WOLF BLITZER: Let's go to Congressman Peter Hoekstra right now.

He is the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, thanks very much for coming in.

I know you're getting ready to catch a flight.

Are you satisfied with the answers you're getting so far from the executive branch of the U.S. government, whether the Pentagon or -- or the administration, the Army, as far as this investigation is concerned?

REP. PETE HOEKSTRA (R), MICHIGAN: No, Wolf, I'm really not. And I think I probably share some of the same frustrations that Senator Lieberman has. I applaud the Senate for holding public hearings. I hold them -- I applaud them for doing the hearings. There's no indication at all that that's going to take place on the House side. And I think they really do have to take place.

You know, we had a briefing today, but way too often with the questions that we ask, the answers were, sorry, congressman, we don't have an answer for that today. And you're kind of thinking, well, this is two weeks after the incident, you would think that this would be Investigation 101.

I think the administration has to be more forthcoming. They have to -- you know, they have to give us partial information, even if they haven't got the whole -- even if they haven't connected all of the pieces themselves. We're used to getting partial information. They need to be more open.

BLITZER: We're -- we're hearing from our producer, Carol Cratty, among others -- and let me begin precise, because this is very sensitive information suggesting, perhaps, that the left hand of the U.S. government doesn't know what the right hand of the U.S. government is -- is doing or what they know. That when Major Hasan first came to the attention of investigators due to his communications with this radical cleric in Yemen, officials looked at his personnel file, but they said there was nothing suspicious included in it -- none of the warning signs that we all know about.

How could this be, Congressman?

HOEKSTRA: Well, you know, Wolf, you know, if we go back to 2001, after the 9/11 attack, the big issue was that the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing. They -- they weren't communicating. Now that -- you know, now we look and we say, sure, we've got an organization called the Director of National Intelligence.

At the macro level, these people are now working together better. But I think that at the lower levels of these organizations, I can unequivocally say we still have problems, whether it's on this case or other cases. I don't think there's any doubt in my mind that these problems still exist and they are persistent.

BLITZER: We know he was in touch with this one radical cleric in Yemen.

Is there any evidence he was in touch with others?

HOEKSTRA: Again, that's one of the answers that we would like to have and we're -- I'm willing to get it.

I think the other thing that you're seeing here, Wolf, is that a lot of the information we're getting is actually coming from the press. They're digging into this quicker and, in some cases, more thoroughly. And they're providing information that, you know, we haven't had access from the -- the intelligence community or from the Department of Defense or the FBI. The -- the media -- the press is actually going out and doing a very good job in keeping Congress informed and keeping the American people informed.

I can't tell you how frustrating that is on our part. But at the same time, I appreciate the work that they're doing.

BLITZER: Is it your sense, at least based on what you know right now -- and there's obviously a lot you don't know and a lot that none of us really knows -- that he was this one individual, perhaps inspired by jihad, but he wasn't part of a formal al Qaeda or Islamic terrorist plot?

HOEKSTRA: Well, Wolf, we need to understand that he may not be part of the formal al Qaeda organization, but he clearly fits in with their model of how to terrorize the world. I have been studying this phenomenon of lone wolf individuals radicalized through the Internet for the last four or five years in depth. they have been -- they understand this concept in Europe. Only in America have we been unable -- unwilling to recognize this phenomena. It is real. It is -- you know, it is prevalent in Europe. We now need to understand how extensive it is here in the United States.

BLITZER: Have you heard anything about Major Hasan wiring money to so-called charities in Pakistan?

HOEKSTRA: Well, there were press reports out today indicating that he sent $20,000 to $30,000 to the Islamic Relief charities. These organizations frequently are front organizations for terrorist organizations in these other countries. If that report is accurate, I don't think it's at all unlikely that some of this money would have made it back into the Middle East, might have made it back to Pakistan or Afghanistan.

But we don't have, you know, the reporting from the intel community that will either verify that or debunk that story. But, again, this was a guy that was living frugally, making a good salary. You know, we really do want to know where he went with his money -- who did he give it to and what front organizations may have received it and where would he have sent it.

BLITZER: Congressman Hoekstra, we'll stay in close touch.