1:08:49] the evacuation occurred during COVID, in part because of difficulties finding [1:08:55] medical professionals with language skills that, you know, would be sufficient [1:09:00] to work with the Afghan population. Furthermore, the State Department's role [1:09:05] was only for 90 days for this program when the transition to HHS occurred. I [1:09:11] would say that that was a finding and a concern that we had in terms of mental [1:09:16] health support [1:09:18] in the work that my office has done. [1:09:20] So I run out of time here. I'm sorry, Mr. Rourke, I couldn't give you a few additional seconds. [1:09:25] But it gets down to the bottom line. Have we learned anything from this horrible experience, this tragedy? [1:09:31] I mean, there's a lot of finger pointing that goes on on Capitol Hill by both political parties. [1:09:36] Is this Joe Biden's fault? Is this Donald Trump's fault? Who made the last decision and so forth? [1:09:40] Wouldn't it be better for us to take a lesson from this about how we can improve this process in the future rather than just shutting down? [1:09:47] Any access of asylees into the United States from 39 different countries. [1:09:52] I would like to see us do something positive and bipartisan and really make this a safer system. [1:09:58] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:09:59] Any of the witnesses disagree with the statement that a prerequisite, a non negotiable requirement of any of these programs, whether it's the special immigrant visa program or the parole program should be the safety and security of the American people. [1:10:19] Anybody disagree? [1:10:20] I disagree with that. [1:10:21] Mr. Baker. [1:10:29] In 2024, your office issued a support a report stating that the Department of State could not confirm the number of individuals evacuated from Afghanistan. [1:10:40] Is that correct? [1:10:41] That is correct, sir. [1:10:43] What we do know is about 80,000 of these individuals of this unknown total of individuals evacuated. [1:10:53] That 80,000 of them are were paroled into the United States. [1:10:57] Mr. Adelman, you mentioned the fact that parole, this authority of the executive branch to allow people to enter the country who would otherwise be inadmissible, is supposed to be decided on a case by case basis, correct? [1:11:14] Correct. [1:11:15] And would you agree with me that the categorical issuance of parole, whether it's to the Afghan nationals or to the millions of people? [1:11:29] The Biden administration let come across the southern border is an abuse of that authority given to the executive branch. [1:11:41] In other words, it's not on an individual basis, right? [1:11:47] Each individual who entered parole through parole was inspected by CBP, and ultimately that process leads to the parole of that individual. [1:11:59] I can't speak to whether the grouping of individuals is against the policy. [1:12:04] Well, when you're letting tens of thousands of people into the country, whether it's across the southern border or from Afghanistan, and you're not doing it on an individual basis, then that is that, according to your testimony, which should be done on an individual basis, it's not being done. [1:12:23] Would it be fair to say, Mr. Baker, that the level of vetting required under the special immigrant visa program that you testified about that Senator Padilla mentioned? [1:12:38] That that vetting process was far more stringent than what was required by the Biden administration for Afghan parolees? [1:12:48] Senator, yes, I think I would agree with that. [1:12:51] However, I would caveat it by saying we have not looked at or have oversight responsibilities for the parole program to compare and contrast. [1:13:00] Mr. Baker, if you could sort of set the scene for us. [1:13:06] So we don't know how many people were evacuated from Afghanistan. [1:13:10] All of us. [1:13:11] I mean, the footage of people trying to jump on the sea, I guess it was a C-130 coming out of Afghanistan out of Kabul will be forever burned in our memory. [1:13:24] But we don't know how many people were ultimately ultimately evacuated. [1:13:29] We do know that the Biden administration's issued is granted parole outside of the special immigrant visa program to about 80,000 individuals. [1:13:39] But how in the world can you properly? [1:13:40] How in the world can you properly vet an individual if you don't know if they don't know that their date of birth? [1:13:51] I mean, the fact is this Afghanistan has been a war torn country for a long time. [1:13:56] And basically the Taliban, the terrorist organization, allowed Al Qaeda a foothold in Afghanistan. [1:14:06] And obviously we know how that turned out on 9 11, 2001. [1:14:13] But is there any surprise to you, Mr. Baker? [1:14:15] That not only we don't know when many of these people were born that we actually don't have any records whatsoever one way or another about these individuals. [1:14:27] I think our work has shown Senator. [1:14:30] There are there is, in fact, a high level of identity fraud in Afghanistan for documents. [1:14:38] And with respect to the special immigrant visa program, which I can speak to more directly. [1:14:45] There were significant staffing gaps at the embassy. [1:14:47] About a third of the consular positions were vacant prior to the to the evacuation. [1:14:52] I believe I believe you mentioned that earlier. [1:14:54] Do we know where these people are? [1:14:56] The 80,000 people paroled by the Biden administration. [1:15:00] The Afghan nationals. [1:15:01] Mr. Adelman. [1:15:02] A number of them apply for immigration benefits. [1:15:06] Do we know where 80,000 of them are? [1:15:08] I can't confirm that we would know where 80,000 or I would defer to. [1:15:12] Do we know what they're doing? [1:15:13] I would defer to the department who does the monitoring. [1:15:16] Okay. [1:15:17] Does the United States government know whether any other Afghan nationals admitted by use of this parole claimed parole authority have become radicalized. [1:15:30] I would defer to the N C T C and the department. [1:15:33] And while we're focused on the untimely death of this national guards guardsman. [1:15:40] And the assault against her compatriot. [1:15:45] We have no idea whether there will be future attacks against the American people or paroled. [1:15:49] Like the one that was stopped by the FBI. [1:15:51] And, uh, uh, uh, shortly thereafter in Fort Worth. [1:15:57] Or how many of them were radicalized have become since radicalized since they're in the United States. [1:16:04] So I start. [1:16:06] I'll finish where I started. [1:16:08] It is a non negotiable requirement. [1:16:12] A prerequisite that whatever visa program, whatever parole. [1:16:17] That any person should be allowed to go through. [1:16:19] That any president might grant to foreign nationals that first and foremost, we have to we have to be concerned about the safety and security of the American people. Everything else is secondary. And that's what this hearing is about. