Transcripts For CSPAN Senate Intelligence Committee Discusses John Ratcliffes Director Of... 20240713

National counterintelligence and security center. The Senate Intelligence committee considered the of texas congressman John Radcliffe to be the next director of National Intelligence. Since august, the position has been occupied by officials in the absence of a senateconfirmed director. Representative radcliffe was asked about whistleblowers, his view on russian interference and the origins of the coronavirus as well as his ability to be nonpartisan as the nations top intel chief. This hearing will be a little different. It is perhaps the first congressional hearing held during the extenuating circumstances of a pandemic. We have a sparse crowd and an expanded dais reflective of the committees adherence to guidelines put forward by the rules committee and attending physician. We thank our members and staff are there patience and understanding as we work through the logistics involved in holding this hearing, which is a critical part of the committees ongoing oversight of the Intelligence Community. Members will be joining us on a rotating basis throughout the morning. Again, this afternoon, as we move to close session. Their absence now is not a reflection of the importance they place on this matter. We have asked members to watch as much of the hearings as they can from their offices, only coming into the hearing room to ask questions. I would also like to thank the press corps for your accommodation of the restrictions we are placing as we seek to fulfill our requirements to hold this nomination hearing in an open setting, or at least as open as current circumstances allow. The media in the room today are representative for the Broader Media community, and i know that they will ensure quick, unvarnished dissemination of what is discussed in this hearing. While i am certain the atmosphere of this setting will feature prominently in media willage, i know the media be focused on the important intelligence oversight and Management Issues that are also going to be discussed. Finally, i want to thank the nominee, who has patiently waited for this hearing. I know hes ready to get to work, leading the Intelligence Community, which has continued to do its vital work under increasingly difficult conditions. These intelligence professionals follows and ears, developments we see in the headlines and threats most of us will never see, from terrorists who seek to do us harm to cyberattackers probing critical thosetructure and capitalizing on the Current Situation to steel Critical Research from defense contractors and professors. Countries around the world have locked down, but those threats have not stopped. Our Intelligence Community is always remains on watch, guarding a grateful if distracted nation. They deserve and the country needs the certainty of a permanent, senateconfirmed director of National Intelligence. After that extended introduction, i would like to formally welcome our witness, congressman John Radcliffe, President Trumps nominee to be the next director of National Intelligence. Congratulations on your nomination. I wish i could also welcome your wife michelle and your daughters. I know they wanted to be here. But given our attempts to minimize the number of people in the hearing room, i send them my appreciation via cspan. I thank them for their willingness to go on this journey with you and for their support. Today, we will consider congressman ratcliffes qualifications and engage in thoughtful to liberation. The congressman has already provided written responses to more than 125 questions presented by committee members. Todays proceedings allow for further inperson discussions. Wasressman ratcliffe elected in november 2014 to the house of representatives from the Fourth District of texas and serves on the House Committee on intelligence, House Judiciary Committee and house ethics committee. Prior to service in congress, mr. Ratcliffe was partner at a law firm, and in the department of justice served as the First Assistant u. S. Attorney, as chief antiterrorism and National Security for the Eastern District of texas, then as interim u. S. Attorney for the Eastern District of texas. Ratcliffe also served as mayor of the city of heath, texas. He received undergraduate degree from notre dame, law degree from Southern Methodist university, asked to meet at a time of profound threat and challenge. Given your experience, we expect he will lead the Intelligence Community with integrity, serve as a forceful advocate for the professionals in the i. C. And ensure the intelligence enterprise operates lawfully, ethically and morally. I can assure you this committee will continue to conduct vigorous oversight over the Intelligence Community, its operations and activities. Well ask difficult and probing questions of you and your staff, and we expect honest, complete, timely responses. I want to thank you again for being here, for your years of service to the country, and i look forward to your testimony. Before i turn to the vice chairman, i take a moment to note the passing of our dear servedtom coburn, who with distinction in the house and senate and was a valuable member of this committee. He cared deeply for this committee and the men and women of the Intelligence Community and understood the mission of this committee. His advice and counsel and friendship will sorely be missed , which i utilized no less than a month and a half ago. Some may wonder why my face looks a little hairy. This is the only way i can think of doing a tribute to tom coburn, was to do what tom did when things were confusing