Transcripts For CSPAN Global Terror Threats 20180216

Did he start this mindset we will build up our navy and our Missile Defense forces in such a way that we never lose face like this again. Sunday night at 8 00 eastern on cspans q a. The director of national intelligence, the cia director and the director of the fbi testified earlier this week at a Senate Intelligence Committee Hearing on global terror threats. This is two hours and 40 minutes. At a Senate Intelligence Committee Hearing. I would like to welcome our distinguished witnesses today. Dan coats. Mike pompeo. General robert ashley. Chris wray. Mike rogers. Robert cardella. We have a long day in front of us. I thank all of you for being here. I know how forward you looked to this one occasion on an annual basis. Since 1995, this committee has met in open forum to discuss the security threats facing the United States of america. This has never been, nor will it ever be, a comfortable conversation to have. The threats this country face are complex, involving, and without easy answers. Domains,t in multiple they are asymmetrical and unconventional, they can be launched from across the ocean or be planned in the heart of our homeland. This conversation serves a vital purpose and it is essential that it takes place in the Public Square with as much detail and can door as if possible. In my view, that is the true value and Public Service of this hearing. It provides the American People with insight that they do not normally get. Those insights are about the spectrum of threats we are up against as a nation. Importantly, those insights are also about the work that the Intelligence Community does to push back on those threats. This is work that both time and this is work that is both time and labor intensive. Thankless, but because of the tireless dedication and patriotism of mend and women who make up our Intelligence Community, it gets done on behalf of the American People every single day. I encourage all the witnesses this morning to not only address the threats to our nation but to talk about what their organizations are doing to help there this country and, to take from then, wisdom of the entire intelligence committee. I encourage everyone to familiarize themselves with its contents. It is a testament to the broad range of talents are witnesses bring to the table. It is a reminder why the country invests so much in the intelligence agencies. I am going to ask you again for your insights on the state of north Koreas Nuclear and Missile Program and what is going on politically with north koreas leadership. Perhaps you can help us differentiate between a genuine effort to reconcile with south an opportunistic attempt to drive a wedge between washington and soul. Last week we had u. S. Advisors come under fire in eastern syria. This prompted a retaliatory strike that killed dozens. In afghanistan 150 were dead last month. After 16 years of work, the incident she is nowhere near to folding. Nearsurgency is nowhere folding. Ciber is clearly the most challenging threat factor this country faces. It is one of the most concerning, given how many aspects of our daily lives in the United States can be disrupted by a wellplanned, well executed cyberattack. I would appreciate your assessment of how well we are doing when it comes to protecting the nations most , fromal Computer Networks the systems that at our military to the networks that ensure the Nations Energy supply. They are all essential to a functionality of a modern america. I fear that they are increasingly vulnerable to state and nonstate actors. Interested in hearing your assessment of the threat posed by the spread of Foreign Technology in the United States. This committee has worked diligently to sound the alarm bells when it comes to the counterintelligence and Information Security risks that come prepackaged with the goods and services of certain overseas vendors. The focus of my concern today is china. Specifically, Chinese Telecom that are widely understood to have extraordinary ties to the chinese government. Thoughtsu will trigger on this and i also ask you to provide your insights on how foreign acquisitions are jeopardizing the nations most sensitive technologies. I would like to spend a moment on the counterintelligence threat to our National Academic research and laboratory construct. What is the scale of the problem . What is the fbi doing to fight it . Finally, we have come to associate nga with modernization of the Intelligence Community. The adversaries of this country are investing and innovating faster with fewer constraints that we are. Than we are. Nga is playing an essential role in pushing the envelope with new ways of tackling problems, like having more data than you can feasibly analyzed. Analyze. E the computer learning and vision work at nga will be a bridge to help us get there. I look forward to your thoughts on what is next at nga and how the Intelligence Community as a whole can make better use of innovation and technologies to address and vance intelligence disciplines advance intelligence disciplines. I will close there because we have a lot to get to. I want to thank you, and more importantly i want to thank those who are not here with you, those who carry out the lions share of the work on behalf of the American People. The folks you represent are important to this committee. We cannot do our oversight without the work they perform before turning to the distinguished vicechairman. We will reconvene at 2 30 this afternoon in a closed session to hear from the same witnesses in a classified setting. I would ask members to reserve anything that remotely gets into a classified question for the afternoon session. Vicechairman. Thank you. Let me also welcome all of you here. Thank you all for your service. We hope that you will convey back to all the brave men and women who work for you that this committee will always have your back. This open hearing comes at an extraordinarily important time. Our nascent intelligence agencies stand at the forefront of our defense against continuing threats from terrorist groups, ideology, world regimes, nuclear proliferation, regional instability. , we have discussed this at length. We have seen the rise of nations who view themselves as competitors, if not as adversaries, of the United States. New have begun to utilize asymmetric weapons that undercut our democratic institutions, steel are most sensitive intellectual property. The me start with russia. Remain withtions your spec to the true extent of the russian interference in the 2016 elections. We will work through these in a bipartisan way on this committee. Broad, you will find a bipartisan consensus on this committee on a number of critical issues. Engaged in a coordinated attack to undermine her democracy. Undermine our democracy. The russian effort utilized our social media platforms to push and spread misinformation at an unprecedented scale. We have had more than a year to get our act together. Two of limited strategy to deter further attacks. Have ave we still do not comprehensive plan. Stated that he is every expectation that russia will try to influence our upcoming elections. State tillerson said that we are releasing russian efforts to metal in the 2018 elections. We are no better prepared than we were in 2016. Mistake, this threat did not believe in begin in 2016. We are seeing a continuous mistake, this threat did not believe in assault by rusd undermine our democratic institutions. Theyre going to keep coming at us. This but this, the president inconveniently continues to deny the threat posed by russia. He did not increase sanctions on russia when he had the chance to do so. A singlet even tweeted concern. This threat demands a whole of government response. That response needs to start with leadership at the top. Time, other threats to institutions come from right here at home. There have been some aided and abetted by Russian Internet bots and trolls who have attacked the basic integrity of the fbi. This is a dangerous trend. This campaign of innuendo and misinformation should alarm all of us, regardless of our partisan affiliation. In addition to this threat from russia, i am concerned that china has developed in all of an approach to gain access to our sensitive technologies and intellectual property. I am paying a great deal of attention to the rise of chinas tech factor. I want to ensure that the ic is tracking the direction that chinas tech giants are heading and especially to the extent that they are beholden to the chinese government. In recent years, we have seen Major Technology firms whose rise was attributed to the illicit access of u. S. Technology. Now represents some of the leading Market Players globally. Most americans have not heard of all of these companies. Western economic markets, we want to ensure they play by the rules. We need to make sure that this is not a new way for china to gain access to sensitive technology. There are a number of other concerns i hope to raise both in the hearing this morning and enclosed during this afternoon. Poised to ic post track foreign influence that relies on social media and misinformation . The chairman and i had a Group Meeting investigating this issue. Russian trolls and bots continue to push divisive content both within the United States and against all of our allies in europe. The u. K. , but france, germany, the netherlands. We saw recent indications of russian activity in mexico. The ic needs to say on top of this issue. I am worried that we do not have the clear line. Another issue. E i believe we need to do more to reform the clearance system, which gao recently placed on its list of high risk Government Programs in need of reform. Folks in serve our company are waiting on line. Theyre waiting way too long to get their security clearances. It is obviously hampering your recruitment and retention. It is costing us millions of dollars in inefficiency. Thank you to all of you to your service. Please convey our best wishes to the men and women who work with you. I look forward to our hearing. Thank you. I am going to recognize director coats. He is the only one who will give official testimony. All members of the panel are open for questions. Will recognize our members by order of seniority for up to five minutes. With that, director coats, the floor is yours. I want to start by apologizing for my raspy voice. I have been fighting through some of the sickness that is going around. I may have to clear my throat a few times. I apologize for that. It strikes me listening to your opening remarks and the vicechairmans opening remarks excuse me. We have continued to have a very interaction of interactive presence in this committee. The issues that you have raved rays are issues that we talk about continuously with you. We want to continue to work with sides ofully on both the aisle as we go forward looking at what the Intelligence Community can provide for this committee. Vicechairman warner, members of the committee, we thank you for the opportunity to be with you here. There have been some changes on the panel since we were here last year. This last visit before this committee. He deeply regrets not having to come before you in the future years. He has enjoyed this process very much. Considering his marriage of marital status. We have two new members. They have been looking forward to this day, i am sure, with great anticipation. I say all of that because what you are looking at here is a team. I. T. Networks together, in terms a team that works together in terms of how we look at policymakers with the intelligence that they need. It is an honor for us to be here. I think this team reflects the hard work the Intelligence Community, in the testimonies and answers the question today. Before i begin the sobering portion of my remarks, let me take a moment to a knowledge positive development for the Intelligence Community and express our thanks to members of the community for this port in the renewing of the authorities of the recent 702 authorization. This is our most important legislative issue because it is our most important collection issue against Foreign Terrorists and threats to america. We appreciate the work that the done, particularly this team, in reaching that goal. We face a complex, volatile, and challenging environment. Conflictof interstate is higher than any time to the end of the cold war. There is a growing use of weapons of masterstroke mass destruction. Are using ciber and other instruments of power to shape societies and markets. We have entered a. That could best be described as a race for technological superiority. We seek to sow division they seek to sow division and the United States. Nonstate actors, including terrorist and criminal groups, stateploding week capacity in africa, the middle causing instability and violence both within states and among states. Topic. Not cover every that will be a relief to the committee. We are submitting a written statement for the record with additional details. Let me turn to global threats. I would like to start with cyber threat. It is one of my top concerns. The United States is under attack. Under attack by entities that are using ciber cyber to penetrate every major action that takes place in the United States. From u. S. Businesses to the federal government to state and local governments, the United States is threatened by Cyber Attacks every day. Russia, china, and iran posed the greatest cyber threats. Other nationstates, terrorist organizations, criminal organizations, are ever more technically capable groups and individuals. They use Cyber Operations to their objectives. Some of these actors are likely to pursue even more aggressive Cyber Attacks with the intent of the grading our Democratic Values and weakening our alliances. Persistent and disruptive Cyber Operations will continue against using elections as opportunities to undermine democracy, so discard, and undermine our values. Chinese Cyber Espionage and attack capabilities will continue to support chinas National Security and economic priorities. Penetrate u. S. O and Ally Networks for espionage and lay the groundwork for future Cyber Attacks. Theh korea will continue use of Cyber Operations to raise funds, launch attacks, and gather intelligence against the United States. Terrorists will use the internet to raise funds and promote their maligned messages. Criminals will exploit cyber tools to finance their operations. Topic for you is weapons of mass destruction. Overall, state efforts to wmds, theor