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I actually agree with the importance of several of the questions that you're asking, and it's only underscoring that the appropriate administration witnesses are not here for today's hearing. [1:16:53] Look, my colleagues on the right want to make this tragic incident about a failure of screening and vetting. The alleged shooter from just before Thanksgiving, Romanella Lock and Wall, was part of a unit that the CIA has publicly admitted to working with. So I think we begin with asking ourselves, are we really going to sit here and say that this man wasn't vetted by the CIA many, many steps ago in the flow chart? As for the evacuation of Afghanistan, I mean, I think there's no question that mistakes were made during the evacuation. [1:17:25] We're having a parallel conversations here. One, the incident, the alleged shooter specifically, and then the other more program policy, the vetting background, more holistically. And at that point, fortunately, we don't have to guess what went right or what went wrong. There's nearly 50 separate inspector general reports that have examined operations, allies welcome and the special immigrant visa program. Thank you. And really, I think it's important for us to understand that. [1:18:01] They analyze this from every angle, including over two dozen reports from the three departments represented here today through their inspector generals. And since the majority appears eager to relitigate this operation, Mr. Chairman, I asked that we place these reports in the hearing record without objection. Thank you. I also want to note that yet again, the hearing has moved forward without the appropriate government witnesses to answer some of the questions that have come in. [1:18:32] But let me specify this because this is public information. The vetting processes that the alleged shooter went through from when he began working with the CIA have made that point already to when his asylum application was granted by the current Trump administration. Yes, that's right. The asylum application that was granted by the current Trump administration. The administration representatives to answer questions about that aren't here. But let me ask you, Mr. Chairman. [1:19:06] Ask about the screening and vetting of the people who are here as witnesses. Mr. Adelman, the Department of Homeland Security inspector general report to make clear that your audits compared the parole screening and vetting processes to the special immigrant visa program and U. S refugee processing and that the operation allies welcome parole screening included biometric and biographic screening at lily pad locations, plus manifest vetting and CBP inspection at port. [1:19:36] Of entry. Can you briefly walk us through the layer process so the public understands what screening and vetting meant in practice. Yes. Thank you. [1:19:46] CBP and DOD collected both, as you mentioned, biographic and biometric, including facial images and fingerprints while the evacuees were at the lily pads. They matched that information against database government databases throughout the federal government. [1:20:05] Once a decision was made. [1:20:08] When they were allowed to travel to the United States, CBP put together a manifest for each flight. They did another round of vetting of that manifest. [1:20:18] And then they were allowed to fly over into the United States. At that point, they went through the normal inspection process that everyone would go through when they reach U. S port of entry, which is the inspection process run by CBP. If CBP found something they would take them to secondary or expected to. [1:20:36] Thank you. Just quickly. Would you agree that your reports other than the U. S? [1:20:38] I don't know. They are all there. [1:20:47] But you know, the fact that we ultimately found that these processes were indeed followed. Yes, or no, generally speaking, the vast majority. It was followed. The challenge was Thank you. Thank you, Mr Brown. From the perspective of the Department of State, you agree, as well that these processes were followed. Yes or no. [1:21:02] Senator. We reviewed 112 Siv files in the context of our audit. Looking at steps required to protect national security. [1:21:09] And found that all state department. [1:21:11] were conducted in the sample for SIV. [1:21:14] Thank you very much. [1:21:15] Mr. Chair, in my limited time, I do want to ask a question on an important and related [1:21:19] matter. [1:21:20] We spent a lot of time today talking about the screening and vetting in a program that [1:21:24] has been repeatedly evaluated by offices of inspectors general. [1:21:29] Documents are right here, including those represented today. [1:21:32] What I haven't heard today is any concern for screening and vetting in what I would [1:21:37] call a hastily concocted program. [1:21:41] President Trump's so-called, quote-unquote, gold card. [1:21:44] Unsurprisingly, there's limited information available on the gold card website and even [1:21:48] on the USCIS website. [1:21:51] Mr. Edelman, today you testified about concerns about screening and vetting in two programs [1:21:55] that put people through background checks multiple times over the course of years. [1:22:01] The Trump gold card website answers a question of, quote, how long will the process take? [1:22:07] And the