Transcripts For ALJAZ On The E-Waste Trail 20240714

Here you and i are a competitive disadvantage because neither one of us are lawyers and that may be a badge of honor for some of us. You have lawyers on your staff. Sir i do congressman and your lawyers have looked at this large concern definition thoroughly and if given you advice yes congressman if the black letter law was so clear and black letter how is it that weve got different attorneys given as you in the united different opinions. Thats rhetorical question. That that with respect to this issue. Just to clarify my caucus and was in our group in front of us last week did a very good job of telling us what he did what he didnt do we now know for sure what it is that he was able to do as part of his investigation he did not request records of the call from the president and the reason he did as he did the difficulty working through all of that would have probably meant that he couldnt comply with a 14 day timeframe so even he did not try to. Overrun the white houses executive privilege over the conversation that president had with the president as ascii. He also said. In his letter i also determine this is quoting michael i also determined that there were reasonable grounds to believe that information related to the urgent concern appeared credible now thats a different statement than a flat out its credible just again a rhetorical statement is there anything a statute from your the your lawyers and advising you this says that the determination of arch concern lies solely with the i. C. I. G. Now sir i was never advised by my Legal Counsel to not affect. Your knowledge as a Justice Department or weighed in its to say that the fact the d. N. I. Cant make a separate decision with respect to this 7 day process that the matter is not of urgent concern as youve as your team decided. The matter of urgent concern is a legally defined term that pretty much either yes or no will protest not the case because. It was and and it and youre saying is not under that Legal Definition because it involves the president the last time i checked your point for me would change the command i know hes not in youre not hes not in your chain of command if youre in his chain to commit that so for very definite reasons appear to be credible it doesnt meet the statutorily urgent concern definition with respect to the whistleblower protections of the i. G. And your team a dead baby that made that call the specter general made a different call no no no sir. Said on the record if it was wrong it was the apartment of Justice Office of Legal Counsel that made the determination that it was not urgent concern all we wanted to do was just check and see and to me it just seemed prudent with the matter at hand right now to be able to just make sure that in fact it did and when it didnt i want to say once again i endeavored to get that information to this committee ok sir just to clarify the role that that this specter general had with respect to the point of justice i heard you say that he was involved in the conversations allowed to make his case but also said you gave him the letter gave the test as part of the letter was what was what was his exact involvement in making his case to the Justice Department to his decision was he actually there present physically or his lawyers there what was going to the best of my knowledge the i. C. I. G. S. Transmittal letter as well as the complaint from the whistleblower were forwarded to the office of Legal Counsel for their determination i believe that that is what they based their opinion on ok so they dont think he had a fashion fun and if im incorrect i will come back to the committee and correct thats ok appreciate that. You know a tough spot appreciate your long. Storied history. Apologize if your integrity was insulted that happens in this arena a lot sometimes justified and moshe not in yours is softer your integrity was not justified in that use the fact that we have differences of opinion when we start losing our service of opinion we start to attack each other call each other names and those kinds of things are so. Why experiences is when youve got a legal matter ive got lawyers ive got pay youve got lawyers you pay a state which typically stick with the lawyers that are paying as are you read good legal advice on this issue and are really wanting to make sure that this was so poor was protected but at the same time that if in fact there was something here that they would that would be you know get the full airing that it is clearly getting so thank you for your service and i thank you very much congressman misool thank you mr chairman and director maguire thanks so much for being here i want to turn to what i fear may be one of the most damaging long term effects of this whistleblower episode and bad is the Chilling Effect that it will have on others in government who may witness misconduct but now may be afraid to come forward to report it so im worried that Government Employees and contractors may see how important this situation is played out and decide its not worth putting themselves on the line the fact that a whistleblower followed all of the proper procedures to report misconduct and then the department of justice and the white house seems to have weighed in to keep the complaint hidden is problematic sir i want to know whether or not you see how problematic this will be and having a Chilling Effect on. Oh members of i see that you are sworn to represent and a sensibly protect congresswoman i think thats a 1st susman i dont disagree with what youve said i have endeavored to transmit to the Intelligence Community my support the whistleblowers and im quite sure that for at least 2 hours this morning there are there are not many people in the Intelligence Community who are doing anything thats productive besides watching this right and so my concern i think is a valid one that in fact what has happened with this was put whistleblower episode will have a Chilling Effect i just also want to ask you. Have you given direction to this whistleblower that he can in fact or he or she can in fact come before Congress Director when the president called the whistleblower a political hack and suggested that he or she was potentially disloyal to the country you remain silent im not sure why but i also think that that adds to the Chilling Effect the statute seems pretty clear that. You shell everybody has a role to play the process seems pretty clear and part of it also includes you directing the whistleblower of his or her protected rights. Can you confirm that youve directed that westall blower that he or she can come before congress. Congresswoman there are several questions there one i do not know the identity of the whistleblower to now that the complaint has come forward we are working with his counsel in order to be able to provide them with security