acquire itiverance and systems causes a major threat to the u. S. And its allies. In addition to its Ballistic Missile tests and growing number of nuclear warheads, north korea will continue its longstanding chemical and biological warfare programs also. Russia will remain the most capable wmd power and is expanding its Nuclear Weapon capabilities. China will continue to expand its weapons of mass destruction its nuclear arsenal. Implementation has extended the time it would take to develop a Nuclear Weapon. From several months to about a year. Provided that a rent continues to adhere to the deals major provisions. Pakistan is developing new types of Nuclear Weapons, including short range tactical weapons. State and nonstate actors, including the Syrian Regime and process andue to have used chemical weapons in syria and iraq. We continue to be concerned about some of these actors and their pursuit of biological weapons. Turning now to terrorism. Terrorism threat is pronounced and spans the spectrum from isis and al qaeda to Lebanese Hezbollah and other affiliated terrorist organizations, as well as the statesponsored activities of the rent. ,. S. Based violent extremists including its fires and self radical individuals, represent the primary and most difficult to detect terrorism threat in the United States. Isis claimed to having a functioning caliphate that governs populations is all but 40. Isis remains a threat and will akely focus on regrouping in rack and syria in ungoverned portions of those countries. It will enhance its global cause,e, championing its Planning International attack, and encouraging members and synthesizers to attack their home countries. To attack their home countries. Moving on, as if we do not have enough threats on years earth, we need to look to the heavens. The Global Expansion of the space industry will extend space enabled capabilities and Situational Awareness to nationstate and commercial space actors in the coming years. Continued china will to expand their space based reconnaissance, communications and navigation systems, in terms of numbers of satellites and applications for use. Both russia and chinese capweapons will mature over the next two years as east country pursues antisatellite weapons as a means to reduce u. S. And allied military effectiveness and perceptions of u. S. Military advantage in space. Topic is topical transnational organized crime. It poses a growing threat to u. S. And allied interests. These criminal groups will supply the dominant share of illicit drugs fueling record mortality rates among our population. Traffic inontinue to human life. They will deplete National Resources and siphon money from governments in the global economy. I would like now to briefly go around the world. If you went out and hired a private plane and launched from los angeles and went around the world and stopped at every hotspot in this world you would make multiple dozens of stops. That is the kind of threat we space. But we start with east asia. Pose anrea continues to evermore increasing threat to the United States and its interests. Pyongyang has repeatedly stated that it does not intend to negotiate its Nuclear Weapons and missiles away. The regime views Nuclear Weapons as critical to its security. Kim jongun sees Nuclear Icbms as leverage to achieve his longterm strategic ambition to end south koreas alliance with washington and to dominate and slow. In the wake of its test last year, we expect to see north korea press ahead with additional missile test this year. His foreign minister has threatened an officer nuclear test over the pacific. Pyongyang is committed to fueling a long range nuclear miscible capable of posing a direct threat to the United States. Modest improvements in north koreas conventional capabilities will continue to pros and ever greater threat to south korea, japan, as well as u. S. Targets in those countries. China will increasingly seek to expand its regional influence and shape events and outcomes globally. It will take a firm stance on its claims to the East China Sea and east china south china sea. Itsa also intends to use initiative to increase its reach to geostrategic locations across eurasia, africa, and the pacific. From east asia we had to south asia. Afghanistan, attacks in the that afghanrate National Security forces face unsteady performance. With Coalition Support they will maintain control of most major population centers. Complicating the afghanistan situation is our assessment that militant groups continued to take advantage of their safe haven to conduct afghanistan,dia, including u. S. Interests therein. Pakistani military leaders. Ontinue to walk delicate lines there is a desire to appear more proactive in responsive to our request to more action to against these groups. The actions taken thus far do not reflect a significant escalation of pressure against these groups and are unlikely to have a lasting effect. Designedistration has designated eight militants affiliated with the taliban. We assess that pakistan will maintain ties to these militants while restricting counterterrorism cooperation with the United States. Next is russia. President clinton will continue president putin will resort to more authoritarian tactics to maintain control amid challenges to his rule. Let me be clear. The russians realized this tool utilized this tool because it is cheap, low risk, offers what as plausible deniability, and has proven to be effective at sowing division. We expect russia to continue using cap again to, social media , false flag personas, sympathetic spokesman, and other means to influence and build on its wide range of operations and exacerbate social and political fissures in the United States. There should be no doubt that russia perceives if russia it should be of no doubt that russia perceives its last actions as successful. I will turn to the middle east. Region will be characterized by political turmoil, economic fragility, and civil and proxy wars in the coming years. It ran will remain the most prominent state sponsor of terrorism and an adversary in the middle east, especially in iraq. Itn will seek to expand its its regional influence and discomfort. An itswill continue to develop military capabilities that threaten u. S. Forces and allies in the region. An has theem ir largest listed Missile Force in the middle east. It poses a risk to u. S. Naval and allied Naval Operations in the persian gulf. Lebanese hezbollah, with the support of a rant, has deployed thousands of fighters to syria and provides direction to other militant groups. Behavior, asative we saw this last weekend in northern israel, increases the potential for escalation. Turkey will seek to fort british ambitions in the middle east. Syria will face unrest and fighting through 2018, even as damascus recaptures urban areas. Iraq is likely to face a likely. Lengthy period of unrest. The war in yemen between the backed group and the Saudi Coalition is likely to continue and will worsen the already tragic humanitarian crisis, or 70 of the population is in need of assistance. The situation in yemen is emblematic of a far larger problem. The number of people displaced by conflict around the world is the highest that it has been since the end of world war ii. Turning to europe, i want to draw your attention to two significant elements that are likely to continue to impact european politics and Foreign Policy in the coming year. The consonant center of gravity appears to be shifting to france , where the president has taken a more assertive role in addressing european and global challenges. Results of the recent german election enforce that assessment. Recent efforts by some governments in central and Eastern Europe to undermine Judicial Independence and parliamentary oversight entities government control over public media are weakening the rules of law. Offersteps could opportunity for chinese and russian influence. There are many more topics i did discuss. I have not even gotten to the western hemisphere or africa. To close with a discussion of one additional threat. This one internal and personal. Im concerned that are increasing political process increasingly fractured political process is threatening our ability to properly defend our nation. Especially in the longterm. The failure to address our longterm fiscal situation has increased the National Debt to over 20 trillion. The situation is unsustainable. It represents a dire threat to our economic and National Security. Mike nolan first identified the National Debt as the greatest threat to our National Security. Has been joined by numerous respected National Security leaders of both parties, including former secretaries of state, as well as former defense secretarys. A current defense secretary agrees with this assessment. Many of you know i have spent a lot of time in my last term at the Senate Working out this issue. The problem continues to grow. I would urge all of us to recognize the need to address this challenge and to take action as soon a fiscal crisis occurs the truly undermines our ability to ensure our National Security. With that, i and the rest of the panel are happy to take your questions. We appreciate the opportunity to be with you today. Thank you for that very thorough review of the world. Members basedze on certain already for up to five minutes. According to the statement for the record, the Intelligence Community assesses that most detected chinese operations against the United States are focused on contractors or i. T. And communications firms. These products and Services Support government and private networks. The Intelligence Communitys performance when it comes to notifying clear defense contractors and other sensitive private sector actors about malicious cyber activities on the networks. You are asked me to rate a function for which i do not have responsibility or daytoday execution. This is an issue that involves an and average work aggressively because i outlined this is a tremendous concern for us as a department. We are not where we need to be. The challenge is that we have multiple areas of knowledge within the private sector. How do we bring this together in an integrated team . That is not where we are today. That is where we have to get to. Are we doing enough to warn of the private sector of the threat that is out there . I think we are informing them as we become aware of it. We are going to see one slice of this picture. I am also interested from the private sectors perspective. Tell us what you are seeing. Thosecan bring this to two together we will have much more knowledge of what is happening. That is what this is. I think it is our ability to bring us together as a team. You have seen the difficulty communicating with Tech Companies about a way forward commonality. Are you concerned at how this is going to become increasingly challenging for both congress and the Intelligence Community working . Yes. How bad does this have to get before we realize we have to do something fundamentally differently . Internet, the the security levels within those is going to bes orders of magnitude. Just wait. It is going to get much worse. By css is that north korea is likely to press ahead with more tests in 2018. North koreas foreign minister indicated an Atmospheric Nuclear pacific, it may be under consideration. Reaction to this kind of test . I have been doing this a year now. I want to express my appreciation to this committee for helping the cia do the things it needs to do to provide us the resources and authorities we need. We have put a lot of effort against this very problem. You have all been incredibly supportive of that. 1960 for that. Team thank you for that. Have ase is that we Global Coalition pushing back against kim jongun and his care regime. With respect to what each particular country might do, i would prefer to keep the conversation to closed session this afternoon. Assessment of ics North Koreans willingness to employee its military capabilities . One of the things that was referred to in the opening remarks is that kim jongun romance intention staying in remains intent to stay in power. He has this longstanding north korean idea of reunification. Their capacity to use a nuclear on combined with their conventional forces to exhort behavior inside the country and against south korea, but more broadly that are analysts are continuing to look at. See as they ratchet up their nuclear capability, making a response more difficult. Their capacity to do harm in the reason region increases. Ashley. Bly for general forrding to the statement the record, widespread proliferation of Artificial Intelligence is likely to prompt new National Security concerns. How is the icy accounting for the capability of these new concerns . Ecurity the icy looking to ask mise the potential of emerging technologies in our own processes . If i could take the first shot at that one. Thank you for all the support. If you look at foreign militaries in the operational environment, this is central at looking at doctrine and what they are developing. Our competitors are pursuing Artificial Intelligence. It is a lot of commercial technology that is available. The ability to digest information, Artificial Intelligence is going to be integral to that. This an example of one of the projects we are working on. Video, you are never going to be able to afford the workforce that is going to be able to go throw the material, whether it is video. Artificial intelligence, Machine Learning, it is more Machine Learning than it is Artificial Intelligence. We are seeing our competitors invest in these kinds of technologies. It is going to get them to decision cycles faster, allow them to digest information in greater volumes, and have a better understanding of what is happening in the battle space. I would agree. I would highlight every organization on this table is faced with the challenge of victims of our own success. It brings its own set of challenges. We are all attempting to do with this. And i look at potential adversaries, i see them going through the same set of challenges. A National Strategy designed to harness the power of Artificial Intelligence to generates a teaching outcomes. You look at the research, how it is affecting the amount of data they are going after. I remember looking at data concentrations of thinking to myself, this is so large, it would be really difficult for an opponent to generate insight or knowledge from it. I do not have those kinds of conversation and are marketed conversations