answer- [1:22:08] I'm sorry, Senator. [1:22:09] Your time is up. [1:22:10] Once an applicant's process is being- [1:22:11] Your time is expired. [1:22:11] Your time is expired. [1:22:12] Your time is expired. [1:22:13] Mr. Chairman, you went over your time. [1:22:14] I appreciate 30 more seconds here. [1:22:15] Well, that's the prerogative of the chair is to recognize senators to speak and you are [1:22:16] addressing an unrelated topic. [1:22:17] Including and attending recent interviews. [1:22:18] You have to look into the screening and vetting process for this gold card program if it [1:22:23] only takes weeks. [1:22:24] And you're out of order. [1:22:25] Only if the price is right. [1:22:26] Let the witness answer, please. [1:22:29] Senator Brits, recognize. [1:22:30] Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Chair Hawley. [1:22:33] I appreciate you all holding this hearing and the witnesses. [1:22:36] I appreciate you being here today. [1:22:38] Look, the Biden-Harris disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. [1:22:43] Sent shockwaves not just through that region, but literally across the entire globe. [1:22:48] I was not in this body at that time. [1:22:50] I was actually on the campaign trail. [1:22:52] And there is nowhere that I visited in the state of Alabama where people didn't have [1:22:56] a visceral reaction to the lack of our commander in chief being in command. [1:23:01] We know that that travesty was just further elevated by the fact that we failed in the [1:23:07] vetting process. [1:23:08] And today we're here to get answers about what actually happened and how we can make [1:23:11] sure that this doesn't happen in the future. [1:23:13] So that's what I want to focus on. [1:23:16] I have heard a lot of conversation about what went right or what went wrong, what should [1:23:21] have happened, where we failed, where we didn't have the proper procedures. [1:23:26] So let's talk about that. [1:23:28] One of the things I saw, and I think it was September of 2022, Mr. Adleman, DHS OIG released [1:23:35] a report that stated that CBP admitted the following evacuees to the U.S. under OAW. [1:23:42] And it was 417. [1:23:43] There were 417 evacuees whose name was totally unknown. [1:23:47] There were 242 evacuees whose last name was unknown, 11,110 evacuees whose date of birth [1:23:55] was January 1st. [1:23:58] And it goes on and on and on. [1:23:59] And despite this, the Biden-Harris administration and DHS did not concur with the recommendations [1:24:06] of DHS OIG that you all made to address it and to actually ensure it didn't happen again. [1:24:12] 05. [1:24:13] The first recommendation was from DHS to develop a comprehensive contingency plan to [1:24:18] adequately vet and screen all individuals during future similar emergency situations. [1:24:25] So do you know, Mr. Adleman, if any of the steps have been taken to ensure that the years [1:24:31] to reexamine and implement these different recommendations, has that been taken and where [1:24:35] are we on that? [1:24:37] 06. [1:24:38] Thank you, Senator. [1:24:39] For that one recommendation on lessons learned, the department, as you noted, did not agree [1:24:42] and has not made any progress. [1:24:43] They have, we have closed a second recommendation in that report on the recurrent vetting process. [1:24:47] 07. [1:24:48] So wait, put a pin in that for a second. [1:24:49] Do either of you know of any changes or structural processes that have been improved upon the [1:24:50] failures that we have seen in the past? [1:24:51] 08. [1:24:52] I can go back to a point a moment ago. [1:24:53] We in state OIG have an open recommendation on the department for memorializing arrangements [1:24:54] for the collection, tracking, analysis, and reexamination. [1:24:55] 09. [1:24:56] I think that's a good point. [1:24:57] 010. [1:24:58] I think that's a good point. [1:24:59] 011. [1:25:00] I think that's a good point. [1:25:01] 012. [1:25:05] I think that's a good point. [1:25:06] 013. [1:25:07] I think that's a good point. [1:25:08] 014. [1:25:09] I think that's a good point. [1:25:10] 015. [1:25:11] I think that's a good point. [1:25:12] 015. [1:25:13] I think that's a good point. [1:25:14] 016. [1:25:15] I think that's a good point. [1:25:16] 019. [1:25:17] I think that's a good point. [1:25:18] 020. [1:25:19] 022. [1:25:20] I think that's a good point. [1:25:21] Also, I have an open recommendation on the department for memorializing arrangements [1:25:22] for collection, tracking, analysis, and sharing of evacuee data to update the memorandum of [1:25:23] agreement between the department and state. [1:25:24] 023. [1:25:25] Has that happened, though? [1:25:26] 024. [1:25:27] It has not. [1:25:28] 025. [1:25:29] That recommendation is open. [1:25:30] 026. [1:25:31] Still. [1:25:32] 027. [1:25:36] Yes. [1:25:37] 028. [1:25:38] Still. [1:25:39] 029. [1:25:40] After we saw the travesty that occurred a few weeks ago, the loss of life, still, [1:25:41] okay. [1:25:42] recommendations and eight of those have been closed. So taking the point that you made earlier about what can we learn from this and how can we improve in the future? I think the department has taken action within about six to eight months of both of our reports to close eight of the recommendations. Okay, well, I appreciate that. And we have a limited amount of time. Mr. Adam, will you just tell me some of those recommendations that were made under the previous administration that we could be working on right now to try to kind of that were obviously [1:26:12] rejected that we need to put back in front of people right now? So the additional recommendations really looked at after the evacuees were admitted into the United States focused on who is responsible for tracking the end of parole within DHS. The components CBP, USCIS, and ICE all could not agree on who is responsible. They also focused on better sharing of derogatory information within DHS and improving data quality issues. We found a large number of data inaccuracies in [1:26:43] DHS's information. Well, in my remaining minute, I know that the Trump administration has talked about refocusing on where we are now, finding these individuals, making