close are i think its pretty my smiter question is Pretty Simple can you assure this committee and the American Public that the whistleblower is off the rise to speak to the committee with the full protections of the whistleblower act can you confirm thats a guess or no question right now im working through that with the chair and to the best of my ability i believe the chair is i was asking to have the whistleblower come forward and im working with counsel with the committee to support that can you assure the American Public that the in result will be that the whistleblower will be able to come before this committee and congress and have the full protections of the whistle after all what is the whistleblower at a statue for if not to provide those full protections against retaliation against Litigation Congress when im doing everything to endeavor to support that with the gentleman yield yes. We are sure and that once you work out the security clearances for the whistleblowers council that was a will or will be able to relate the full facts within his knowledge the concern wrongdoing by the president or anyone else that he or she will not be inhibited in what they can tell our committee that there will not be some minder from the white house or elsewhere. Sitting next to them telling them what they can answer not answer do i have your assurance that whistle or will be able to testify fully and freely. And enjoy the protections of the law us congressman. Thank you back to the journal so mr director i also want to understand what youre going to do to try to ensure the trust of the employees and contractors that you represent to assure the American People that the whistleblower statute is in that being properly. Here too and that no further efforts would be to obstruct an opportunity for a whistleblower who has watched misconduct to actually get justice congresswoman supporting and leading they have members and women of the Intelligence Community my highest priority i dont consider that they work for me as a director of National Intelligence i believe that i will sir and i just want to say and go on record as being very clear that this will have a Chilling Effect and that that is exactly not what this statute was intended for it was intended for transparency it was protect it was intended and also to give the whistleblower certain protections and i think the American People deserve that thank you thank you congressman mr turner director thank you for being here one of them and thank you for your your service and the clarity at which you have described the deliberations that you went through and applying the laws with respect to this complaint it is incredibly admirable in the manner in which you approach this now i read the complaint and ive read the transcript of the conversation with the president and the president of ukraine. Concerning that conversation i want to say to the president this is not ok it isnt that a conversation is not ok and i think its disappointing to the American Public when they read the transcript i can see what else it is not it is not whats in the complaint. We now have the complaint and the transcript people can read that the allegations of the complaint and the complaint are not the allegations of the subject matter of this conversation what else its not its not the conversation that was in the chairmans Opening Statement and while the chairman was speaking i actually had someone text me is he just making this up and yes just say he was because sometimes fiction is better than the actual words or the text luckily the American Public are smart they have the transcript theyve read the conversation they know when someone is just making it up now weve seen this movie before weve been here all year on litigating impeachment well long before the july 25th conversation happened between the president and the president of ukraine and weve heard the clicks of the cameras in this Intelligence Committees room where weve not been focusing on the issues of the National Security threats but instead of the calls and for impeachment which is really an assault on the electorate not just this president now the complaint we now have a mr director is based on hearsay the person who wrote it says i talked to people and they told me these things and part merican public has the transcript of the complaint so they have the ability to compare them whats clear about the complaint is its based on political issues mr director hes alleging or she is alleging that the actions of the president were political in nature now thats my concern about how this is applied to the whistleblower statute whistleblower statute is intended to better provide those in the Intelligence Community an opportunity to come to congress when theyre concerned about abuses of powers and laws but its about the Intelligence Community its about abuse of surveillance about the abuse of that the spine mechanisms that we have it this is about the actually the product of surveillance someone who has been had access to surveillance that related the president s conversation. That is brought us forward to us id like for you to to to turn for a moment and tell us your thoughts of the whistleblower process and that the the concerns as to why it has to be there so that the in the Intelligence Community can be held accountable and we can have oversight because it certainly wasnt there to for oversight of the president it was there for oversight for the Intelligence Community so if you could describe your thoughts on that and then i was very interested in your discussion but on the issue of executive privilege because the theres been much im made of the fact that the law says on the whistleblower statute that you shall clearly you have a conflict of laws when you have both the executive privilege issue and the issue of the word shell so 1st could you tell us the importance of the whistleblower statute with respect to the accountability of the Intelligence Community and our role of oversight there and then your. Your process your. Affects of being stuck in the middle where you have these conflicts of last structure a congressman the Intelligence Community whistleblower protection act is to apply to the Intelligence Community and then at it pertains to financial administrative or operational activities within the Intelligence Community in the under the oversight and responsibility of the director of National Intelligence it does not allow a member of the Intelligence Community to report any wrongdoing that comes from anywhere in the federal government the written and so with that i do believe that that is about the intelligence whistleblower protection act was the best vehicle that the whistleblower had to use and it came to me and i would just caution with our i. C. I. G. Who is a colleague and it the determination was made you know by the well that day that