and we lacked understanding as to what direction to go here. As most of us know, tom would come back and wouldnt shave for a month, two months, until things were squared away. I dont know if i will wait until things are squared away, but i will wait until toms Memorial Service to properly memorialize him. I recognize the vice chairman for any opening remarks. Thank you, mr. Chairman. It is good to see you, my colleagues. Let me start for a moment where you left off. As somebody who spent literally years and years with tom coburn on a weekly basis, with the illfated gang of six effort, i got to know toms intelligence, nature, isirascible that the right word . Occasional pain in the whatever, but i share with you, he will be missed. , i would have joined you in that kind of tribute, but if you saw how bad any beard i tried to grow would look, im probably doing a better tribute by just saying. Its great to see you. I know these are normally supposedwhere we are to see the impression in the whites of your eyes. Im not sure i will be able to make that kind of judgment from here with my aging eyes. I get the general sense of you and i can see a little smile. If it turns to grimaces at times, we will no. But it is great to have you here, and i appreciate the opportunity i had to spend some quality time together last friday. Unfortunately, as the chairman has noted, i once again must note these are unprecedented times. America faces a challenge to our lives and security we have not had in over half a century, and it is during such trying times that we all recognize the value of nonpartisan expertise throughout our government. Nowhere is this clearer than in the apolitical Intelligence Community. The i. C. Collects intelligence on imminent and potential threats, analyzes them dispassionately and presents its best estimates, without fear or favor, to our nations leaders. This is essential, so policymakers can craft a timely, Effective Response to protect america. Nowhere is the need for leadershipapolitical clearer than the position of director of National Intelligence, who stands at the head of the nations 17 intelligence agencies. Unfortunately, what we have seen from the president ever since he came into office is an unrelenting and i believe undeserved attack upon our professional women and men of our intelligence agencies. Thi sis not because this is not because our Intelligence Community is deserving of these attacks, nor are they at the heart of some deep state conspiracy to undermine our political leaders. No. I believe the president attacks are intelligence agencies for one simple reason, because unvarnished truth and on embellished analysis are not welcome in this white house. What we have seen over the last year has been especially dangerous. The systematic firing of anyone at the odni who has the temerity to speak truth to power. Coats, Principal Deputy sue gordon, to acting dni admiral joe maguire, to acting director of National Counterterrorism russ travers, to the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community michael atkinson. These firings and forced departures from the leadership of the Intelligence Community have left the odni without a single senateconfirmed leader at the helm. Notead, an acting dni with experience in intelligence but with plenty of political loyalty to the president has been appointed to oversee americas intelligence enterprise. Individualni, this promptly instituted a hiring freeze and a reorganization whose purpose has not been communicated to the intelligence Oversight Committees. He also quickly fired Senior Leaders with decades of experience in the i. C. Alarmingly, we have begun to hear reports that intelligence professionals have been inappropriately questioned to limit the information they share with congress. The mr. Ratcliffe, president has nominated you to this critical position of National Security and intelligence leadership. Imve to say that while willing to give you the benefit of the doubt during this hearing, i dont see what has changed since last summer, when the president decided not to proceed with your nomination over concerns about your inexperience, partisanship, and past statements that seemed to embellish your record. This includes a some particularly damaging remarks about whistleblowers, which has long been a bipartisan cause on this committee. Ill speak plainly. I still have some of the same doubts now that i had back in august. Yourhave suggested that main qualification for confirmation to this post is that you are not ambassador grenell. Frankly, thats not enough. Before we put the senates stamp of approval and confirm a nominee to this critical position, senators must demand the qualities that the senate specified when it passed the law creating the odni after 9 11, legislation which my colleagues helps author. We must expect and demand professionalism, a nonpartisan commitment to the truth, and a rocksolid dedication to defending those who defend us every day. H the professional women and men of the intelligence bodies. I look forward to the questioning. I think the vicechairman thank the vicechairman. Former attorney general John Ashcroft was scheduled to be here to introduce representative ratcliffe, given current circumstances he could not attend. Theent us his remarks and senator has kindly agreed to represent attorney general ashcroft today. Senator cornyn, the floors years. Senator cornyn you, mr. Chairman. Always good to be with my colleagues on the Senate Select committee on intelligence and it is my pleasure to introduce John Ratcliffe, the nominee for director of National Intelligence. As the chairman said, we do