sure that we're doing a better job. But based on your experience in dealing with these issues, are there any particular unresolved issues? Obviously, the administration can push, but that we here in Congress need to take a look at in order to be able to be better positioned in the event that this happens in the future. I think for me, it would be just to make some progress on the recommendations to clarify the responsibilities [1:27:17] within the Department of Homeland Security and improve information sharing. Mr. Baker. Could you repeat the question? Yeah, and I have 10 seconds real quick. Mr. O'Rourke, do you have anything? Yes. I think for DOD, if the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security can implement the two remaining open recommendations, I think that that would go a long way to improving this in the future. All right, well, let's get to work. Let's work together to make sure that we keep the American people safe. Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the witnesses for your testimony. Specialist [1:27:50] Sarah Beckstrom should be alive today, and Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolf should not be fighting horrific injuries, and they and their families are in my prayers. One man, Mr. Lankenwald, did a horrible, tragic thing. That does not mean all of those of his same background deserve to be punished. Instead, we should, as several of my colleagues have suggested, have a real conversation about how we ensure this doesn't happen again. And that has to include mental health resources, [1:28:20] access to local law enforcement. Could you three each just briefly answer, is there any specific flag or piece of information that your clear DOD missed about Mr. Lankenwald as he was being reviewed for admission in this country that can be attributed to the broader issues or potential deficiencies in vetting discussed in your various reports? We didn't look at the specific individual, and I don't want to comment on him now because of the open investigation. Understood. [1:28:52] Mr. Baker. I'm really the same. Mr. Warr. So DOD has a lot of information and data that we compiled over 20 years in Afghanistan, and I think the question for us to look at was how best can we get that information into the hands of decision makers? And so that's why we focused in our two reports on the macro issues and kind of how we can deal with that risk and identify improvements that could be made. So I'd appreciate more follow up [1:29:25] from you on that. But here's what I just heard from the three of you. We're not here at a hearing where you looked at this tragic case and this individual and then looked back at the raft of previous reports and your work to say this is the failure in vetting or this is the process issue that led to this individual being in the United States. I think it's apparent we need to have a serious conversation about Mr. Lankenwald's case, his mental health struggles, how we could identify and ensure that a similar threat is [1:29:55] stopped before a tragedy strikes. But I do disagree with the way this hearing was framed, both in its title, and I think its overall objective to justify the demonization of the Afghan people, and in particular, those who served alongside our troops and came here through the post conflict relocation. Deputy Inspector General Adelman. I've been really concerned with the impact of the Trump administration's cuts to public safety and counterterrorism grant programs to state. [1:30:25] I've been concerned with its reassignment of thousands of law enforcement personnel to support mass deportations of individuals without criminal records. Both of these, in my view, have harmed public safety and taken resources away from the very local law enforcement efforts that might have prevented this specific attack. Are you conducting any inquiries into the effects that these cuts and reassignments have had on DHS's ability to address current or future threats to the homeland? Normally in our work, we would wait to the [1:30:57] grants are paid out before we would take a look at them. I understand this situation creates a different issue. So it's something that we can take under consideration. I mean, there were additional mental health grants cut today. There were law enforcement related grants cut last year. My hope is that you will do some of that work and then come back to the chairs of these subcommittees to discuss it. A last question for you, if I might, Mr. Adelman, your 2022 report OIG [1:31:27] 2264, its first recommendation, its first recommendation required providing evidence of full screening and vetting of all Afghan evacuees and ensuring that recurrent vetting processes were established. Your testimony says you closed that recommendation. Can you say more about how or why that recommendation was closed? Yes. CBP provided us with data to illustrate that the recurrent vetting process was created and followed. They also showed that they had obtained [1:31:58] all the accurate data. So we have a little more information on that. [1:31:58] additional information potentially through when someone's applying for immigration benefits. [1:32:04] We are doing follow-up work to look at the current recurrent vetting process and if things [1:32:09] have improved in terms of information sharing. [1:32:11] I look forward to hearing about your new study about the recurrent vetting process [1:32:16] and I welcome that analysis, but let me just make sure I heard you right. [1:32:20] That first recommendation required evidence of full screening and vetting and ensuring [1:32:25] that recurrent vetting processes were established and you closed that recommendation. [1:32:29] That's correct. [1:32:30] Thank you. [1:32:31] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:32:33] Senator Coons, I will repudiate the characterization of this hearing as a demonization of the Afghan [1:32:39] people. [1:32:41] This hearing is about President Biden's administration's failure to keep the American [1:32:44] people safe. [1:32:46] That's what this hearing's about. [1:32:48] Senator Cruz. [1:32:51] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:32:52] In August of 2021, Joe