any more. You have watched the prc and others engage in activity designed to access these massive data concentrations. This is one of those areas of debate. You see a lot of investments that are pursuing this. It . To operationalize if i could just use a world war ii example. The fact that they were there were planes and tanks that were not unit to the germans in world war ii. Singer was a futurist. We sat with him a couple years ago. If you look at the things that are emerging, the technology that is coming out, what you see the breakthrough that gave people early advantage . Is able to harness it, operationalize it, and put it into effect. That is the key different. Difference. Nga has probably taken a significantly on this given the enormous volume of collection that they take and process that through the use of humans. I have asked robert to be prepared to answer that question for you. Its important to note what has not changed. Responsibility, we have to provide you with decision advantage. What has changed is the world around us and within it. Us. What we used to own exclusively is now more shared. All is something that we lock arms on because it is not the access that is exclusive anymore. It is the use. The concept of operations. I have the same concerns you do about getting the cooperation we need from those companies. I am rather optimistic about it. At the end of the day, we can andnce the american economyi hs we can advance our understanding of the world in a way that gets back to that first step, decision advantage. Processing of data will come up in our close session with you. I have you targeted. Thank you mr. Chairman. The director started his discussion with cyber. I think it is very telling in how we view threats. A year sinces been the russian intervention in our 2016 election. We have seen russia intervene and a number of other western democracies. I would like each of you to briefly reconfirm to the American Public that our Intelligence Community understands this threat. Who runr, those of you the panel each expressed confidence in the january 2017 assessment that russia interfered in the 2016 elections. Todayd like each of you to reaffirm that and, do you agree with director pompeo that we have not seen a significant decrease in the russian activity theyvery expectation that will try to continue to intervene in our elections in 2018 and 2020 . No change in my view of the 2017 assessment. I support that. I agree with director pompeos assessment about the likelihood of the 2018 currents as well. I stood by it then and i stand by it now. I agree with the rep. Pompeo . This is not going to change or stop. Yes. Community wentire have seen throughout the entire community, we have not seen any change since last year. I agree with director pompeo. Ive had that one of my partner for a while. I have had that one in my pocket for a while. I realize that this is a new area for all of us. There are legitimate issues around American Civil Rights that have to be balance. Balanced. We need to have an organized plan going forward. This question will be directed at director ray. We havempanies while somebody masquerading as mike pompeo but is actually in st. Peter. St. Petersburg. It does not fit into a particular flowchart. Who is in charge of addressing the threat posed by foreign terms of theirin use and misuse of social media . No Single Agency is in charge. There are several agencies throughout the federal government that have equities in this. We are working together to try to integrate that process. It is clearly something that needs to be addressed as quickly as possible. You and i have had a number of discussions about that. On moving forward in terms of identification and relative response. The things we can do to prevent this from happening. Support fromg more the private sector, who are beginning to recognize the issues that are faced and the material that comes through their processes. We can direct them what to do. We are certainly spending effort to work with them to provide answers to this question. With thed agree director. Its a team effort. One of the things that has dumped out at me is how much more of a team the Intelligence Community is the last time i was in the space. I have one of mikes people who sits in my inner team and vice versa. We are dealing with each other every day. It is the mark within the Intelligence Community and partnership with the private sector. That is the other change or notice. Were trying to share information and raise awareness on their end. We cannot fully police social media. We have to work with them so that they can police themselves better. The companies themselves are slow to recognize this threat. They still have more work to do. The fact that we do not have clarity in terms of who is in charge means that we do not have a full plan. The chairman has alluded to the rise of chinese Tech Companies. My fear is that some of these chinese Tech Companies may not even have to acquire an American Company before they become pervasive in our market. We sende make sure that a signal to the private sector before some of these companies totally invade our market . Many of them are tied back to the chinese government. It is not only sending the signal and working together. It also involves the whole of government. I think we need to go beyond the current process, in terms of evaluating. We will coordinate our intelligence to provide the besters with it intelligence we cant, relative to the situation. Can, relative to the situation. As i mentioned in my early remarks, the chinese are pervasive on this. We have seen it happen throughout the public and private sectors. We have tried very hard to be more out and about in the private sector, in terms of providing defensive briefings. So that some of the u. S. Ies can recognize the theirs that are coming way. I have been pretty gratified by the response we have gotten by most companies once we are able to educate them. Bigger challenges we face is that there is a lot of exciting stuff that is happening in terms of smaller startup companies. There are less sophisticated. Trying to make sure we are educating them as well is a continuing challenge. The rally is that the chinese have turned more and more to , usingeative avenues nontraditional collectors. In the Intelligence Community recognize that the private sector is not used to spotting. A lot of it is trying to educate them about what to be on the look for and have it be more of a dialogue. Think you very much. Think you very much. You very much. You guys seem like part of the committee we see so much. Know that that is the case. We sincerely appreciate that. Aeryone of us here knows what tough job each of your agencies has. Im speaking for myself and i suspect for most of the committee. We have 100 confidence in your to deliver to us the facts we need to make the policy decisions. One of the things that does rear its ugly head occasionally and when your chops intersect with domestic political affairs. You probably wind up with this more than anybody else. It gets messy. It gets difficult. We all have to recommit ourselves to what we are actually doing here to reach the right facts. I would respectfully disagree with my good friend from virginia. We are no better prepared to handle the russian onslaught in 18 that we were in 16. When this happened and 16, those of us on this committee and most of you who works in the ic were not surprise to find out that the russians were attempting to meddle in our affairs. We had one of the best earrings we had this year at the open hearing we had on how to use social media. We saw how distracted it was, how ineffective, how cheap for them to do it. After that, with all due respect, i think the American People are ready for this. I think that now they are going to look askance a lot more at the information that is attempted to be passed out through social media. The American People are smart people. They realize there are people trying to manipulate them, both domestically and foreign. I agree with everyone on the panel. This is going to go on. This is the way the russians have done business. This is no suppressed with. We saw in france and germany even more than we got it. I think the American People are much more prepared than when they were before. Thank you for that analysis of syria. I doubt it made it any clearer for me or the American People. It is right difficult. After this last weekend it got even more complicated. We are to have to keep an eye on that. Cyber is certainly something that is right at the top. Condition in this country is of critical importance to us. I want to ask a specific of youn to four regarding korea. I think that is the most existential threat that we face. It is at our doorstep. Talk about this the year ago. It was then. This is now. The movement of north korea has not slowed down. If anything, all of us would agree it has probably picked up. It is at our doorstep. This is going to have to be dealt with in a very the very near future. We have talked about trying to engage in conversations and what conditions would be. I think we are still in the process of refining that. That is moving. Watched the smile campaign that north korea hasnt flipped it on the south Korean People. The south Korean People seem to be charmed or captivated by it. I think it is nothing more than a stall by the North Koreans to further develop what theyre trying to do. Kitchen, iin my think we need to be very cautious of this. Judgment, i think we need to be very cautious of this. I would like to hear your view of the suppose it turn in the last couple of weeks by the North Koreans. Well, this is an existential threat, potentially to the United States but also to north korea. Kim jongun views this as any kind of kinetic attack or effort to force him to give up his Nuclear Weapons is an existential threat to his nation and to his leadership in particular. As you know, its a very hard topic given their secrecy and so forth. We know its a oneman decision. We have processes in place here in the United States to have multiple engagements with various agencies in terms of our policymaking and relative to the decision that the president ultimately makes. That does not appear to be the case in north korea. The provocative nature and instability that kim has demonstrated potentially is a significant threat to the United States. I agree with you that a decision time is becoming ever closer in terms of how we respond to this. Our goal is a peaceful settlement. Were using maximum pressure on north korea in various ways, which can be described by my colleagues here. Most of that in closed session. We have to face the fact that this is a potentially existential problem for the United States. Wise words. Director pompeo. The last part of your question pompeo the last part of your question about this past now almost week at the olympics, the American People should all remember that kim yojong is the head of the agitation and propaganda department. No change there. Admiral rogers . I would just say if he thinks he can splinter the relationship between ourselves and the south koreans, he is sadly mistaken. And finally, Lieutenant General ashley. No change to his strategic calculus. As a matter of fact, under the kj regime, youve seen an effort of readiness, very different from his father. You have a millionman army. 70 of it is south of pyongyang. They train in a very deliberate fashion. His strategic calculus is not changing, and we should not be misled by the events around the olympics. Thank you so much. My time is up. Senator feinstein. Sen. Feinstein thanks very much. I want to associate myself with some of the comments of the senator. We just had a secure briefing last week, and i think it was difficult and harsh. I harken back to the words of the secretary of state. On the four nos. One, that we do not seek regime change. Two, we are not seeking the accelerated reunion of the peninsula. And finally,that we will not bring u. S. Forces north of the demilitarized zone. If the Korean Peninsula is reunified. Let me ask you, mr. Pompeo, because you were you just spoke with some certainty. Does kim jongun really understand and believe that our goals are not regime change or regime collapse . Senator feinstein, i cant give you any certainty about what kim jongun actually subjectively believes. Very difficult intelligence problem anywhere in the world, most especially difficult there. And i have expressed this before. We do remain concerned. Our analysts remain concerned that kim jongun is not hearing the full story. That is, that those around him arent providing nuance, arent suggesting to him the tenuous nature of his position,both internationally and domestically. The breach with china, the deep connections between the United States and the republic of korea, we are not at all certain that the leaders around him are sharing that information in a way that is accurate, complete, and full. Sen. Feinstein in a recent Washington Post oped, victor cha warned of the dangers of a preventive United States military strike against north korea. He cautioned that such a strike would not halt north Koreas Nuclear Weapons Program and could spark an uncontrolled conflict in the region that could kill hundreds of thousands of americans. He is not the only one. A number of experts on the area have said that. And some other things. To have the Intelligence Community assessed how the north korean regime would react to a preventive United States attack . We have. I would prefer to share that with you in closed session this afternoon. Would you do that this afternoon . Absolutely, senator. We have written about various forms of actions, what we analyze, the certainty and uncertainty we have around that analysis, as well as what we think happens in the event that the United States decides not to do that and continues to allow kim jongun to develop his Nuclear Weapons arsenal. Sen. Feinstein have you explored what it would take to bring them to the table . We have. Id prefer to share that with you in the closed session. Yes, maam. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you,senator feinstein. Senator rubio. Sen. Rubio thank you. Thank you, all for being here. I go all of the same words everyone is sharing with you about the esteem we have for all of the agencies and the work they do. I think this has already been touched upon, i do believe that russia, Vladimir Putin in particular, his efforts around the world are very important. The Biggest Issue of our time, in my view and i think the view of most members of this committee and i would guess mostmembers of this panel, is china and the risk they pose. Im not sure in the 240someodd year history of this nation weve ever faced an adversary to stash of this scale, scope, and capacity. Its my personal view and shared by many people that they are carrying out a wellorchestrated, wellexecuted, very patient, longterm strategy to replace the United States as the most powerful and influential nation on earth. You see that reflected in this repeated use of this term in community of common destiny, which basically means a retreat from western values of democracy and freedom and openness towards some other model that benefits them and their pursuit of this appears to be every element of their national power. Military, commercial,trade, economics, information and media. The tools they use are everything from hacking to companies and Critical Infrastructure and defense contractors. Everybody you can imagine to using our immigration system against us, to even our universities. Thats where i wanted to begin. This week i well, let me ask this. Is it your view that the United States today as a government is prepared for the scale, scope, and magnitude of the challenge presented by this plan that chinas carrying out . Dir. Coats we have full awareness of what the chinese are attempting to do on a global basis. Theres no question that what you have just articulated is whats happening with china. Theyre doing it in a very smart way. Theyre doing it in a very in a very they are doing it in a very effective way. Theyre looking beyond their own region. I think they have its clear that they have a longterm strategic objective to become a world power. And they are executing throughout the whole of government ways in which they can accomplish that. We have intensive studies going on throughout the Intelligence Community relative to a to z on what china is doing. General mattis has asked us for that. Others have askedus to provide that. Senator warner called me last week. We had a discussion on that. I assured him that we are pulling all of our elements of intelligence gathering together to provide a very, very deep dive into what china is doing now and what their plans are for the future and how it would impact on the United States. Just to kind of highlight the different ways and untraditional ways in which theyre pursuing this plan, director wray, what is the counterintelligence risk posed to u. S. National security from chinese students,particularly those in advanced programs in the sciences and mathematics . Dir. Wray i think in this setting, i would just say that the use of nontraditional collectors, especially in the academic setting, whether its professors, scientists, students, we see in almost every field office that the fbi has around the country, not just in major cities, small ones as well, basically every discipline, and i think the level of naivete on thepart of the academic sector about this creates its own issues. Theyre exploiting the very open research and Development Environment we have, which we all revere, but theyre taking advantage of it. So one of the things were trying to do is view the china threat as not just a whole of government threat but a whole of Society Threat on their end, and i think its going to take a whole of Society Response by us. Its not just the Intelligence Community, but its raising awareness within our academic sector, within our private sector as part of the defense. In that vein, last week i wrote a letter to five Higher Education institutions in florida about the confucius institutes. Its my view theyre complicit in these efforts to influence Public Opinion and teach half truths to show chinese policy and government in the most favorable light. Do you share concerns about that as a tool and as a way to exploit the sort of naive view among some in the Academic Circles about what the purpose of these institutes could be . We do share concerns about the confucius institutes. Weve been watching that in development for a while. Its just one of many tools that they take advantage of. We have seen some decrease recently in their own enthusiasm and commitment to that in particular program, but it is something that were watching warily, and in certain instances have developed appropriate investigative steps. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Vice chairman warner highlighted in his Opening Statement the importance of an Effective Security clearance process. So ive got a question for you, director wray. Was the fbi aware of allegations related to rob porter and domestic abuse, and if so, was the white house informed this could affect his security clearance . When were they informed, and who at the white house was informed . Well, senator, theres a limit to what i can say about the content of any particular Background Investigation for a variety of reasons that im sure you can appreciate. I would say that the Background Investigation process involves a fairly elaborate set of standards, guidelines, protocols, agreements, et cetera, that have been in place for 20plus years. Im quite confident in this particular instance, the fbi followed those protocols. So was the white house told this could affect his security clearance . Thats a yes or no. I cant get into the content what were they informed . What i can tell you is that the fbi submitted a partial report on the investigation in question in march andthen a completed Background Investigation in late july that soon thereafter we received and requests for followup inquiry, and we did the followup and provided that information in november and we administratively closed the file in january. Nth, we received some additional information, and we passed that on as well. In ok. Let me turn now to the two recent arbitrary and inconsistent decisions that affect the politicizing of the classification system. The first was the public release of the nunes memo. The second involved the report that the congress required on russian oligarchs, the relationship with president putin and indications of corruption. In that case, the secretary of the treasury released nothing other than a list of rich russians taken from public sources. My question, and any of you can respond, did any of you take a position on either of these two arbitrary classification decisions, and did any of you have any communications with the white house about either of those classification matters . And him and him and him and ill start. The answer is no. No. I raised concerns on this issue with the dni. No. The cia was not asked to review the classification of those documents. Not on the second. The oligarch treasury document, we did have interaction about the memo from chairman nunes. Is there anything you can say that protects sources and methods in an open session with respect to that matter . Well, i would just say as we said publicly that we had grave concerns about that memos release. Ok. On encryption, director wray, as you know, this isnt a surprise because i indicated i would ask you about this. You have essentially indicated that companies should be making their products with backdoors in order to allow you all to do your job. And we all want you to protect americans, and at the same time, sometimes theres these policies that make us less safe and give up our liberties. Thats what i think we get with what you all are advocating, which is weak encryption. Now, this is a pretty technical area, as you and i have talked about. Theres a field known as cryptography. I dont pretend to be an expert on it. But i think there is a clear consensus among experts in the field. Again to you or request. I have asked for a list of the experts that you have consulted. Get it. Ot been able to can you give me a date when we will be told who are these people who are advising you to pursue this route . As i do not know of anybody respected in the field who is advising that it is a good idea to a doctor position to weaken strong encryption. So can i get that list . I would be happy to talk more about this topic this afternoon. My position is not that we should weaken encryption. My position is we should be working together, government and private sector to find a solution that balances both concerns. Im on the program for working together. I just think we need to be driven by objective facts and the position you all are taking is out of synch with what the experts are saying. I want to know who you all are consulting with. Well talk about that this afternoon. Thanks, mr. Chairman. Senator collins. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Director pompeo, last week New York Times published a report that alleged that u. S. Intelligence officials had paid 100,000 to a russian source for phony secrets,including potentially compromising information about the president , and information on certain tools allegedly stolen from the nsa. First, is it accurate that the cia has categorically denied the assertions in this story, and second, if so, what would be the motivations of a russian who pedalled this story to New York Times and other western Media Outlets . Is this part of the Russian Campaign to undermine faith in western democracies . Senator collins, thanks for the question. Reporting on this matter has been atrocious, ridiculous, totally inaccurate. In our view the people that were swindled were the authors of the two pieces. Indeed it is our view the same two people that were proffering phony information to the United States government proffered that same phony information to these two reporters. The Central Intelligence agency did not provide any resources, no money to these two individuals who proffered u. S. Government information directly or indirectly at any time, and the information we were working to try and retrieve was information we believed might well have been stolen from the u. S. Government. It was unrelated to the idea of compromise that appears in each of the two articles. Thank you. Director wray, the president repeatedly raised concerns about current and former fbi leaders and has alleged corruption and political bias in the performance of Law Enforcement and National Security missions. I want to give you the opportunity today to respond to those criticisms. What is your reaction . Senator, my experience has validated all my prior experiences with the fbi and that it is the finest group ofprofessionals and Public Servants i could hope to work for. And every day many, many, many times a day im confronted with unbelievable examples of integrity and professionalism and grit. You know, there are 37,000 people in the fbi that do unbelievable things all around the world. Although you would never know it from watching the news, we have more than two investigations. And most of them do a lot to keep americans safe. Thank you. Thats one of the reasons i wanted to give you an opportunity to respond. Director coats, weve had a lot of discussion about russian attempts which are ongoing to influence elections and western democracies, to undermine nato, and to try to destroy institutions in our country and elsewhere. This is an election year. It is frustrating we havent passed legislation to help states strengthen their security of their Voting Systems. Putting that issue aside, theres also going to be an election this year in latvia, one of our nato allies. What is your assessment of whether or not the russians are actively engaged in influencing that election and how concerned is the Intelligence Community they might be successful producing a government subject to russias Foreign Policy objectives. Not only are we concerned, the 29 nations of nato are concerned. I returned not long ago from a meeting in brussels with the intelligence arm of nato. All 29 nations, the topic was addressed primarily on russian elections, trying to undermine Democratic Values. At the end of that, the new director of the organization asked for a show of hands or any verbal response from any representatives of the 29 nations if they thought that russia had not interfered with their processes and particularly, their elections, or had the potential to do so. Not one person raised their hand. He said, do i understand that we are unanimous in assessing what the russians are trying to do to undermine our elections and undermine our coordination with the United States and relationships with each other to undermine the basic principles of sharing with European Countries everything thats accomplished through nato. Do i understand that no one has an objection . Do you all see this for what it is . Dead silent. He said, i take silence to be consent. I think that says that this is pervasive, that the russians have a strategy that goes well beyond whats happening in the United States, even though while they have historically tried to do these kinds of things, clearly in 2016, they upped their game. They took advantage of social media. Theyre doing that not only in the United States, theyre doing it throughout europe and elsewhere. I think that sends a strong signal that any elections coming up, we need to assume there might be interference in that,particularly from the russians and maybe other malignant actors, and steps need to be taken to work with stateand local officials because many elections will be state and local. Governorships, even members ofcertain houses of representation within the states themselves. So it clearly is an issue that is whole of government,and i would say this, the more, and we agreed with this at brussels, i tried to make that point while i was there, the more transparency we can provide to the American People, to people of nations that see this threat coming, the better off we will be. Obviously, we have to take other measures. And we need to inform the American Public that this is real, that this is going to be happening, and resilience needed for us to stand up and say were not going to allow some russian to tell us how to vote and how to run our country. I think there needs to be a national cry for that. Thank you. Thank you, chairman. Director wray, the fbi is accused of political bias recently against the president by the president himself. In fact, he said the fbis reputation is, quote, in tatters. Do you think the fbis reputation is in any way in tatters, and are you confident in the independence of your agency . Senator, theres no shortage of opinions about our agency just like every other agency up here and just like the congress. I can only speak from my experience. Youre doing better than the