have a letter from the former attorney general and it is rather lengthy. Im not going to read all of it i will refer to some excerpts. I ask for consent that it be made part of the record following my remarks. The reason why i think it is so important for the committee and the senate to hear from former attorney general ratcliffe excuse me, former attorney general ashcroft, is because of his intimate knowledge of the professional qualifications of the nominee, as well as the personal qualifications, his intelligence and his integrity. For highquality decisionmaking, sound intelligence must never be contaminated by personal bias or political predisposition. Ive known and worked with john for more than a decade. Person,f no person, no with a higher commitment to integrity and ive seen him speak the unvarnished truth to those he works with and works for, whether senior government officials or corporate ceos. He makes the important point and he did in my conversation with him yesterday on his farm in missouri, he makes the point that congressman ratliff has served in crucial roles as a developer and consumer of intelligence, a role i think his qualifications for the job. He said the John Ratcliffe is committed to forging the most insightful and accurate intelligence and counterintelligence possible. He will serve decisionmakers with fulsome transparent intelligence that enables them to make decisions to defend the nation to keep our citizens safe and free. Chairman, i know that coming to this nomination as a member of congress, that congressman ratliff as any member of ,ongress might, people wonder does he really understand the difference between being in the adversarial atmosphere that is congress and that especially speaks to our oversight responsibilities as somebody who has had the privilege of serving in all three branches of asernment, as judge, attorney general, John Ratcliffe has the personal integrity and intelligence to be able to understand the difference between being a legislator and being the director of National Intelligence. These are simply different roles to be played while discharging government responsibilities. I think that is something you might want to ask him more about , something i hope you will address, but ive known him personally for 10 years and im proud to support his nomination and to give you my strongest personal recommendation. I do believe that as a former u. S. Attorney and is a current member of the house Intelligence Committee, he does understand the vast threats our country is facing and the challenges we face that lie ahead. We need to be able to count on a leader to operate free of personal or political motivation, serving only with the security and safety of the American People in mind and i believe John Ratcliffe is the person to do that job. He is prepared to continue the legacy of outstanding leadership we have come to expect and count to count on his ability to serve as a steadfast leader and advocate for the ic. Lligence of the mr. Chairman, ranking member, i appreciate your careful consideration of my friend and fellow texan, john rap left, and appreciate John Ratcliffe, and appreciate the opportunity to introduce them today. With that, congressman radcliffe, if you would rise and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear to give the committee the truth, the full truth, and nothing but the truth . Rep. Ratcliffe i do. Please be seated. Before we moved to your fivement, i will ask you standard question the committee poses to each nominee who appears before us. Do you agree to appear before the committee here and in other venues when invited . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. If confirmed, do you agree to send your officials when invited . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. Do you agree to provide documents or any other materials requested by the committee in order for it to carry out oversight and legislative responsibilities . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. Will you ensure that office and staff provide materials when requested . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. Inform thegree to committee to asbestos possible . Rather than only the chair and vice chair . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. I want to thank you very much. It is my intention to move to a Committee Vote as soon as possible. For planning purposes, any member who wishes to submit questions for the record after todays hearing, please do so quickly. Yourll now proceed to opening statement, after which i will recognize members by seniority for five minutes. Members will have the opportunity to ask followup questions in the blocks that are designated. Let me say for the purposes of members, we have 30 minute blocks, there is time allotted, there is not time for everybody to have five minutes. Of 30 minutes regardless of where we are, i will cut it off. Stop for the room at 12 00. The floor is yours, congressman. German burke, vice chairman, distant with members of the committee, im honored to appear before you to be the direct the president s nominee to be the next director of National Intelligence. Acknowledge the work of staff who helped get us here today. I appreciate their dedication in making today possible. I would also like to share a few thoughts on the challenging times we face today. The covid19 pandemic has cut short the lives of over 67,000 americans. It has sickened over one million americans. It has impacted everyone of us. My deepest sympathies are with those we have lost and i salute the efforts of those on the front lines, including the dedicated Intelligence Community