Biden and the Democrats presided over the most disastrous American [1:32:57] retreat in modern times. [1:33:00] In Afghanistan, we saw chaos. [1:33:03] We saw [1:33:04] Bagram Air Base abandoned to the Taliban. [1:33:09] We saw Afghans clinging to the wheels as planes took off and we saw 13 American servicemen [1:33:16] and women murdered. [1:33:20] It was utter disaster and the subsequent evacuation was both over inclusive and under inclusive. [1:33:28] It was under inclusive and that we left behind Afghans who had risked their lives supporting [1:33:34] the U.S. military. [1:33:36] And it was over inclusive in that the Biden administration did. [1:33:39] It was over inclusive in that the Biden administration did. [1:33:40] It was over inclusive in that the Biden administration did. [1:33:40] It was over inclusive in that the Biden administration did. [1:33:40] They did at best half-assed vetting that put the American people in danger in a span [1:33:48] of just a few days. [1:33:50] The Biden administration carried out the largest importation of foreigners in American history, [1:33:57] bringing more than 120,000 people, including tens of thousands of unvetted Afghans into [1:34:04] the United States. [1:34:07] Mr. Baker, you're the Acting Inspector General at the State Department. [1:34:11] Approximately how many Afghan nationals were ultimately brought to the United States? [1:34:15] States. [1:34:16] Senator, according to visa statistics, about 145,000 visas and U.S. refugee admission program [1:34:28] admissions occurred. [1:34:29] Secretary Blinken identified 124,000 evacuees out of Kabul as the number. [1:34:37] However, we were never able to verify that number, despite eight months of work with [1:34:42] Department of Defense OIG colleagues. [1:34:45] And your office found serious breakdowns in coordination, record keeping, and accountability, [1:34:50] correct? [1:34:51] Absolutely, yes. [1:34:52] And most of those individuals were admitted through mass parole, not through fully vetted [1:34:57] visas. [1:34:58] Is that correct? [1:35:00] I can speak to the State Department piece of that, and I believe I don't have the numbers [1:35:06] for my colleague, me. [1:35:09] Seventy-seven thousand were paroled into the United States. [1:35:13] And the numbers of... [1:35:14] Mr. Stark, our Stark, of the 77,000 you just mentioned, more than 70,000 had no prior lawful [1:35:22] immigration status and were paroled into this country. [1:35:24] Mr. Adleman, you're the Deputy Inspector General of Audits for the Department of Homeland [1:35:28] Security. [1:35:29] Your office has documented that the vetting process for this population was rushed, fragmented, [1:35:35] and incomplete. [1:35:36] Is that correct? [1:35:38] Correct. [1:35:39] Because of that rushed process, terrorism-related indicators and derogatory intelligence were [1:35:44] not fully resolved prior to this. [1:35:45] We identified two individuals who, it turned out, had derogatory information and later [1:35:54] had to be removed from the United States due to national security concerns. [1:35:58] According to intelligence assessments, approximately 2,000 of these evacuees had terrorism-related [1:36:04] ties or derogatory intelligence indications. [1:36:08] Because the vetting was rushed and fragmented, those indicators were not fully resolved before [1:36:13] entry. [1:36:14] And worse. [1:36:15] There was no systematic sustained follow-up. [1:36:16] After entry. [1:36:17] After entry. [1:36:18] After entry. [1:36:19] After entry. [1:36:20] After entry. [1:36:22] There was no final decision made in the United States, a few years ago, by the U.S. Department [1:36:25] of Justice, to determine who actually posed a threat. [1:36:26] Even so, with only cursory post-entry review, law enforcement has already identified at [1:36:28] least 55 Afghan evacuees who were confirmed or suspected terrorists. [1:36:35] Fifty-five. [1:36:36] Mr. Adleman, these 55 individuals were not uncovered through a comprehensive screening [1:36:41] system. [1:36:42] They were identified despite the absence of one. [1:36:44] Is that fair to say? [1:36:47] I can't speak to the 55, but I can say that there were challenges in the screening and [1:36:50] vetting process. So if only cursory scrutiny uncovered 55 confirmed or suspected terrorists, [1:36:56] isn't it reasonable to conclude that additional risks may have gone undetected among the remaining [1:37:02] population? That was our concern. And the gravest danger wasn't limited just to those we managed to [1:37:09] identify. On November 26th, just blocks away from the White House, an Afghan national paroled into [1:37:15] the United States by Joe Biden opened fire on National Guard service members standing watch [1:37:21] over our Capitol. 20-year-old Guardsman Sarah Beckstrom was shot and killed at her post. [1:37:27] Guardsman Andrew Wolfe was critically wounded. And the most chilling truth is this. [1:37:32] The November 26th Afghan attacker in Washington, D.C. was not among the 2,000 individuals [1:37:40] flagged by intelligence assessments. He was not among the 55 confirmed or suspected terrorists. [1:37:48] We have young Americans in uniform doing their duty, [1:37:51] who should not have been shot and should not have died. For years, we've been sounding the alarm. [1:37:58] And for years, the Biden administration looked the other way and endangered [1:38:02] every American in this country. Senator Blumenthal. [1:38:13] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think I speak for all the members of this panel in expressing the view [1:38:22] that violence is absolutely abhorrent and unacceptable, that our hearts go out to the [1:38:29] family of Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom. And we, [1:38:33] pray for the quick recovery of Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolfe. My hope is that we honor them [1:38:42] with action, that we look forward and say to ourselves, how can we stop this kind of violence [1:38:53] from happening again? What we know about the shooter's mental health is that apparently have [1:39:00] been declining for some time. And individuals familiar with him raised the alarm over episodes [1:39:09] of depression and erratic behavior. There's speculation that he's going to be in a coma. [1:39:14] There's speculation that his prior roles in combat because he was at the side of our troops as part [1:39:21] of the CIA back zero unit in Afghanistan might have contributed to PPS PTSD in the same way that our [1:39:32] own troops come home with that kind of illness. It is an illness, a disease. It is treatable, [1:39:42] but it has to be addressed. So the topic here is framed as one of the most important issues of our [1:39:49] country. It is one of vetting and perceived failures of vetting, but it also should be viewed as one of mental [1:39:56] health and even of gun violence. Mental health is not an Afghan problem. It's an American problem. [1:40:06] And Mr. Edelman, do you know how the shooter obtained the gun? [1:40:17] We have not looked into any records of the suspect. [1:40:20] Do you know whether mental health services were available to him? [1:40:23] I do not. [1:40:25] Do you know whether IG reports have been conducted to examine the [1:40:30] levels of PTSD that refugees or others coming into this country after thorough vetting may be suffering from? [1:40:41] We have not looked at that in the past. [1:40:43] Let me ask you on another topic. A lot of talk today about screening and vetting. [1:40:49] I haven't heard anything, again, looking forward about the so-called gold card, President Trump's gold card. [1:41:01] My understanding is from the limited information that's available on the gold card website that [1:41:11] and [1:41:12] actually, I'll quote from it. Once an applicant's processing fee and application are received, the process should take weeks. [1:41:20] Now, we're talking about vetting and screening of someone who came into the country after multiple series of vettings over years. [1:41:29] Do you have any plans to look into this process of vetting and screening that allows somebody to come into the country after only weeks, [1:41:40] possibly of superficial, very little vetting, simply because they can pay, [1:41:47] money to expedite the process? [1:41:52] So we take a risk based approach when we choose what audits to look at. [1:41:55] As we learn more about this, we will certainly take that under consideration and determine. [1:42:00] Well, I'm asking you for a commitment, sir, that you will, in fact, look into the gold card process to prevent this kind of problem from recurring. [1:42:11] In real time, we see the potential pitfalls. [1:42:17] Will you look into them to prevent the kind of absolutely abhorrent? [1:42:23] Consequences that we saw in the death of these two great national guardsmen. [1:42:30] Yes, we'll look into it as part of our planning process. Yes. [1:42:33] I was a critic of the Afghanistan withdrawal in the way that it was done. [1:42:42] I'm not here to relitigate that issue. I'm here to look forward and try to prevent this kind of tragedy from occurring again. [1:42:53] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have one last question before we excuse this panel. [1:43:01] But given what you described in that the difficulty of getting information from a war torn country, one that had been involved in in war for 20 years or more. [1:43:16] Given the fact the Taliban, the terrorist organization basically was in control or governing. [1:43:24] The country, given the fact of illiteracy on the part of many of the Afghan nationals who didn't even couldn't even. [1:43:34] Stand up. [1:43:35] They're not allowed to speak out. [1:43:37] They're not allowed to speak out. [1:43:40] And I'm just wondering if you can just state the date of their birth. [1:43:44] Is do you agree with me that the default position of this operation allies welcome was unless we find something derogatory, you're going to be admitted. [1:44:01] In other words, no record was treated as a positive in terms of admission. [1:44:08] Is that you agree with that characterization? [1:44:11] Mr Adelman. [1:44:12] I do. [1:44:13] Yes, Senator. [1:44:14] Chair, thank you. [1:44:15] And I just want to mention, and this is some of the core work on SAV where I know we have a high refusal rate for those who go through a thorough process that does indicate again, document fraud and other risks with the with those applicant pools. [1:44:29] Thank you. [1:44:30] I'm sorry, I didn't see Senator Moody come in, but I'll recognize her next. [1:44:35] And I understand Senator Blackburn is right here, too. [1:44:52] Please proceed. [1:44:54] First of all, I want to say thank you. [1:44:57] That that you all are here. [1:44:59] And I thank the chairman for calling a joint hearing. [1:45:00] hearing that we could work through this. I think there are so many questions that have arisen [1:45:12] out of this parolee program, and the hurt that it has caused, the uncertainty that it has caused, [1:45:22] has not been something that would credit our nation's processes and policies. [1:45:34] Fraud, let's talk about that. And Mr. Alderman, I want to come to you with this. This is something [1:45:43] that we have heard so much about. Of course, the White House has had quite a focus on this, [1:45:49] with what has happened in Minnesota that has [1:45:52] really, [1:45:53] caused people to look at some of these programs. I introduced the Fraud Accountability Act this [1:46:01] month, and it is something that would make fraud a deportable offense, and would actually update [1:46:11] the INA to make certain that it is explicit. Now, you're serving as the Deputy Inspector [1:46:24] General. [1:46:24] I'm the Deputy Inspector General in the DHS Office of Audits. So I want you to talk for a minute about [1:46:32] what you are seeing with fraud, how you see if it is widespread, and how you respond to what the [1:46:41] steps that this administration, unlike the last administration, this administration is taking steps [1:46:48] to root it out. Thank you. We've done extensive work on COVID relief fraud, [1:46:57] in our office. We had a group that was, or is, directly focused on that. We found many challenges with fraud through the COVID funding that was received by states. We also look at FEMA grants to ensure that those are spent correctly and have [1:47:14] a large number of reports on that. We will continue to do that type of work to ensure that any time the Department is spending its funds that there is not fraud involved or wasted funds. [1:47:26] I have not I would need to review the changes that would be made plus I [1:47:32] wouldn't really look at the policy of changes to the INA in our in my position [1:47:38] but I can say that we continue to look to make sure to root out fraud with the [1:47:43] department spending where are you seeing the most prevalent entry points for [1:47:49] people that are committing fraud is it through a lack of vetting in these [1:47:54] programs or where where's that entry entry point I think there's always a [1:48:00] balance when there's an emergency on how quickly you want to quickly provide [1:48:04] funds for those people who you know have faced something terrible but when you're [1:48:09] speeding through those and sometimes there's something called self [1:48:12] certification where they're saying I need the funds that's where it could [1:48:16] become a challenge okay mr. Baker let's talk about vetting and the committee has [1:48:22] talked quite a bit about that [1:48:25] as you've been in this hearing today and I think there is no doubt that the lack [1:48:34] of vetting is something that has just caused so much concern and one of the [1:48:39] things in that I hear in Tennessee is that as people are reviewing these [1:48:46] programs they're not necessarily talking about it as a national security issue [1:48:53] they talk about it as a [1:48:55] national security issue they talk about it as a [1:48:55] national security issue they talk about it as a [1:48:55] public safety issue, and we have referenced the situation here in D.C. with Sarah Beckstrom [1:49:04] and with Staff Sergeant Wolf and the tragedy that is there. [1:49:11] But talk about how you see this lining up with those public safety concerns rising. [1:49:19] Senator, thank you for that good question. [1:49:23] I think we in state OIG do view visa and consular integrity as a matter of national security [1:49:29] and not just public safety. [1:49:32] It's integral to the work that we do, and our work with the Special Immigrant Visa Program [1:49:38] has included an integrity working group with DHS, I mean, U.S. Customs and Immigration [1:49:44] Service and Bureau of Diplomatic Security, which has concurrent jurisdiction for visa [1:49:49] and passport fraud from the beginning. [1:49:52] We have a number of ongoing cases. [1:49:53] As I mentioned earlier, related to the SIV program, and we are very much seized with [1:50:01] the importance of this part of the portfolio for our oversight role. [1:50:07] Thank you. [1:50:08] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:50:11] Senator Whitehouse. [1:50:12] Thanks, Chairman. [1:50:13] May I first ask if any of the witnesses on this panel served in Afghanistan? [1:50:23] I did not. [1:50:25] No. [1:50:26] No? [1:50:27] I traveled there as a civilian to do my OIG oversight. [1:50:30] Okay. [1:50:31] The reason I asked that question is because I think one important voice for a hearing [1:50:41] like this is the men and women who served in Afghanistan and who worked closely with [1:50:50] Afghan soldiers and intelligence operatives, very often very closely, very often with their [1:50:59] security determined by the capability of their Afghan counterparts. [1:51:02] Thank you. [1:51:03] Thank you. [1:51:04] And I'm thinking mainly about my right-wing colleagues. [1:51:06] And when the issue of Afghan resettlement came up, the voices that I heard the most [1:51:13] were the voices of Rhode Islanders who had served in Afghanistan, other Americans who [1:51:17] had served in Afghanistan, and whose message to us was many of us owe our lives to these [1:51:25] Afghan soldiers. [1:51:26] We have a moral duty to protect them and to give them an opportunity to come to the United [1:51:32] States and not leave them to the tender mercies of the Products. [1:51:34] I respect this finding. [1:51:35] And we want to keep our situationboxes as simple as possible. [1:51:35] Thank you. [1:51:36] Taliban. Do any of you disagree that the service of Afghan troops and [1:51:44] intelligence professionals gave them some moral standing in an effort to [1:51:51] relocate to the United States? No. Mr. Edelman does not disagree with that? Is [1:52:02] that no no and no? Well I happen to agree with you and I wish that voice was more [1:52:09] prevalent here. I've also been told and if anybody cares to correct me in a [1:52:18] response from for the record you're welcome to do so but I've been told that [1:52:23] the number of Afghans who have entered on parole into the United States under [1:52:28] Operation Allies Welcome is 76,000 and that of those 76,000 as of a report from [1:52:39] the Department of Homeland Security in December [1:52:42] six [1:52:45] had been arrested. 76,000 brought into the United States, six have been arrested. [1:52:57] By my count more January 6 rioters pardoned by President Trump were [1:53:06] arrested after the pardon than our Afghan allies brought into this country [1:53:15] under Operation Allies Welcome. So I hope as we go forward we consider what our [1:53:24] obligation was to those Afghan soldiers. [1:53:28] And I do want to give a little of a sense of how these [1:53:42] operations included the einmalite [1:54:05] and intelligence operatives, translators, IED technicians who served beside our troops often protected them, sometimes at the cost of injury and loss of life to themselves particularly with the numbers I can't do the math off the top of my head but six out of 76,000 getting arrested. That's like less than a tenth of 1%. We're not exactly dealing with this dangerous intrusion into our country when those are the most dangerous people in our country. We're not exactly dealing with this dangerous intrusion into our country when those are [1:54:07] the actual numbers. [1:54:10] So I would – I wanted to make those points because I think a hearing like this should [1:54:15] reflect the views of the Americans who served in all the different stages of our activities [1:54:22] in Afghanistan from those earliest days, when