congress. [laughter] [laughter] and my experience has been that every office i go to, every division i go to what patriots, people who could do anything else with their careers but have chosen to work for the fbi because they believe in serving others. And the feedback i get from our state and local Law Enforcement partners, from foreign partners, from folks we worked with in the private sector in the community, office after office after office has been very, very gratifying and reassuring to me. And im a big believer in the idea that the fbi speaks through its work, through its cases, through the victims it protects. And i encourage our folks not to get too hung up on what i consider to be noise on tv and social media. So you havent seen any evidence of some sort of inherent political bias in the agency . No. How do statements like that impact morale of rank and file agents, are they able to shake that off they all think narrowly. Cused. Theyre accustomed to the fact that we do some of the hardest things there are to do for a living, and i like to think our folks are pretty sturdy. I think of a woman i met just the other day, an agent in the miami office who had a bad accident, 12 stitches in her face, and the next day, boom, back at work. I think about folks in the San Juan Office i visited recently. You want to talk about people going through a real storm, they do it and theyre out in the community. I can tell you the Community Values what they do on the island. An oped by former intelligence analysts, one of the worst cases of politicization of intelligence in modern American History, end quote. You said you had concerns about the memo. I know you cant get into the gritty details of that, but can you say in your view whether or not one of the concerns is that it may have selectively cherrypicked information without presenting the entire fact pattern that led up to the fisa warrant application . Well, senator, i would just repeat what we said at the time which is that we had then and continue to have now grave concerns about the accuracy of the memorandum because of omissions. We provided thousands of documents that were very sensitive and lots and lots of briefings, and it is very hard for anybody to distill that down to three and a half pages. Director pompeo, have you seen russian activity in the lead up to the 2018 election cycle . Yes. Senator, i paused on that, trying to make sure i stay on the unclassified side. Yes, we have seen russian activity and intentions to have impact on the next election cycle. Director coats . Yes, we have. Anyone else . Admiral rogers . Yes, i think this would be a good topic for this afternoon. According to news reports, there are dozens of white house staff with only interim security clearance still, to include Jared Kushner until last week, to include white house staff secretary rob porter, who i would assume would have regularly reviewed classified documents as part of his job. Director coats, if someone is flagged by the fbi with areas of concern in their Background Investigations into white house staff with incident interim clearances, should they still have access to classified materials . Let me first speak in general relative to temporary classifications. Clearly with the new administration in particular were trying to fill alot of new slots and the classification process and security clearance process has been mentioned. Im only speaking with regard to folks who may have had issues raised as opposed to just being in the matter of course going through the long process. Well, im not in position, and we can talk about this in the classified session, but im not in position to discuss what individual situations are for specified individuals. I might just say that i think sometimes it is necessary to have some type of preliminary clearance in order to fill a slot, but i have publicly stated if thats the case, access has to be limited in terms of the kinds of information they can be in a position to receive or not receive so i think thats something that we have to do as part of our security clearance review. The process is broken. It needs to be reformed. As senator warner has previously said, its not evolution, it is revolution. We have 700,000 backups, so we have situations where weneed people in places but they dont yet have that. Your specific question i think might take up in the classified session. Chairman, i am over my time. Thank you,director coats. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Director coats, director pompeo, admiral rogers, i think you all talked about evidence that the russians would intend to do things to be active in our elections. Really seems to me two divisions of activity. One is information thats put on the record, misleading, false, trying to develop thatlevel. The other even more sinister might be the level of dealing with the election system itself, the voting day system, registration system, and those two clearly the voting day system, the one we need to have the most concerns about that Critical Infrastructure. This committee has been working toward both those goals of trying to shore up Critical Infrastructure on election day as well as alert people to and decide what might be done about misinformation on the other side of the ledger. Voting begins in march. Thats nextmonth. If were going to have any impact on securing that Voting System itself, it would seem to me we need to be acting quickly. I think the great part of the strength of the system is the diversity of the system, different not only state to state but from elected jurisdictions within the states, thats a strength, not a weakness in my view, but what are some of the things we can do to be more helpful to local Election Officials and encourage them to share information when they think their systems are being attacked, getting more information than we have. There was a lot of criticism in the last cycle that we knew that some election systems were being attacked and didnt tell them they were being attacked and so the three of you in any order, lets just do the order i started with, director coats, director pompeo, admiral rogers. Any thoughts you have on what we can do to protect the Critical Infrastructure of the election system and how quickly we need to act if we intend to do that this year. Well, the Intelligence Community, all elements of it are aware. We want to provide,collect and provide as much information as we can so we can give the warnings and alerts, so we can share information back and forth with local and state and election processes with the federal government. Department of homeland security, department of fbi,obviously were involved, given these are domestic issues, but we look to every piece of intelligence we can gather to provide the warnings. It is an effort i think the government needs to put together at the state and local level and work with those individuals who are engaged in the election process. In terms of security of their machines, cyber plays a major role here so i think it is clearly an area where federal government, foreign collection on potential threats of interference, warnings, and processes in terms of how to put in place security and secure that to ensure the American People that their vote is sanctioned and well and not manipulated in any way whatsoever. Director pompeo . I was referring to the former, first part of your question, not truly to the latter, things we have seen russia doing to date are mostly focused on information types of warfare, like senator warren spoke about earlier. With regard to the cias role, we have two missions. One, identify the source of the information, make those here domestically aware of it to do things they need to do, fbi or dhs so they have that information. We are working diligently among many threat factors to do that. Second thing, we can talk more about this this afternoon, we have capabilities offensively to raise costs for those that dare challenge United States elections. And after admiral rogers, director, i may want to come to you and see on the samesharing information, any impediment to sharing that with local officials or reasons we dont want to do that. Senator, the only thing i would add, and one of the things we find in that role, many network and system operators dont understand their own structures and systems. One of the things i think is part of this, how do we help those local, federal, state entities understand the network structure, potential vulnerabilities. It is part of how we work through the process. Director wray . Senator, thats one of the areas that theres been discussion about whether were doing better. This is one of the areas i think we are doing better. We together at the fbi, together with dhs recently, for example, scheduled meetings with various election, state Election Officials. Normally the barrier would be classification concerns, whether somebody hadclearances. We were able to put together briefings appropriately tailored with nondisclosure agreements with the officials. There are ways if people are creative and forward leaning to educate the state Election Officials which is of course where elections are run in this country. Hopefully well be creative and forward leaning and want to keep track of what were doing there. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator king. Thank you, mr. Chairman. First statement i want to make is more in sorrow than anger. I will get to the anger part in a minute. The sorrow part is that director coats in response to a question from senator collins,you gave an eloquent factual statement of the activities of the russians and the fact that theyre continuing around the world and that theyre a continuing threat to this country. All of you haveagreed to that. If only the president would say that. I understand the president s sensitivity about whether his campaign was in connection with the russians, and thats a separate question, but theres no question we have before us the entire Intelligence Community that the russians interfered in the election in 2016, theyre continuing to do it, and theyre a real imminent threat to elections in a matter of eight or nine months. My problem is i talked to people in maine that say the wholething is a witchhunt and hoax because the president told me. I just wish you all could persuade the president as a matter of National Security to separate these two issues, the collusion issue is here,unresolved, we get to the bottom of that. But theres no doubt as you all have testified today. We cannot confront this threat which is a serious one with a whole of government response when the leader of the government continues to deny it exists. Now, let me get to the anger part. The anger part involves cyberattacks. You have all testified that we are subject to repeated Cyber Attacks. Theyre occurring right now inour infrastructure all over this country. I am sick and tired of going to these hearings which i have been going to for five years where everybody talks about Cyber Attacks, and our country still does not have apolicy or a doctrine or a strategy for dealing with them. And this is not a criticism of the current administration, i am an equal opportunity critic, the Prior Administration didnt do it either. Admiral rogers, until we have some deterrent capacity, were going to continue to be attacked. Isnt that true . Yes, sir. We have to change the current dynamic. We are on the wrong end of that cost equation. Trying to fight a global battle with our hands tied behind our back. Director coats, you have a stunning statement, they will work to use Cyber Operations to achieve strategicobjectives unless they face repercussions for their operations. Right now there are none. Is that not the case . There are no repercussions. We have no doctrine of deterrence. How are we going to get them to stop doing this if all we do is patch our software and try to defend ourselves . Those are relevant questions, and i think everyone not only at this table but in every agency of government understands the threat that we have here and the impact already being made through cyber threats. Our role as Intelligence Community is to provide all of the information we can as to what is happening so our policy makers can take that, including congress, and shape how we are responding to this and deal with this in a whole of government way. It just never seems to happen. Director pompeo, you understand this issue, do you not . Were not going to be able to defend from Cyber Attacks by being defensive, we have to have a doctrine of deterrence. If they strike us in cyber, theyll be struck back in some way. It may not be cyber. I agree. Though i cant say much in this setting, i argue your statement we have done nothing does not reflect the responses that frankly some of us at this table have engaged in and United States government engaged in before and after this, both during and before this administration. Deterrence doesnt work unless the other side knows it. The doomsday machine in dr. Strangelove didnt work because the russians hadnt told us about it. It is true. Important the adversary know it, not important the whole world knows it. And the adversary knows it in your view . I prefer to save that for another forum. I believe this country needs a clear doctrine, what is a cyber attack, what is act of war, what will be the response and consequences. Senator, i agree with you. We collectively, it is a complicated problem. It. Havent seen include us, by the way. I do, too. I sat as member of house of representatives, i take responsibility not having solved that, too. Theres a lot to do. We need a u. S. Government strategy and clearauthorities to go achieve that strategy. I appreciate it. I just dont want to go home to maine when theres serious cyber attack, say we knew it was a problem, had four committees of jurisdiction and couldnt work it out. Yes, sir. Thats not going to fly. Yes, sir. Senator, i might just add that we dont want to learn this lesson the hard way. 911 took place because we were not coordinating ourefforts. We are now coordinating efforts but didnt have the right defense in place. Our job is to get that right information to policy makers and get on with it because it is just common sense. If someone is attackingyou and theres no retribution or response, it is goingto incentivize more contacts. Right now, there are a lot of blank checks of things we need to do. Thank you. Senator langford. Director coats, you and i talked last year about this issue that senator king was bringing up about cyber doctrine and a point