professionals reporting for duty. Times andtruly trying your sacrifice will not be forgotten. I would like to begin by thanking President Trump for his Incredible Opportunity for me to and i wouldtion like to thank attorney general , im forever grateful for your faith in me. I would like to recognize and thank senator cornyn for his kind words and my fellow texans for their support. It has been the privilege of my life to represent the fourth can congressional district. There is no way i could be with you today without the encouragement and support of my family. I would like to recognize and thank my amazing wife, are truly wonderful daughters, my mom, and my brothers and sisters. Watching from above im sure is my late dad. Service is apublic direct reflection of my family selflessness, their sacrifice, their enduring love of country, and for me. I dont have the words to express my gratitude. Has been ahere today mixture of Public Service and private sector experience. Age 23,ted school at tried my first case at age 24. A decade later i was managing partner of my own law firm. By most measures i was successful. But something was missing. As the son of two Public School teachers, i was taught from an early age the virtues of Public Service and selfsacrifice. Reflecting back, i realized it was those values that pushed me to a higher calling, one of service to the American People. The catalyst for me came on september 11, 2001. When the first plane struck, i was sitting in the 35th floor of a highrise Office Building in dallas texas that looked a whole lot like the ones in new york under attack. I watched so Many Americans give their lives that terrible day and in the months that followed, i watched many more sacrifice so much to defend the United States ended inspired me to take stock of all the gifts ive been given and what i might contribute to the defense of this great nation. Within a few years, i changed careers altogether, i left to the civil law practice behind to become a federal law practice. I served as chief of antiterrorism and National Security. My daily responsibility involved leading and managing, directing casesosecuting security including domestic and international terrorism, drug and human trafficking, transnational crime, and illegal immigration among others. I led and managed the joint Terrorism Task force activities and worked closely with Justice Department officials and fbi on terrorism prevention, the overriding priority. In these roles, i came to appreciate the values of interagency efforts and timely. Nd accurate for the past six years, ive been fortunate to serve with you all in congress and have prioritize National Security issues, seeking assignments in house intelligence, judiciary, and Homeland Security issues. Although serving the citizens in texas has been the owner of a believe my abilities and my judgment make me the right person to successfully lead the men and women of the Intelligence Community. If confirmed, my top priority will be to present the president and senior policymakers with objective and timely intelligence to better informed decisions about the safety of our great nation. As the president s principal intelligence advisor, i would ensure that all intelligence is collected, analyzed, and reported without bias, prejudice, or political influence. I see the director of National Intelligence is more than just a leader, a manager, and integrator. The dni must be an arrow catcher, problem solver, and obstacle mover for the ic, addressing issues, resolving conflicts, and putting tools and resources in the right place at the right time and always, always the dni must be the voice to advocate for and defend the interests of the ic and its people. Myconfirmed, you have commitment to deliver timely, accurate, and objective evidence to speak truth to power, be that with congress or the administration. Let me be very clear. Anyone wants what our intelligence to reflect, the intelligence i will provide if confirmed will not be impacted or altered as a result of outside influence. Above all, my fidelity and loyalty will always be with the constitution and the rule of law. My actions will reflect that commitment. Many of you have asked me what i see as the greatest fat threat facing our nation. Is diverselandscape and geographically diffuse. I believe the immediate focus of the ic must be directed to the geopolitical and Economic Impact of the coronavirus pandemic, as well as its origins. The American People deserve answers and, if confirmed, i pledge that the ic will remain laser focused on providing them. We face enduring challenges on other fronts as well, these and china, from the race to 5g preventing cyber espionage. Russia and its continued efforts to undermine our democracy by enter curing and free and fair elections, iran and its continued pursuit of nuclear capabilities, ballistic missiles, and sponsorship of terrorist groups. Continueda and its possession of Nuclear Weapons and Delivery Systems and transnational issues like cybersecurity, safeguarding supply chains, and preventing terrorist attacks or a resurgence of isis. This list is by no means exhaustive. To address the full list of threats, the ic must work continuously to earn the trust of the president , the congress, and the American People. At its core, the dni position is about leadership. If confirmed, i hope to be a stabilizing force to build trust and break down barriers to information sharing as warranted in order to sharpen the analytic work of the Intelligence Community. Dni remains the integrationad the of the Intelligence Community. We can never underestimate the value of integrated