our Special Forces teams went in and charged [1:54:28] around on horseback in the mountains, only able to operate because of the support of [1:54:36] Afghan allies, all the way through until the departure from Afghanistan that was driven [1:54:44] by a very unfortunate agreement entered into by President Trump. [1:54:48] Senator Moody. [1:54:51] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:54:54] This is an important hearing. [1:54:56] I think any time we can show the American people that we are thoroughly investigating [1:55:03] and providing oversight when there has been harm in America to Americans, especially those [1:55:10] that have – that have – that have – that have – that have – that have – that have [1:55:11] volunteered to serve, we need to show that we're doing everything we can to make sure [1:55:16] we mitigate the chance of it ever happening again. [1:55:19] And so I appreciate all three of you being here today so that we can perform this critical [1:55:24] review, this critical function of government on behalf of the American people. [1:55:28] And unfortunately, we continue to find example after example where failures of the last administration [1:55:34] come to light. [1:55:36] I mean, we were – I, as a former attorney general, discovered numerous examples where [1:55:41] laws were being broken. [1:55:42] Reckless decisions were being made during the last administration, got courts to find [1:55:48] that laws were being broken, reckless decisions were being made. [1:55:53] And unfortunately, we still had the same activity go on and on and on, and watching the horrific [1:56:01] results of those decisions and policies play out on our TVs every night. [1:56:07] And so I think it is incredibly important as a nation that we, the people, demand that [1:56:13] we get back to proper governance and that we – [1:56:15] that we examine what went wrong and how we ensure it doesn't happen again. [1:56:19] So the tragedy that we witnessed right before Thanksgiving, the tragic killing of a National [1:56:24] Guardsman and the critical wounding of another at the hands of a foreign national, the American [1:56:31] people deserve answers. [1:56:34] Tragedies like this are becoming all too familiar. [1:56:37] And I can name the names, and the Americans across the nation can name these by heart [1:56:44] now. [1:56:45] Laken Riley, Nathaniel Barker, Sarah Beckstrom. [1:56:48] Their families now grapple with the reality. [1:56:49] The reality that they will be missing loved ones. [1:56:54] And time and time again, under Biden's leadership, non-citizens, heck, even entire foreign nations [1:57:01] were prioritized over American citizens. [1:57:04] And that shameful withdrawal from Afghanistan, the way that went down, reminded Americans [1:57:10] of that fact. [1:57:11] In fact, I bet everyone in this room sitting here today remembers exactly what they were [1:57:17] doing when they watched that debacle, that tragedy play out. [1:57:22] And I think that's the reality. [1:57:23] I pulled everybody in my office this morning. [1:57:27] Do each of you remember when you saw that happen and played out on TVs? [1:57:31] Do you remember what you were doing? [1:57:33] Every single one of them remembered it because it was such a devastating embarrassment to [1:57:41] our nation and certainly a morale blow to the men and women that served over there. [1:57:49] Not only did they allow millions and millions of illegal aliens to flow across our southern [1:57:53] border and then pushed so many of those that were unvetted into our neighborhoods. [1:57:59] They granted entry to thousands of barely vetted Afghan nationals at the expense of [1:58:05] American citizens. [1:58:12] You know, you don't have to just take my word for it. [1:58:13] Hunter Biden just said last month that the Afghanistan withdrawal was an obvious failure. [1:58:20] And I think he used profanity with that. [1:58:22] But the position remains, and it may be the only thing we agree on, that the last president, [1:58:29] President Biden, failed the American people and President Trump is trying his best to [1:58:34] fix it. [1:58:35] And now Congress has to act to make sure that these fixes stick and that we don't [1:58:41] find ourselves in this position again. [1:58:46] And so, Mr. Baker, I thank you for your service to our country. [1:58:49] Under President Trump, we stopped we have stopped treating border security and vetting [1:58:53] like best practice suggestions, and we've started treating them like the core national [1:59:00] security responsibilities that they are. [1:59:03] Can you share with us or identify any enhanced Trump era special immigrant visa screening [1:59:09] practices or controls that made that program more secure and reliable, which we should [1:59:18] codify or focus on so that these cannot be bypassed in the future during a time of crisis? [1:59:28] Senator, thank you for that question. [1:59:30] My office has not done work, as you as you may know, the Afghan S.A.V. program has been [1:59:36] suspended. [1:59:37] However, we do have four recommendations outstanding with the department. [1:59:42] If that program is to be restarted, that will strengthen S.A.V. processing. [1:59:46] And again, I'm speaking to S.A.V. and not to what my colleagues would be handling with [1:59:51] humanitarian parole. [1:59:53] One particular area we saw from the very beginning was the lack of strategic planning that is [2:00:00] of setting goals and measuring them systematically policies for ongoing interagency coordination [2:00:08] and improvements. [2:00:09] A second recommendation and employment verification. [2:00:12] MOU with DOD on finally staffing plans. [2:00:16] So we have four recommendations and I know my colleagues and the other OIGs do too that [2:00:22] if implemented will strengthen the program and I trust Congress can consider in that [2:00:27] context. [2:00:29] I see I have used all of my time, so I will defer back to the chair. [2:00:32] Thank you so much. [2:00:34] I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today and for your service to our country. [2:00:40] We are going to move now to the next panel. [2:00:43] And thank you again for being here.