person on who that would be and defined person to give options to congress and the president to say if it is needed and warranted, this is the person, this is the entity that would make the recommendations and allow the president to make decisions on what the proper response is. Has that been completed, is there a point person to give recommendations on cyber attack to the president . That has not yet been completed. Of course, your understanding of the standup of Cyber Command and new director replacing admiral rogers, the decisionrelative to whether there would be separation between functions that are now nsa and cyber has yet to be made. General mattis is contemplating what the next best step is. They have involved the Intelligence Community in terms of making decisions in that role,but we at this point cannot point to one sort of cyberczar but various agencies throughout the federal government taking this very, very seriously, and there are individuals that we continue to meet on a regular basis. We have a coordination effort for all of the cyber that comes in so we dont stovepipe like before 9 11. Things are under way, but in terms of putting a finalized this is how were going to do it together is still in process. Senator langford, with respect to responses to that, these are title x dod authorities, so there is a person responsible. Secretary mattis has that responsibility to advise the president on appropriateness of responses in all theaters of conflict with adversaries. Thank you. I want to bring up the issue of rising threat of whats happening southof the border in mexico. Homicide rate went up 27 lastyear, had 64,000 americans that died from overdose of drugs, preponderance came from or through mexico. We have a very rapidly rising threat it appears to me. What i am interested in from you all on National Security level and what youre seeing, what are we facing, whats changing now in mexico versus ten years ago mexico and our relationship and threats coming from there . I would defer to director wray relative to what his agency is doing. Clearly we have a continuing problem and the Mexican Government has a problem relative to gangs and organizations. There are high profile arrests lately. We have taken down some labs. Mexico is cooperating and they themselves willadmit it is almost overwhelming, their army has been participating, almost overwhelming to control the situation south of the border. We have our own issues on Border Protection as well as consumption in the United States. Director wray. In many ways were seeing more of the same. One of the things that changed, i think that was the heart of the question, i think one of the things we are watching in particular is more black market fentanyl being shipped to Transnational Criminal Organizations and theyre taking advantage of pricing advantages and thats being then delivered in large quantities to our streets. Certainly the mexico relationship is from Law Enforcement perspective and from domestic security perspective, one of the most important. Mexico isfice in the largest in the world, pretty sure about that, or pretty close to it if not. Thats a reflection of how much activity there is. Let me ask you specific oklahoma questions and also a national question. There was an individual that was picked up in weatherford, oklahoma, a few weeks ago by the fbi. His fingerprints were identified from a terror Training Camp in afghanistan. He had been in the country for multiple years. And what im trying to be able to determine is the coordination of information to local Law Enforcement and from data thats gathered from some of the work thats happening overseas in afghanistan and such, how are the two being married together that we can identify individuals that are a threat to our nation based on their participation in a terror Training Camp overseas, now coming to theamerican shores. Well, certainly we have become better at looking at biometric information from overseas and marrying it up with potential threat subjects here in the u. S. As well as in some of our allies. The individual in question of course turned out to have his fingerprints on information from the camp. And it is just a reminder to us that a lot of people went through those camps. While the civilized world, intelligence, community, Law Enforcement, military, our allies around the world made a major dent on those people but we are kidding ourselves if we think a lot of them are not still out there. It is a reminder to stay on the balls of our feet. Changed ind what mexico. I would like to make an additional point. Lasthas transpired the couple of years, you had five principal cartels. Those five cartels have devolved into 20 and part of that outgrowth you have seen increase in violence. Thank you. On behalf of the people of West Virginia, want to thank you for the job you do keeping us safe. We have confidence in what you are doing. We appreciate the service youre giving. Director coats, think you and i were both in the senate at the same time when mike millon, admiral mike mullen said the greatest threat we face. On a intelligence at the time, and were trying to find the greatest threat to the United States. I was thinking of another country, russia, china, what ever. He did not hesitate and said, the greatest threat is the debt of our nation. I think you reiterated that in the opening remarks. Debt innot mention the the worldwide assessment as a threat to the nation. I think you made a tremendous effort to put that into Opening Statement. I appreciate that, your thought process. Director coates my thought process is i am getting a little bit out of my lane in terms of what i am supposed to do but i felt that i had responsibility to raise this issue because it does affect the military and Intelligence Community. It is going to have a serious effect on us. Only thing that seems to be bipartisan today is spending more money. Both sides seem to agree on spending more money without accountability, so im glad to hear your remarks on that. I share what senator langford said about what is killing more americans than any other threats today. Drugs. My state of West Virginia has been hit harder than any other state. I have more deaths per capita. It has been ravaging to schools, families. Unbelievable what we are going through. I think in a nutshell i would be asking all of you all are responsible to do everything you can to keep us safe and youve done a tremendous job as far as foreign attack and things of that sort. Director wray, i appreciate what the fbi does. They have a strong presence in West Virginia and were very appreciative of that. What type of efforts from each of your agencies have you spent as far as drugs and fighting the drug infestation, highest on the priority list, one of the greatest dangers, or part of the overall scheme of things. Just speaking for the Intelligence Community, it is a high priority for us. We mentioned it in the threat a assessment. We are collectors of foreign sources at transnational organizations, et cetera. Whether coming from overseas, afghanistan, colombia, what it is, how it is going, and of course it is a whole of government because once it penetrates the United States, we then use our domestic agencies. As far as the fbi, youre on the front line, youre here on the home land. What do you think, what can we do to help . I think on the good news side in a country thats often very divided, this is one issue as far as i can tell where everybody agrees about what a major threat it is. It covers communities from north to south, red to blue, from rich to poor, from urban to rural. I think it has thats the good news. Bad news, it has grown to a point theres no one agency or one approach thats going to solve the problem. So were doing our part. Some of the things were able to do, focusing particularly on gate keepers. A lot of it is coming through medical professionals and pharmacies, so were using Intelligence Driven operations there, various initiatives. We are partnering with foreign counter parts, working with dea, state andlocal Law Enforcement, et cetera. Were also trying to do things to raise awareness. We did a video with dea called chasing the dragon kind of been shown in schools around the country. But this is a multidisciplinary problem. My time is short. If i can ask this question, whoever wants to answer this one. Based on what we know, and the way we distribute money forforeign aid to different countries, knowing a lot of countries we distribute aid to is basically allowing, permitting this type of scourge coming to the country in the form of drugs, have you all thought and considered to make recommendations we hold hostage if you will or liable to money theyre receiving from the United States for the best of intentions, but the best of intentions is the fight of drugs coming to our country. When we know what it is coming from china, afghanistan, iraq, wherever it is coming from. Selfo and all of the american countries. Theres a whole generation in West Virginia, 10,000 jobs i cannot fill. The United States has 3 million jobs we cannot fill. Most of it is around drugs. This is what were asking for. This is going to be all caps on deck. All hands on deck. I dont know if anybody wants to do you all have that as high priority . Does anyone believe we should withhold foreign aid to countries that basically have a list of drugs coming to our country . Senator, ill answer this. I think the United States should use every tool, whether foreign aid or other tools. Money talks. To get these. Thats exactly right, to get nations it is coming from to put it as priority for their country. Some dont have the capacity to fix it. It is a problem bigger than their nation, but we ought to be unafraid to use the leverage that comes with our generosity from the american taxpayer toensure these countries are doing everything they can to prevent drugs coming from their country to ours. Thank you. I appreciate it. As you know, we provide efforts within countries to help them eradicate, hasnt been totally successful, but thats one way we usesome of that aid, if directly contributed to ratification of drugs. Thank you. Thank you foryour appearance and thanks to the men and women you represent and the work they do for our country. Mr. Wray, are you aware of a gentleman by the name of oleg daraposka. I heard the name. Fair to call him aputin russianinlinked oligarch . I will leave that. Sent a letter to london based lawyer, who represents him, and asked if Christopher Steele was employed directly or indirectly by him at thetime he was running the socalled steele dossier. Do you know if Christopher Steele worked for him . Thats not something i can answer. Could we discuss it in classified setting . There might be more we can say there. Thank you. Maybe well hear back from the lawyer in london as well to give us a straight answer. Jim comey testified before the committee inopen setting last summer and referred to the dossier as salacious and unverified. The thought . We can talk more on that this afternoon. I want to talk about Chinese Telecom companies. Senator rubio talked about threat of rising china and threat of confucious centers. And Telecom Companies pose to our country. Thats why i introduced legislation withnor cornyn and rubio to say they cant use that companies that use them. Verizon and at t and others have taken the threat seriously. Could you explain what the risk is we face from zte and wall way beingused in the United States, especially in public setting, the risk that companies,state governments, local governments might face if they use those products and services . I think probably the simplest way to put it in this setting is that were deeply concerned about risks of allowing any company or entity that is beholden to foreign governments that dont share our values to gain positions of power inside our Telecommunications Networks that provides the capacity to exert pressureor control over our telecommunications infrastructure, provides the capacity to maliciously modify or steal information, provides capacity to conduct undetected espionage. At a 100,000 foot level in this setting, those are the kinds of things that worry us. I will say like you, senator, we have been gratified to date by the response of the large u. S. Telecommunications providers, trying to raise awareness on the issue. I also recognize that Competitive Pressures are building. So it is something we have to be vigilant about and continue as you all are doing to raise awareness. This is a challenge that is only going to increase over time for us. You would suggest to mayors, county judges, university if ztents to be wary comes bearing gifts. All the witnesses, i would like to addresses questions address this question to you. Raise your hand if you would use products or services from wow way or zte. None of you would. You lead intelligence services, thats something of a biased question. Raise your hand if you recommend private citizens use those products or services. None of you again raising your hand. Thank you for that. Finally, i finally, i would like to turn to a question to director pompeo of something in the news the last few hours. Reports that 200 russian mercenaries were killed in eastern syria. Can you confirm or deny the reports . Ill leave to department of defense to talk about what transpired there. I can say this from intelligence perspective, we have seen in multiple instances foreign their orces using mercenaries and battles that will begin to approach the United States. General, would you like to confirm or deny . If we could take that to a close session, we can lay out an interesting fabric of what is syria and what transpired we can address that in the afternoon. As a general matter, can i ask is massing and maneuvering forces against a location where u. S. Personnel are present in syria a good way toget yourself to get yourself killed . I think ill defer that to departments of defense as well. General ashley, would you like to answer that question . Does make you more susceptible. And leave that to theoperational operational operational commander. Not a good idea to have a long and fruitful life. Thank you. Senator ericson. I want to echo the comments of colleagues thanking the men and women of your agencies. I am concerned the political attacks against men and women of your agencies may have had an effect on your ability to recruit, retain, and morale of your agencies. So i would like to emphasize the point that we all i think share in making which is we thank the men and