he viewed that it was in fact credible and that it was a matter of urgent concern and i just thought it would be prudent to have another opinion i have worked with lawyers my whole career whether it was the rule of Armed Conflict admiral to claims. Or rules of engagement or just the uniform code of military justice and i have found that different lawyers have different opinions on the same subject we have 9 justices the Supreme Court more often than not the opinions of 54 that doesnt mean that 5 are right and 4 are wrong there are differences of opinion but when this matter came to me i have a lot of Life Experience i realized the importance of the matter that is before us this morning and i thought that it would be prudent for me to ensure that in fact it met that statute before i sent it forward and compliance with the whistleblower protection act and i hope that responds to your question so your buck. As a side i want to mention that my colleague is right on both counts. Its not ok but also by summary the president s call was meant to be at least part in parity the fact that thats not clear is a separate problem in and of itself of course the president ever said. If i if you dont understand me honestly 7 more times my point is thats the message that the ukraine president was receiving in not so many words this carson thank you chairmanship thank you director maguire for your service. Director maguire this appears to be the 1st Intelligence Community will so blow a complaint that has ever ever been withheld from congress is that writer a congressman carson i believe that it might be and once again i said in my statement it is a fact as far as im concerned unprecedented it is unprecedented sir do you know why its on president i think its because the law that congress that this very committee drafted really couldnt be clearer it states that upon receiving such an urgent complaint from Inspector General you the director of National Intelligence quote shell end quote forwarded to the intel committees within 7 days no ifs ands or buts and even when the i. G. Has found complaints not to be an urgent concern or even credible your office has consistently and uniformly still transmitted those complaints to the Intelligence Committees is that rights are. Congressman carson in the past even if they were not a matter of urgent concern or that they were not credible they were forwarded but each in every instance prior to this it involved members of the a tele Just Community who are serving in organisations underneath that door of the control of the d. N. I. This one is different because they did not meet those 2 criteria. Director does executive privilege serve in your mind or laws that regulate the Intelligence Community preempt or negate even the laws that safeguard the security of americas democratic elections and her democracy itself sir no chairman carson it does not. Yet net net net notwithstanding director this unambiguous mandate and the consistent practice of your office. That you would held this urgent complaint from congress at the direction of the white house and the Justice Department you follow their orders instead of the law and if the Inspector General had not brought this complaint to our attention you in the trumpet ministration might have gotten away with this unprecedented action so you released a statement yesterday affirming your oath to the constitution and your dedication to the rule of law but im having trouble understanding how. That statement can be true in light of the facts here can you explain that to us or. Congressman carson a couple of things the white house did not did not direct me to withhold the information neither did the office of Legal Counsel that opinion is bit and unclassified and has been disseminated the question came down to urgent concern which is a Legal Definition and does it mean is it important is it timely urgent concern met the certain criteria that weve discussed several times here so we did not and all that did sir with and just take away the 7 days now as i said before just because it was not folded into this committee does not mean that it went unanswered the i. C. I. G. And the Justice Department referred it to the federal bureau of investigation for investigation so this is nothing and that was working while i was endeavoring to get the executive privilege concerns addressed so that it can then be forwarded it was not stonewalling i didnt receive direction from anybody i was just trying to work through the process and the law the way it is written i have to comply with the way the law is not the way some people would like it to be and if i could could do otherwise it would have been much more convenient for me congressman. And lastly director as you sit here today sir do you commit to providing every single whistleblower complaint intended for congress to the Intelligence Committees as required by the statutes or if its required by the statute congressman carson yes i will. As good to know sir and i certainly hope so because i think the unprecedented decision to withhold this will complain from congress i think it raises concerns very serious concerns for us and for me. And i think that we need to get to the bottom of this i yield the balance of my time chairman thank you thank you congressman carson thank you. How much time does the gentleman have remaining when he said well. Director you were not directed to withhold the complaint is that your testimony yes that is absolutely true so you exercise your discretion. To withhold the complaint from the committee i did not sir what i did was i delayed it because he did not meet the statutorily definition of urgent concern and i was working through and director youre aware you spent a lot of time focusing on the definition of urgent concern youre aware that the practice of your office has been that regardless of whether the complaint meets the definition of urgent concern regardless of whether Inspector General found a credible or incredible the complaint is always given to our committee youre aware thats the unbroken practice since the establishment of your office and the Inspector General are you aware of that chairman every previous whistleblower complaint that was forwarded to the Intelligence Committees involved a member of the Intelligence Community and an organization under which the director of National Intelligence had authority and responsibility but youre aware that the past practice has been were talking about urgent concern here that whether you or the Inspector General or any else believes it meets the statute definition the past practice has always been to give it to this committee youre aware of that right i am aware that this is unprecedented ok and this every now and with that story and great this is never happened before but there you go and this is a unique situation but but you director made the decision