operations or assume that agencies would do so in their own without strong leadership in the above. I believe every Government Agency must constantly review its operations to ensure it is setting the right priorities, achieving Mission Objectives and spending taxpayer dollars effectively and efficiently. To make the community more effective, efficient, and resilient. To remain the World Premiere intelligence enterprise, the ic must continue to recruit and retain the best, brightest, and most Diverse Workforce the nation has to offer. The men and women are dedicated Civil Servants who rarely, if ever receive the full recognition of their sacrifice to country and dedication to the mission of keeping americans safe, secure, and free. There will be no greater champion of their hard work or dedication to this country than me. Im honored by the opportunity to be here with you today and i think you for your consideration of my nomination during these difficult times. I look forward to answering your westerns. Thank you for those remarks, congressman. We will go into the first block of time consumed by the chair, the vice chair. Members will have up to five minutes. I will try to bank some time. Congressman ratcliffe, several questions. When you are confirmed to be dni, you will be walking into an organization that has been led for quite some time by acting officials. It applies to the position for which you have been nominated. Also more recently to the Inspector Generals office. Independence and ability to speak truth to power are critical in both offices. Can you speak to your views to the importance of the Intelligence Communitys Inspector General and your expectation of that office as dni . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, thank you for the question. You made reference to acting officials. I have been an acting official for a period of time. I was acting u. S. Attorney for a period of time. I have an appreciation for why it does make a difference. I also appreciates the comments youve made and about speaking truth to power. I very much intend to do that. To the Inspector General position, i have a strong record of supporting and defending and working with inspectors general. I have publicly defended Inspector General michael horowitz, even when some of my colleagues have criticized his work and even when i have disagreed with some of his opinions, but i understand his role and the importance of Inspector Generals because there will always be misconduct when you have government. If confirmeditted as dni to working with the Inspector General to make sure that the Intelligence Community has that type of intelligence in place to act in the best interests of the American People. Over the course of the last three years, this committee has issued four reports about russias meddling in our elections. Covering their intrusions into state election systems, the use of social media, and most recently confirming the findings of the 2017 Intelligence Community assessment, while being mindful of the fact that we are in an unclassified setting, what are your views on russias meddling in our elections . Rep. Ratcliffe my views are that russia meddled or interfered with active measures in 2016, they interfered in 2018, they will attempt to do so in 2018. They have a goal of sowing discord and they have been successful in sowing discord. Fortunately, based on the good work of this committee, we know that they may have been successful in that regard, but they have not been successful in changing boat for the outcome of any election. The Intelligence Community plays a vital role in ensuring that we have safe and Credible Elections and that every vote cast is done so properly and counted properly. Bringingou commit to information about threats to congress so we are fully and currently informed . Rep. Ratcliffe i will. Will you commit to testify at the annual worldwide threats hearing . Rep. Ratcliffe i will. Over the past three years, we have issued four reports. Number five is finished. Number five will go for declassification. Do we have your commitment as dni that you would expeditiously go through the declassification process . Rep. Ratcliffe you do. Senator warner. Thank you, mr. Chairman. You actually took some of my questions. My eyesight is good. [laughter] good to see you, mr. Radcliffe. Lastreciated our time friday. I want to followup on a couple of the chairmans questions first. As we discussed, we are volume five and the first four volumes have all been unanimous maybe with the exception of one dissenting vote. If we get this document to the ondi, we need your commitment not only that we do would expeditiously come about as much as possible, to get that volume five reviewed, redacted, and before theeally august recess. I know youve not seen the report yet. All i would ask is that aspiration only you commit to that goal. Document that can be potentially significant come out in the midst of a president ial fair on isnt good or either side, if i can clarify a little bit, recognizing that you would try to get this cleared prior to august . Rep. Ratcliffe vice chairman, i will again commit that i will work with you to get that declassified as expeditiously as possible. Again, our goal is to get it out before august. Again, following up on the chairmans comments and we talked about this in person, but for the committee and public thatd, youve indicated you do believe russia interfered. What this committees judgment was in volume 4 and throughout all volumes was that not only did russia interfere, but during they interference in 2016, had a selected candidate they were for and a selected candidate they were against. For, candidate trump against candidate clinton. Have you had a chance to review our documents and have you reached a similar conclusion . A conclusion that actually reinforces the unanimous conclusion of the Intelligence Community assessment . 