women of your agencies for selfless work. They do it on behalf of the American People without any expectation of award or reward and we cannot thank them enough , for keeping us safe. Director wray. Chairman nunez memo had Sensitive Information to a person working on the campaign. According to the white house statement, the president was the one that authorized the memos declassification. Do you believe theres an actual or at least appearance of a conflict of interest when the president is put in charge of declassifying information that could complicate an Ongoing Investigation into his own campaign . Well, senator, as we have been very clear what our view was about disclosure and accuracy of the memo in question, but i do think it is the president s role as commander in chief under the rule that was invoked to object or not to declassification. I think that is the president s responsibility. Regardless of whether theres appearance or actual conflict of interest . I leave it to others to characterize whether theres appearance or conflict of interest, but i think the president was fulfilling his responsibility in that situation. If the president asked you tomorrow to hand over to him additional sensitive fbi information on the investigations into his campaign, would you give it to him . I am not going to discuss the investigation in question with the president , much less provide information from that investigation to him. And if he received that information and wanted to declassify it, would he have the ability to do that from your perspective . Information from the however he received it, perhaps from members of the United States congress. I think legally he would have that ability. And do you believe the president should recuse himself from reviewing and declassifying sensitive material related to this investigation . I think recusal questions i encourage him to talk to white House Counsel about. Has the fbi done legal analysis on these questions . Happily, i am no longer in the business of doing legal analysis. I now get to be a client and blame lawyers for things instead of being the lawyer that gets blamed. Have you blamed any lawyers for their analysis of this issue . I have not yet, no. Ok. Is the fbi getting the cooperation it needs from social Media Companies to counter foreign adversary influence on our elections . I think the cooperation has been improving. I think werecontinuing to work with social Media Companies to see how could raise their awareness so they can share information and vice versa, i think things are moving the right direction but i think a lot of progress to be made. What more do you need from social Media Companies to improve the partnership you would like to have with them to counter the attacks . Well, i think we always like to have more information shared more quickly from their end, but i think from their perspective, it is a dialogue. Theyre looking to get information from us about what it is we see so they can give responsive information. I think were working through the issues. Do you believe that the social Media Companies have enough employees that have appropriate security clearance to make partnership sreal . Thats not an issue i have evaluated but happy to take a look at it. Please do, follow up with the committee. Director coats, one of the things makes guarding against foreign intelligence threats on social media so complex is that threat originatesoverseas and originates overseas and that would be within the jurisdiction ofthe cia and nsa and then it comes to our shores and then it passes onto the fbi and also the social Media Companies themselves. Im not aware of any written ic strategy on how we would confront the threat to social media. Does such a strategy exist in writing . I would have to get back with you on that. I would be happy to look into it. From my perspective now, a written specific strategy is not in place, but i want to check on that. Please do follow up. Also last year, Congress Passed a bipartisan russian sanctions bill. However, the administration has not imposed those sanctions. From an intelligence perspective, what is your assessment of how russia interprets the administrations in action . I do not have relegation information relative to what the russian thinking is in terms of that specific reaction. There are other sanctions as you know imposed on russian oligarchs and others through United Nations and other things that have been done. The ande to specifically on your question, i do not have an answer for that. Senator, may i comment . I think we ought to look at that in broader context, how the russians view all of the actions justis administration, not a particular set of sanctionsor absence thereof. So as we have watched the russians respond to this administrations decision to provide defensive weapons in ukraine, to push back against russian efforts in syria, sanctions placed on venezuela were directly in conflict with russian interests. The list of places russians are feeling the pain from this administrations actions are long. But director pompeo, im sure you agree, in order to understand the full scope of effect, it is also important that we analyze each discrete component, including what is the interpretation of this administrations failure to enact sanctions as has been passed and directed by the United States congress in a bipartisan way. Have you done that assessment . In closed session, i will tell you what we know and dont know about that issue. I agree with you, it is important to look at each one in its own place. What we most often see in terms of russian response is to cumulative activities in response to russian activities, how the United States responds to those in a cumulative way. I look forward to the conversation. Yes, maam. Director coats, you alluded to activities of Transnational Criminal Organizations and i am thinking particularly as regards neighbors down south of our order. Recently heard somebody refer to cartels, Transnational Criminal Organizations as commodity agnostic. In other words, theyll traffic in people, drugs and other contraband, all in pursuit of money. But whatever brings in the most dollars. Senator manchin and others have alluded to the concern and we share the concern about deaths and overdoses caused by drugs in america, much of which comes across our southern borders through ports of entry. This week were going to be considering Border Security measures as part of a larger package the president has proposed while addressing the socalled daca recipients. But do you believe that modernizing or providing enhanced technology and other means to surveil and follow and identify Illegal Drugs coming across ports of entry would be a good thing for us to do . I do. I do think a layered approach is necessary to it is clear that one specific defense put in place is not going to solve the problem. It needs to be a layered interest of not only physical facilities but also border patrol, also how those who arrive and perhaps dissipate waiting for court appearance, tracking them, whole range of things that are going tobe needed to stop the flow from coming in. I know it has been alluded to, but let me emphasize my with the demand side. Maybe we have given up. I hope not, in addressing the demand side that provides money and incentive for the cartels to that i think deserves full attention and focus of the United States government. Ive heard general kelly in his previous job at dhs talk about that, and i hope we will return to that focus as part of the layered approach, the demand side. It is something i think that is hardest thing to deal with, perhaps might have the greatest impact. The supply depends on demand, and demand drives the supply, and provides capital in which to take extraordinarily methods that bypass our defenses to get drugs into the United States. On the demand side this is whole of American People process, ptas, it is growing up, got videos of driving and drivers training and horrendous look at crashes and so forth and so on, need to let every student know, need to let what consequences of the drugs are to their lives and future. Need to get parents involved, Parent Teacher associations involved, so whether they pick up their values from church or the neighborhood or whatever, this is a national crisis. All of us here represented or from states staggering through the process of watching young people and others die from drugs more potent than theyve ever been. Let me lay down a couple of markers here in my comments. Then end on the committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. I will join senator rubio and senator king, senator langford and others concern about failure of u. S. Government again to have an all of Government Strategy to deal with the cyber threat. I have no doubt in my mind we have superior capabilities, but theyre stovepiped. I dont think the policy makers are doing a good enough job. I think it is incumbent on us to try to provide policy guidance so you and others in the intelligence communities and National Security apparatus can address this threat in a way that needs to be addressed. Our adversaries dont suffer from lack of all of government policy. Theyre all over that. China i china i agree with senator rubio about their strategy. Some of you responded to that. One of the strategies that china and other countries adopted is to avoid some of the review measures in the committee on Foreign Investment in the United States when it comes to direct investment, buying dual use Technology Startup companies and the like, and then using that to gain strategic advantage against the United States. I wonder if maybe director wray, could you address that, and then anybody else in the time permitted, be glad to hear what you have to say about that. Well, senator, i think youre exactly right that reform is relevant to the china threat, although not exclusively china threat. Theres a degree where it currently standsis susceptible to the kind of round pegs only go in round holes thing, and not hard to come up with othershaped pegs to get around the process. The obvious example is joint ventures, but other ways as well. Thats one of the significant problems. Another problem is the amount of time built into the process to do a thoroughreview, which is too short. Another another problem is theinability to share information since other countries oral ice are going through the same thing, to be able to share information so when they go through their own versions of this process, they have the benefit of what was attempted in our country and vice versa. I think in general, we need a more Strategic Perspective on chinas efforts to use acquisitions and other typesof Business Ventures as opposed to a tactical looking only within the four corners of one an the four corners of one particular transaction. So if i could, thedirector the director laid out the bigger issue at the strategic level. For us at cia, we take on tactical. We are ready to penetrate the if you look at supply chain riskmanagement, we run the Threat Analysis Center that is hooked into cfius, so we bring the Services Together and look at supply chain Risk Management for ci issues associated with whomever may get a contract and ties back to china and other nations. But you mentioned the fact that every case for cfius comes back and we lookat it, we get about three days with it. We could use more time to get a more thorough scrub. Senator reed . I apologize for being late. We had a simultaneous hearing. All morning, gentlemen, weve heard the story of russia influencing our campaigns and indeed in the Current Campaign for the mid terms. So let me say, has the president directed you and your agency to take specific actions to confront and blunt russian influence activities that are ongoing . Were taking a lot of specific efforts to blunt were they directed by the president . Not as specifically directed by the president. Director pompeo, have you received specific president ial direction to take steps to disrupt these activities . Sorry. Im not sure how specific. The president s made very clear, we have an obligation from our perspectivefrom the foreign intelligence perspective, to doeverything we can to make sure theres a deep and thorough understanding of every threat, including threats from russia. Has he singled out the russian threat, which appears to be critical to this election coming up . I know there are threats from manydifferent vectors, but have you received a specific i think the president s been very clear that hes asked our agency to cooperate with each of the investigations thats ongoing and do everything we can to ensure we thoroughly understand this potential threat. Director coats, have you received a specific directive to take specific steps to disrupt and understand first and disrupt russian activities directed at our elections in 2018 . I would echo what director pompeo said. We Work Together on this. The agency has full understanding that we are to provide what intelligence is relevant and make sure thats passed on to our policy makers, including the president. Passing on relevant intelligence is not actively disrupting the operations of an opponent, do you agree . No, we passit on and they make the decisions how to implement it. As the director of intelligence, are you aware of or are leading a interagency or working group that is tasked with countering russian activities, not reporting on it, but countering those activities . Are you aware of any group, since state elections are critical . Were relying on the investigations that are under way. So the answer both with the committee and the hipsy committee and the special counsel. So youre not taking any specific steps based on the intelligence to disrupt russian activities that are occurring at this moment . We take all kinds of step to disrupt russian activities in terms of what theyre trying to do. Ill turn it over to director pompeo let me finish with the rest of the gentlemen. Are you finished, mr. Coats . Yes. Thank you, sir. We have a significant effort, im happy to talk to you about in closed session, and its not just our effort. It is certainly all of ic effort. There may be others participating as well to push back against this threat, and its not just the russians threat. Its iranians and chinese, its a big, broad effort i understand we have mutual threats. But one threat that has been central to our and youve in testified to this publicly. The last election there was russian influence on this election. They seemed to be moreprepared. They learned