you made the decision to withhold it from the committee for a month. When the white house had made no claim of executive privilege when the department of justice said you dont have to give it to them but you can you made the decision not to know the true what the office of Legal Counsel said that it does not meet the Legal Definition of urgent concern so it said they were not required it didnt say you cannot provide it it said you are not required to that is if you dont want to were not going to force you youre not required but it didnt say you cant my right what it allowed me and i had to said that in my Opening Statement but even so it was referred to the f. B. I. For investigation and i was endeavoring to get the information to you mr chairman but i could not follow it as a member of the executive branch without executive privilege is being addressed and i feel that the white House Counsel was doing the best that they could in order to get that and it took longer than i would have liked thats for sure but that came to what we concluded yesterday with the release of the transcripts and because the transcripts were released that no longer was there a situation of executive privilege and i was then free to send both the expected generals cover letter and the complaint to you that one has no time was there any attempt on my parts or ever to withhold the information from you is the chair this committee or the Senate Intelligence Committee Director i wish i had the confidence of knowing that but for this hearing but for the deadline that we were forced to set with this airing that we would have been provided that complaint but i dont know that we would have ever seen that complaint. Dr one strip. Then mr chairman and i thank you mr maguire for being here today you know i think its a shame that we started off this hearing with fictional remarks the implication of a conversation that took place between a president and a foreign leader putting words into it that did not exist there not in the transcript and i would contend that those were intentionally not clear and the chairman described it as parity and i dont believe that this is the time or the place for parity when we are trying to seek facts nor do those that were involved with the conversation agree with the parity that the chairman gave us and unfortunately today many innocent americans are going to turn on their t. V. And the media is only going to show that section of what the chairman had to say but im also glad to know that Many Americans have seen this movie too many times and theyre tired of it but let me get to some questions sir if i can lets go to the word credible credible does not mean proven true or factual would that be correct in this situation i find no fault in your logic congressman ok so you know the interpretation there was credible but also was that decision made by the i. G. Before seeing the transcript of the conversation. I believe that the i. C. I. G. Conducted to his best to his ability the investigation and he found to his ability that he that based on the evidence and discussing it with the whistleblower that he thought that in fact it was credible but the i. G. Didnt necessarily have the transcript of the convert he did not ok that thats thats my question so to another point you know one of the issues that arose out of the russian best to gauge in the last congress was a question over the latitude provided to the u. S. President to conduct Foreign Affairs and 2017 i asked then cia director brennan how he viewed statements made by president obama to russian president medvedev regarding him more flexibility to negotiate after his 2012 election and president medvedev replied that he would transmit the information to vladimir and that medvedev stood with president obama that was in an open hearing director brown and wouldnt entertain my question and insisted on not answering to the fact that the conversation was between the heads of government thats what he said he further claimed he was avoiding getting involved in political partisan issues which brings me to a similar question related to this whistleblower complaint one you said this executive privilege is on waiver of all and i think thats kind of consistent with cia director brennan was implying congressman only the white house and the president could waive executive privilege the president exerts a privilege and only the white house and the president can waive that the director brennan gave me the impression then that that was like thats the rule thats the law so i have to go with that but do you do you believe the president s intitled to withhold his or her communications from congress if the conversation is used in a whistleblower case i think that the president when he conducts diplomacy and deals with foreign heads of state he has every right to be able to have that information be held within the white house and the. Executive branch and if if yes today i think the transmission of the call is unprecedented and its also i think that other future leaders when they interact with our head of state might be more cautious in what they say and reduce the interaction that they have with the president because of that release so we may need to change our process here because i guess if a decision regarding executive privilege maybe it should be made prior to submitting that communication to congress well either that or i believe that this committee wrote the law and based on what were doing today you know perhaps it needs to be relooked i dont know i leave that to the legislative branch so also we may need to change process you know the 14 days that might be kind of tough to adhere to so i think maybe. You know this is a special circumstance unprecedented maybe theres to be some leeway in the timeframe that the narrow 14 days and i and i dont know if you know it was eat did you feel or did the i. G. Ever say that they felt rushed to making a decision because of the 14 day process now congressman i believe that hes a very experienced Inspector General hes used to dealing with the 14 day process and when you work under a timeline like that he worked with his staff and i think endeavored to to the extent because he was following the statute as he believed it was written so i would think that any prudent lawyer would like to have more time to be able to collect the facts and do other things but michael at conception was under the 14 day timeline and he did the best to his ability to comply with that did you feel rushed in any way sir i did not thank you i yield back thank you congressman disappear. Thank you mr chairman and thank you director maguire for your extraordinarily long service to our country at any point during this process did you personally threatened to resign if the complaint was not provided to the committee now congressman i did not and i know that that story has appeared quite a bit and i issued a statement yesterday all right thank you. When you read the complaint were you shocked at all by what you read congresswoman congresswoman excuse me so i said i have a Life Experience level Life Experience i join the navy and i understand what your record could you just when i handed it i realized the i realized full well full and well the importance of the allegation and i also have to tell you congressman congresswoman when i saw that i anticipated having to sit in front of some committee some time to discuss it all right the complaint refers to what happened after the july 25th conversation between the ukraine president and the president United States and the white house lawyers ordered other staff to move the transcript from its typical repast atory to a more secure location in order to lock down and that was the term used in the complaint all records of the phone call. Did you did there that reaction to that transcript seem to you like a recognition within the white house that the call was completely improper congresswoman i have no firsthand knowledge of that all i have is the knowledge that the whistleblower alleges in his allegation the whistleblower complaint i dont know whether in fact that that is true or not my only hope the knowledge and situation awareness of that is from the whistleblowers letter. So knowing that the whistleblower appeared to be credible based on the evaluation by the Inspector General and knowing that that effort was undertaken by the white house to cover it up why would you then as your 1st action outside of the Intelligence Community go directly to the white house to the very entity that was being scrutinized and complained about in the complaint why would you go there to ask their advice as to what you should do congresswoman the allegation that is made by the whistleblower is 2nd hand information not known to him or her 1st hand except mr mcguire it was determined to be credible that there was an investigation done by the Inspector General let me go on to another issue a President Trump over the weekend tweeted it appears that an american spy in one of our intelligence agencies may have been spying on our own president. Do you believe that the whistleblower was dying on one of our intelligence agencies or spying on the president as i said several times so far this morning i believe that the whistleblower complied with the law and did everything that they thought he or she thought was responsible under the Intelligence Community whistleblower protection act but she did not speak out to protect the whistleblower did you congresswoman yes or no sir i did yes i did within my own workforce i thought that there was enough stuff that was appearing out in the press that was erroneous that was absolutely incorrect and i didnt think that i needed to respond to every single statement that was out there that was incorrect so what i did is my right to use to my workforce i have International Pressure thank you maam the president on monday said. Also who is this socalled whistleblower who who knows the correct facts is he on our countrys side do you believe the whistleblower is on our countrys side i believe that the whistleblower and all a ploy to come forward to the i. C. I. G to raise concerns of fraud waste and abuse are doing what they perceive to be the right thing so working on behalf of our country are you aware of the fact that was a blow ours within the federal government have done a fide waste fraud and abuse of over 59000000000. 00 that has had the effect of benefiting the taxpayers and keeping our country safe as well congresswoman im not familiar with the dollar value but having been in the Government Service for nearly 4 decades i am very much aware of the value of thank you the program and i ask you one final question did the present the United States ask you to find out the identity of the whistleblower i can say although i would not normally discuss my conversations with the president i could tell you in phatic lee no has anyone else within the white house or the department of justice asked you know congresswoman thank you youre welcome mr stewart mr grove mr garth thank you for being here today i want you to know the good news is im not going to treat you like a child and im going to give you a chance to answer your questions if i ask you something want to thank you for your service and id like you to remind me you said it earlier how many years of Service Military service do you have. I have 36 years of service in the United States navy 34 of those is a navy seal thats thats great 36 years 34 years as a navy seal i had a mere 14 years as an air force pilot i proudly wear these air force wings these are actually my fathers air force wings he served in the military as well as 5 of his sons and for someone who hasnt served in the military i dont think they realize how deeply offensive it is to have your honor and your integrity questioned some on this committee have done exactly that theyve accused you of breaking the law and im going to read just 11 part of many that i could from the chairman this raises grave concerns that your office together with the department of justice and possibly the white house have been gauged in unlawful effort to protect the president. And theres others that i could read as they have sought i believe to destroy your character so im going to give you the opportunity to answer very clearly are you motivated by politics in your work or your professional behavior. It should be set up so are you motivated by politics in your work or your professional behavior no congressman ok im all im just going even though i am not i am i am not political i am not partisan and i did not look to be sitting here as the acting director of National Intelligence i thought that there were perhaps other people who would be best more qualified to do that but the president asked b. To do this and it was my aunt to step up and for the well of the long im doing it to lead and support the Intelligence Community can thank you do you believe that you have followed the laws and policies and precedent in the way youve handled this complaint i do i know i do i have you in any way to protect the president or anyone else from any wrongdoing i have not what i have done is endeavor to follow the law thank you do you believe that you had a legal responsibility to follow the guidance of the office of Legal Counsel the opinion of the office of Legal Counsel is binding on the executive branch thank you now theres been a big deal made about the fact that this is a 1st whistleblower complaint that has been withheld from congress but its also true isnt it that its a 1st whistleblower complaint that has potentially falls under executive privilege and its also the 1st time that included information that is potentially outside of the authority of the d. N. I. Is that true to