their lessons. The question i pose, has the president directed the Intelligence Community in a coordinated effort, not merely to report but to actively stop this activity. And theanswer seems to be, were reporting on every threat coming into the United States. Let me get back to, quickly, any of the other panelists have anything to add toon this point . I cannot say i have been explicitly directed to blunt or actively stop. On the other hand, it is clear to generate knowledge and insight, so we can generate policy. That direction has been explicit. Collecting intelligence and acting on it in a coordinated fashion are two different things. Have very few moments remaining. Andave talked about china the involvement and trying to buy companies. They are undertaking a shoe investment in Artificial Intelligence and quantum computing. That is dwarfing anything that the administration is proposing are suggesting. If Artificial Intelligence has even half of the benefits that its promoters claim, itsgoing to be extraordinarily disruptive. Quantum computing has the capacity to undercut cryptology as we know it, and the experts can correct me if im wrong. Some of the mechanisms that quantum computing can generate could, based on infinite measurements of gravity, detect devices underground and under the water, which for anybody whos a submariner, you have to be wondering. So, where is our National Manhattan program for ai and quantum computing that will match the chinese . Director coats, you seem to be anxious to answer that. I think there are some things that we ought to talk about in classified setting here. Were were treading very narrow line here relative to discussingthis in an open meeting. I dont want to tread that line, but we do have to recognize that, again, the chinese activity to appropriate our intellectual property is obvious. They are generating their ownintellectual property at a rate that could be disruptive and we are not matching them. Again, this manhattan analogy might be a little bit out of date, but when we see the potential effects of a scientific developmentback in 1940s, we spared no expense so we would get it first before our opponents. The chinese seem to be making that type of commitment very publicly. Hundred millions billions of dollars that theyve said publicly, they have a plan and theyre working the plan. And we provide that information to the extent that we can collect that information. But just like the manhattan project, we dont openly share what steps that were taking to address it. I respect that. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you, senator reed. And i hope youll come back to the closed session this ange this afternoon. I want to turn to were about to wrap up. Everybody can look up. There are no more questions. So you dont have to lose eye contact with us, hoping youre not the guy that theyre going to ask to answer. You can tell who the newbies are, theyve stayed focused on themembers the entire times and the ones that have been here before are like this. I want to turn to the vice chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We hope to seeyou all this afternoon. Robert, we hope to get you some overhead questions to you this afternoon. Echoing what weve all said, appreciate your service. But i i think were hearing a lot of commonality as we think about cyber, information, misinformation, and one of the things that have struck me, if you do a rough calculation and add up the costs to russia, in terms oftheir intervention in america, elections, the dutch elections, where they handcounted all the ballots, the french elections were acknowledged, taking down 30,000 sites. Its less than the cost of one new f35 airplane. Pretty good bang for the buck. I remember i remember ayear or so ago, langley looking at some Stealth Technology and the colonel showing him around, bemoaning the fact that the chinese had gotten this on the cheap by stealing a lot of the intellectual property that underlies that technology. And echoing what senator reed said, and again, this is where we allneed to put our heads together. We just made a massive additional investment in dod. Were roughly ten up on our spend, versus our adversaries. Not from a criticism standpoint, but where we should be thinking going forward, we should be buying the best 20th century military that money can buy, when we see our adversaries making investments in ai, Machine Learning, quantum computing. We all need to think through this from a general strategic standpoint. I worry that weve got certain lowhanging trut lowhanging fruit, as we think about chinese Tech Companies and how to get cfius right. One of the things weve discussed with you in the past, you look simply at iot connected devices, were going to double the number from ten billion to 20 billion in the next three to five years, but we have noeven deminimus federal security requirements for the purchasing of iot devices. Ive talked with general ashley on this. I dont believe there is, across the ioc and dod, prerequisite before we buy connected refrigerators or common consumer goods that there be that patchability or no embedded pass code. So theres a lot of work we can do, but we dont have the luxury of short time. Senator blunt raised questions around Election Security and i know the chairman will make this comment in his closing remarks. I think this committee has done some good bipartisan work on a series of areas that arose out of the russia investigation. Its our hope that on Election Security, we can come forward with a set of recommendations very quickly, because we have primaries coming up as early as march. My hope is that there will be Bipartisan Legislation to start addressing this issue. So thank you, gentlemen. Look forward to our session this afternoon. And with that, ill turn it over to thechairman. Thank you, vice chairman, and admiral rogers, i cant remember whether it was you or somebody else at the table said when we had a closed session about investment. Its not much we spend, its how we deploy the capital that weve devoted to a particular thing. And i think as a general statement, we get much betterat at the way we deploy capital. And i think we deploy it with a measurement tool today on return thats totally different than it was 10, 20, 30 years ago and i think thats important. This committee has a global mandate. A mandate that i thinks been reflected in the statements and questions of the members of this committee today. Its my hope that the American People got a sense of the breadth of topics this committee deals with on a daily basis and as like so do you. What was unsaid today . What was unsaid is that the special counsel is not the only investigation thats going on in washington. The scope of the special counsels investigation was clearly stated by the dag, when he fired bob mueller. And i think the media has spent some portion of every day trying to portray that the scope of that investigation has changed. The truth is, i dont know. Im not sure that anybody in this room knows. But heres what i do know. I know the senate intel investigation continues. Were hopefully wrapping up some important areas that we have focused on. The vice chairman just alluded to the fact that its our hope and our belief that before the primaries begin, we intend to have an overview of our findings that will be public. We intend to have an open hearing on Election Security. And its the committees intent to make recommendations that will enhance the likelihood that the security of our election process is in place. In addition to that, our review of the ica, the Intel Community assessment, which was done in the december of 16, we have reviewed in great detail. And we and we hope to report on what we found to support the findings where its appropriate, to be critical, if, in fact, we saw areas that we found came up short. We intend to make that public. Overview to begin with, none of these would be without a declassification process, but we will have a public version that we air as quickly as we can. And the third piece of review of when we learned of russias intrusions into our system, what we did or what we didnt do. And again, with the intent of sharing as much of that with the American Public as we can find through open hearings and through an overview. Lastly, we will continue to work towards conclusions related to any cooperation or collusion by any individual, campaign, or company with efforts to influence the outcome of elections or to create societal chaos in the United States. I i want to thank each of you at the table for an unprecedented access to intelligence products, legal documents, and other materials that were needed for us to do our job. We have a very talented group of individuals who have conducted this investigation. The remarks of every individual who has come in before us has commented on their professionalism and the fact that at the end of eight hours, they couldnt tell who was a democrat and who was a republican. So the effort to be bipartisan has not just been public, it is private as well and permeates all the way down through our staff. They couldnt do this in a timely fashion, if it wasnt without the access that each of you have provided us and your agencys. And let me just reiterate again, we understand that this is an unprecedented access tothis information. I promised you, when we started a year ago, that the sensitive nature of that material would, in fact, be protected. The vice charmtirman and i have done everything in our power to do that. We think we have maintained that promise. There have been times where information has found its way out some of recent, where it didnt come from us, but certainly people have portrayed it did. And thats okay, because you know and we know the security measures weve got in place to protect the sensitivity of that material. Have also protected the sensitivity of the individuals that have been interviewed, voluntarily. The individuals who have come in, what theyve shared with us, to date, we have not released any interview notes. Because thats not very public consumption. We ask people to come in and share with us things that help us understand what happened. Its our responsibility totake responsibility to take that information and to put it into some form that furthers the American Peoples understanding and assurance that we have thoroughly reviewed this. We will continue the promise that we made to each of you, till the conclusion of this investigation, and on. There are no expectations that everything youve shared with us is now a precedent that you have to continue. I hope its not. I have said publicly and criticized for it, that our committee was created to operate in secrecy. I believe thats where we perform our best work, and were giving the opportunity and the need for the American People to have a better understanding, that we should provide that for them in as controlled an atmosphere as we do. Today is an example of that. And we can now move from a public setting to a more private and closed setting to continue to get some clarity on some of the issues that our members need. I want you to understand the takeaway here. The takeaway is, this committee has and will continue to focus on answering the question that was given to this committee from an investigation standpoint what russia did to influence the 2016 elections. There are efforts to expand our efforts. They are not internal. We realize we have to answer for the American People, what did russia do to mess with the 2016 elections, and like many of you, on some of the questions weve asked, we find its multi jurisdictional. Weve got to begin to sort that out for us. Us, the American People. So i thank you for your willingness to be here today. I thank you for the performance of your employees who have worked tirelessly with very little thanks of late, with a lot of criticism, to keep this country safe. And i mightsay, to keep other countries safe. Because we are very generous when we know that bad things are going to happen. The committee is appreciative of the relationship that we have. We will continue to work to earn your trust because thats the only way we can perform the type of oversight that we believe the committee is mandated to do. And for the cooperationthat each one of you provides us. Were grateful for that. With that, this hearing is adjourned until 2 30. [indistinct conversations] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] tonight, former president ial candidate mitt romney will be speaking at the linkedin a dinner the lincoln day dinner. He announced he will be running for the senate seat currently held by orrin hatch, who is retiring. You can watch the speech at 10 30 eastern on cspan. On comments from jeb bush education and savings accounts. He recounts his past efforts, including implementing statewide voucher programs. Thats will air saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Our live coverage of the savanna book festival starts saturday morning at 9 00 eastern, and includes the book future war. Schapiro, and Celeste Headley with her book, we need to talk. Watch live coverage of the savanna book festival beginning at 9 00 eastern on the on a cspan2s book tv. This weekend on American History tv on cspan3, saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on lectures in history, douglas wilder. I have a definition i use for politics. Can anyone guess what that is . Word wouldould no define politics. Money. doesntsomething that involve money. Sunday at 10 00 a. M. Eastern on the west point center for oral history. Henry hanks thomas, a combat medic during the vietnam war. My grandfather served in world war i. My father served in world war ii. For a black man, wherever you served, it was your military service you hoped would confirm firstclass,e redblooded american citizen entitled. At 4 00 p. M. On real america, with a conference in washington dc next week, we look back on 1888 when a president reagan spoke at a dinner. The American People know what limited government, tax cuts, deregulation, and the lean toward privatization meant. Hess been the largest time expansion in our history, they want to throw it away with a return to budgets. Watch American History tv, every weekend on cspan3. Earlier today, Deputy Attorney general Rod Rosenstein announced charges against 13 russian nationals and three Russian Companies are committing crimes aimed to interfere with the United States political system, including the 2016 president ial election. From the justice department, this is 10 minutes