the best of my knowledge congressman that is correct ok and i will say to my colleague sitting here i think youre nuts if you think youre going to convince the American People that your cause is just by attacking this man and by and impugning his character when its clear that he felt there was a discrepancy and to potential deficiency in the law he was trying to do the right thing. He felt compelled by the law to do exactly what he did and yet the entire tone here is that somehow youre a political stooge who has done nothing but try to protect the president i just think thats knots and anyone watching this hearing is surely going to walk away with the clear impression that you are a man of integrity who did what you thought was right regardless of the questions and the innuendo that is cast by some my colleague sitting here today had like one more thing before i yield my time i think we can agree that leaks run lawful and that leaks are damaging and for heavens sakes weve seen plenty of that over the last 3 years and theres a long list of leaks that havent had clear implications for our National Security meaningful implications for our National Security i want to know do you know who is feeding the press information about this case and have you made any referrals to the department of justice for unlawful disclosures this or do you know do you know who is feeding information about this case or no i dont think you think it be appropriate to make to make a referral to a department of justice to try to determine that i believe that anybody who witnesses or sees any wrongdoing should refer any wrongdoing or complaint to the department of justice for investigation including investigation about leaks that is called classified information yes congressman any wrongdoing all right clyde dont know what time it is because our clock isnt working i suppose my time is up but i would conclude by emphasizing once again good luck convincing the American People that this is a dishonorable man sitting here good luck convincing the American People that he has done anything to the what he thinks is right and if you think it scores political points with your friends who have wanted to impeach his president from the day he was elected then keep going down that road. Thank you congressman but only say director no one has accused you of being a political stooge or dishonorable no one has said so no one has suggested that you because it is very committed as your chair that it is certainly our strong view and we would hope it would be shared by the minority that when the Congress Says that something shall be done it shall be done and when that involves the wrongdoing of the president it is not an exception to the requirement of the statute and the fact that this whistleblower has been left wisting in the wind now for weeks has been attacked by the president should concern all of us democrats and republicans that this was ever allowed to come to be that allegations this serious and this urgent were withheld as long as they were from this committee that should concern all of us. And no one is suggesting that there is a dishonor here but nonetheless we are going to insist that the law be followed mr chairman will you mr quickly thank mr chairman thank you sir for your service and for being here as you know those in public life who work and deal with other countries ambassadors secretaries of state many in the intelligence fail their vetted they go for approval before the senate they have to get clearance and you understand the policy reasons for that correct yes congressman do you have any issues with civilians without approval without vetting without clearance taking on those roles. Yes i do congressman and why would you have those concerns well in order to be. Read in order to be able to handle Sensitive Information whether it be diplomatic or certainly intelligence information one must be vetted this is the important part of prevent just protecting National Security in order though you would just cant bring people in and automatically wave a magic wand to put holy water on them to give them a security clearance it is a matter of vetted for me to come back into government the f. B. I. Went back for 15 years in my background examined all of my financial records to make sure that i was in fact worthy of having an intelligence wins and we do the same thing with the Intelligence Community everybody who is subject or everybody who is privileged you have access to intelligence information is a sacred trust the American People expect us to keep them safe as i said earlier in order to do that we need to ensure that any person who has access to this Sensitive Information of the United States has been thoroughly vetted to ensure that they are able to handle it and from his not just the intel issues its the issues of of National Policy that people have an official role that they carry out on behalf of the United States and we know what their role is correct yes congressman i would what is your understanding right now what mr giulianis role is. Mr congressman and congressman quickly i respectfully dished referred to the white house. To comment on the president s personal lawyer. Ok so it is so far what ive declaimed as you see that it is a personal lawyer who read in the complaint we read in this modified transcript hes mentioned 5 times your reaction to the fact that this civilian without any of these vetting has played this role. No sir all im saying is that i know what the allegations are im not saying that the allegations are true and thats where the committee i dont think theres any question the credibility of the complaint in that in thats in the transcript the president mentions and speaks highly of mr giuliani a highly respected man he was the mayor of new york a graver i would like him to call you ill ask him to call you along with the attorney general your reaction to civilian dealing with these in the complaint it talks about our National Security that the come and specter generals just talks about this as the highest responsibility among those that the d. N. I. Has and obviously mr giuliani is playing this role to your knowledge does he have security clearance i dont know congressman quickly. Be there aware or unaware whether or not mr giuliani has a security clearance before this all happened we were aware of his role or understanding what his role was doing what you do. Congressman quickly though i only knowledge of what mr giuliani does have to be honest with you i get from t. V. And from the news media i am not aware of what he does in fact for the president you are you aware of his any communication by mr giuliani and your office about how he should proceed with this role given the classified nature the National Security implications that are in the complaint that theyre in the transcript and the role that he is playing. Well i have read the transcripts just as you have so my knowledge of his activity in there is just limited to the conversation that the president had with the president of ukraine so we specd your role and while we have differences of opinion we continue to respect your integrity and your honor but we have this vast amount of experience you have and we need to understand how it plays juxtaposition with the complaint im reading and o. M. B. Official informed departments and agencies that the president earlier that month had issued instructions to suspend all u. S. Security assistance to ukraine your reaction to that congressman quickly i think that anything that has to do with the president s lawyer in these matters should be referred to to the white house and the president for that one though and im just reading that im just reading the complaint i lead and i support the Intelligence Community and the 17 different departments and agencies underneath my leadership i do not lead the president and i have no authority or responsibility over the white house but you are aware with all your experience of the fact that we have this relationship with ukraine that they are dependent upon us and that this complaint doesnt concern you cant say that publicly that it concerns you theres a lot of things that concern me on the director of National Intelligence and this one here though i just have to defer back to the conversation that the president had is his conversation how the president of the United States wants to could talk to diplomacy is his business and i is not whether or not i approve it or disapprove of it that is the president s business on how he wants to conduct that survey the issue is whether it commits a crime and that bothers you the time of the gentleman has expired. Directly make complete your answer if you wish it should be sure if you want to respond you may. Know im fine thank you chairman mystified thank you mr maguire thank you for being here we appreciate your life of Public Service my question relates to prior to the transmission on august 26th from the i. G. To the d. N. I. Were there it is 1500. 00 g. M. T. Here on aljazeera 11 am in washington d. C. On come on santa maria continuing live coverage of the house Intelligence Committee hearing featuring testimony from the acting director of National Intelligence Joseph Mcguire this is of course over the whistleblower complaint letter of which have now been released back to that hearing that will be very helpful to this committee in terms of if there were any preliminary conversations what was discussed and if there was any action taken as a result of those conversations i want to turn to the complaint itself which is made public for the american for the American Public to read and let me preface this by saying that i greatly appreciate your statement that you believe the whistleblower is operating in good faith i think thats very important for americans to hear but on page one and im not going to improvise for parody purposes like the chairman of this committee did im going to quote it directly on page one the complaint reads quote i was not a direct witness to most of the events described. This seems like a very important line to look into and i think the American Public will have questions in particular about that why so my question to you is for the record did the i. G. Fully investigate the allegations into this complaint at this time has the i. G. Fully investigate the allegations in this complaint as i said earlier congresswoman i believe that the italians community expected general did a thorough investigation with the 14 day timeframe that he had and under that timeline to the best of his ability made the determination that it was both credible and urgent i have no reason to doubt that Michael Atkinson did anything but it is his job sure so when you talk about a full investigation where the veracity of the allegations in the complaint looked into there were many references to white house officials do you know if the i. G. Spoke with those white house officials do you know if he investigated again the truthfulness of these allegations or was it a preliminary investigation congresswoman id have to defer to the i. G. To respond to you on that but i do know i do although i do not know the identity of the whistleblower i do know that Michael Atkinson had in fact you know discussed this with the whistleblower and found his complaint to be credible as far as who else you spoke with i am unaware of what went on in my collections investigation into this matter so as of today the only individual that we know that the i. G. Spoke with is the author is the complainant is the author and the whistleblower now congresswoman what im saying is i am unaware who else michael may have spoken to just unfamiliar with his investigative process and everybody that he spoke to in this regard thank you for the answer on the record again for the American Public theyre going to have many questions as they read this complaint today and because on page one it says no direct knowledge i think its very important that we conduct. That we have questions answered for individuals that do have direct knowledge and with that email back. Thank you congressman its just well thank you mr mcguire do you agree that the definition of a cover up is an attempt to prevent people from discovering a crime and say thats close i mean im sure theres others one but i dont disagree with that sir and in the whistleblowers complaint the whistleblower alleges that immediately after the president s call with the president of ukraine on july 25 white house lawyers moved quickly to direct white house officials to move electronic transcripts from one Computer System where it was normally stored to a secret classified Information System is that right congresswoman actually be sure i apologize congress and that what was alleged in that was of our complaint congressman yes or no on sure all i know is that is the allegation is that what im asking you that thats whats alleged thats the allegation and you read that allegation and the 1st people that you go to after you read that allegation are the white house lawyers who are telling the white house officials who see this transcript and move it into a secret compartmentalise system but those are the 1st people you go to well lets say a couple of things is that yes or no yes but ok im going to let me keep going here so you get this complaint Inspector General says urgent credible you have no wiggle room to not go to congress and instead you send your concern to the subject of the complaint the white house so did the white house tell you after you sent your concern about privilege that they tell you to go to the pardon of justice next we might by cim by counsel and consultation with the Intelligence Community Inspector General went to the office of Legal Counsel. So they were not directed to do that we and mr maguire you said that this did not involve ongoing intelligence activities however the whistleblower says that this is not the 1st time that the president s transcripts with foreign leaders were improperly moved to an Intelligence Community kober system is that a part of the allegation i believe thats in the letter and i will let the letter speak for itself so well what can also speak for itself is that if a transcript of the foreign leader is improperly moved into an Intelligence Community classification system that actually would involve your responsibilities is that right not necessarily that is i do not it is not underneath my authority and responsibility and once again this is an allegation that has been made does not necessarily mean that that is a true statement and the allegation was determined to be urgent incredible by the Inspector General is that right yes it was so would you also want to know though considering that you are the director of National Intelligence and transcripts are being moved into a secret Intelligence System whether other transcripts perhaps maybe the president s phone calls with Vladimir Putin with n. B. S. Of saudi arabia or air to one of turkey or kim jong un would you want to know if those are also being improperly moved because the president is trying to cover up something. Congressman how the white house the office of the exit the executive office of the president and the National Security council conduct their business is their business well its actually your business to protect americas secrets is that right its all of our eyes at this committee as well and if theres cover up activity because the president is working improperly with a Foreign Government that could compromise americas secrets is that right congressman there is an allegation of a cover up im sure an investigation before this committee might lead questions or just prove that but right now all we have is an allegation an allegation of a 2nd hand information from a whistleblower i have developmental age or whether or not that is true and accurate statement the department of justice opinion you relied upon said that you were not responsible per for preventing foreign election interference is that right that was in the opinion what that the office of Legal Counsel did was over 11 pages you know then days ahead in defining and explaining their trust occasion for it not complying with urgent car you responsible for preventing election interference election interference by a Foreign Government congressman election interfere i hope you know this answer is yes or no are you responsible for preventing election interference byte by election interference is a lawyer i dont know yet if you know how they already are he Intelligence Community is it your priority that yes it is ok so this complaint also alleges a shakedown with a Foreign Government by the United States president in vet involving a rogue actor as mr quickly pointed out who has no clearance no authority under the United States and an effort by the white house to move the transcript of his call to a secret system is that right thats at least whats alleged congressman i believe that Election Security is my most fundamental priority however this complaint focused on a conversation by the president with another foreign leader not Election Security and youll back thank you thank you congressman. And if that conversation involve the president requesting help in the form of intervention in our election is that not an issue of interference in our election german once again this was sent to the federal bureau of investigation you understand about it but youre not suggesting are you that the president is somehow immune from the laws that preclude a u. S. Person from seeking foreign help in the u. S. Election are you what i am saying chairman schiff is that no one none of us is above the law in this country mr hurd thank you chairman pleasure to be here with you i tell my friends all the time that ive gotten more surveillance as a member of congress and i did as an undercover officer in the cia and i think youve got more arrows shot at you you know since youve been d. N. I. And then you did in your almost 4 decades on the battlefield. A specific question the letter thats contained in the whistleblower package its actually dated august 12th and i recognize this may be a better question to be asking the i. C. I. G. That letter is dated august 12th and its to the chairman of this and it select committee on intelligence and to the chairman of this committee do you know if the whistleblower provided that letter to those 2 chairman concurrently with the i. C. I. G. That congressman i said earlier i believe that the whistleblower and the i. C. I. G. A. Acted in good faith and followed the law every step of the way Good Good Good copy. We talked about the way the law on the whistleblower statute is says you shall share if its decided to be an urgent concern however best practices has always been to share regardless of whether that urge a concern do you see any reason. Negative impacts on the Intelligence Community if that legislation was changed to say all whistleblower complaints should be shared with with the committees that thats correct and addition to that congressman i mean they just say the allegation was made against a member of this committee i do know members of this committee although you are the Intelligence Committee but not members of the Intelligence Committee and as the d. N. I. I have no authority or responsibility over this committee but my question is do you think that if every whistleblower complaints that was brought to the Intelligence Community Inspector General was always shared with this committee with that have any impact on intelligence equities. And i ask that because i dont know why when the statute was written that it didnt say all should be shared rather than only urgent concern and my question to you as the head of the Intelligence Community do you think if we change that law would it have an impact on intelligence equities so i dont think that a law could be changed to cover all things that might possibly happen i think we have a good law i think it is well written however as i said congressman this is unprecedented and this is a unique situation why this one is its why were sitting here this morning sure and i hope were not in this position again however if we do find ourselves in this position again i want to make sure that there is not any uncertainty in when information should be shared to this committee was the odeon i or under you or under your predecessor aware of an o. N. B. Decision to suspend ukrainian aide as was a legend in this complaint. As far as im concerned personally congressman no i have no knowledge of that and i am not aware if anybody within the odeon i as aware of that i just dont know the answer to that