4 . You comment on our volume rep. Ratcliffe yeah, senator i very much appreciate the bipartisan approach in which this committee address that issue. I did have a chance to review confirms which i know the ic assessment. I have no reason to dispute the committee findings. I will say that i have no reason to dispute the committee that i serve on, the house Intelligence Committee findings, which is a different perspective with regard to one issue that you mentioned, about a preference for a candidate. I was not on the committee at that time. I respect both committees. But i have not seen the underlying intelligence to tell me why there is a difference of opinion between the two committees. But again i very much appreciate volume 4 and the work this committee put in and i would reiterate that the most important take away from the findings i think of both committees is that as russia continues to so discord, that they have not been successful in changing votes for the outcome of an election and we need to remain committed to making sure that does not happen in the future. Me, to makelly to that kind of assessment and decide how we are going to prevent russias further interference in 2020, if they have a clear preference for one candidate over another, that would just offer alter how we counter those efforts. I really hope that you will spend the time and look at the underlying intelligence. If you find that you reach a conclusion that is different than the unanimous conclusion of the Intelligence Community or thisnanimous conclusion of committee here, i would expect a brief on that in pointing out how you found our conclusions or the ics conclusions were inaccurate. Do you commit to come back to us if you reach a different conclusion once you have reviewed that underlying intelligence . Rep. Ratcliffe i will. One of the things we also discussed. Of the community that seems under assault with the acting odni and that is the Election Security unit. There is obviously different parts of the ic. The nsa has a new group. The cia has a group. One of the most important is a group that has stood up by , it includeses some intelligence professionals like shelby pearson. They have briefed us on a regular basis. I would like your commitment that since we are literally less , that youonths away will not take any efforts to dismantle the current leadership of the Election Security unit or the current capabilities of the Election Security unit this close to the 2020 election. Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i have no intention of making changes in that regard. And that that unit, should they have data that is relevant and appropriate for this committees responsibility, that that unit will be able to continue on a regular basis to brief this committee . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i want to make sure that im clear through the day that have , i mention the global is safe, but the others and Credible Elections and i will make it my highest priority to make sure we have those safe and Credible Elections in 2020. It is important again that that group who has briefed this committee on a regular basis continues to have that ability to brief. Again, echoing what the chairman has said, and i dont know whether our clocks . They are not running. You will give me a high sign . Just did i hit my five minutes . Last question. Confirmed, we are already past due date on when we would have the traditional worldwide threat hearing. You have committed to the chairman that you would hold that hearing. My hope would be that that commitment would take place within 60 days of you being confirmed. Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i will make a commitment i look forward if confirmed to appearing as dni in the worldwide threats hearing. I dont want to make a commitment in terms of time that i dont know what im promising exactly. What i will make a commitment is that if confirmed, i agree that it is important and i will work to make that happen as expeditiously as possible. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Radcliffe, he has been incredibly generous with my time. I had an opportunity to spend some time with him. I had all the questions that i need answered from him already. Indeed, most of them are not available for discussion in an open setting like this. In the interest of keeping you on time and on schedule, im going to yield back my time, since i do have answers to my questions. Thank you. Thank you, senator. Senator feinstein. Thanks very much. Chairman, congressman, welcome. I would like to ask a couple questions about whistleblowers, if i might. To acommittee has adhered tradition of protecting whistleblowers. However, it is my understanding that your participation in President Trumps campaign to punish and discredit one ic whistleblower suggests you do not align yourself with this bipartisan approach. Let me give you an example. During a december 11 hearing of the House Committee on the judiciary, you claimed without any evidence that the whistleblower got caught making a false statement. On december 12, you tweeted that the whistleblower did not tell the truth both verbally and in writing. Staff forttacked providing guidance to potential whistleblowers who know how to lawfully make a disclosure. Here is the question. If you are confirmed, do you believe that your past remarks concerning the ukraine whistleblower will discourage ic whistleblowers from exercising their rights consistent with the law to make protected disclosures . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, thanks for the question. I want to make it very clear, if confirmed as dni, every whistleblower, past, present, and future will enjoy every protection under the law. I dont want to relitigate old duringof what happened the impeachment inquiry. My issue was not with the whistleblower, my issue was with what i perceived as a lack of due process in the house process. Again, i dont want to relitigate, so i believe it at that. Every whistleblower can protect full protection under the law. Whistleblowers are so important. A whistleblower doctor in china is one of the reasons we got an earlier warning, so i will make that commitment to you, senator. Thank you very much. ,n the evening of april 3 President Trump announced he was firing mr. Atkinson because he had sought to transmit to congress a credible whistleblower complaint of urgent concern. One that was required by law to be transmitted to congress. Belief ofre the members of this committee and the senate that mr. Atkinson was improperly fired despite the fact as acting director mcguire said he did everything by the book and follow the law . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i appreciate the question. I think before you entered the room i talked about my history and strong support of working with Inspector Generals. I talked about Inspector General horowitz, who was someone i went to when i thought there was a problem with the misuse of intelligence authorities. Hisvery much appreciated approach and work and some of the concerns i raised were presented in his findings in his report. With respect to aiken Inspector General atkinson and the situation you describe, i dont have enough information to answer your question. If i can explain why. I will tell you that my dealings with Inspector General atkinson, i had no issues. I think he did what he thought was right. I think he did think he was following the law. Is that the to that legal opinion within theo dni from the general counsel and the , my reading of it is that their determination was that he may have exceeded his authority because the investigation involved issues that were not intelligence activities or Intelligence Community employees. That is a legal question that i dont know the answer to. Again, i very much want to reiterate that if confirmed how important Inspector Generals are in government and my strong history of working with them. I understand that Inspector General tom in chaims in that role. I dont know him, but he is a 30year veteran, very wellrespected. I hope to have the opportunity to work with him. I appreciate that answer. If confirmed, do you commit to directing all ic agencies to cooperate fully with congressional oversight requests regarding covid19 . Produce the full membership and staff of the congressional intelligence all intelligence requested by Congress Regarding covid19 . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, thanks for the question. That is meant to be broad. Rep. Ratcliffe and i appreciate the question. In my opening remarks and i think reiterating in one of my responses that the immediate concern that i have is getting answers from the American People through the Intelligence Community of confirmed, if confirmed the Intelligence Community will be laser focused on getting all the answers that we can regarding how this happened, when this happened, and i commit to providing with as much transparency to you as the law will allow and with due regard for sources and methods that everything be provided as quickly as possible. Thank you. Just a couple of questions quickly about hard targets. In your view, is the ic doing enough to collect against hard targets . Like north korea . Senator, as you know, the challenge with north korea is visibility. That my impression from the outside, like you as a member of an Oversight Committee of intelligence, is that we have very good collection. Im only cap yachting it cap yacht im only we maythat we may have make it a priority, collection is what makes this the greatest intelligence enterprise in the world. I will commit that if we are not doing enough, i will make it a high priority to improve any employds we may need to , let mengratulations just, weve gotten to know each other over the years, not in the setting of intelligence, but through mutual friends. I want to ask you a simple and straightforward question. Accomplished career. By electoral standards, you are in a seat that would be considered a safe district. You seem to be enjoying your work. Why are you doing this . I dont mean that in a negative way. You have exposed yourself to criticism and the climate today and politics is pretty intense. That you are job willing to step forward and do at this time . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i appreciate the question and i appreciate the time weve had to get to know each other when you have come over to the lower house to visit with us. First of all, i think any time the president asks you to do something for your country, you want to consider a way to salute smartly and say yes. Beyond that, you have to want this job. For the same reason in my leaving atalked about successful law practice to make a fraction of that to be a federal prosecutor, the mission is too important. What the Intelligence Community , how it has positioned the United States as the world superpower and i think everyone knows that the relationship between the Intelligence Community, congress, the president , and across the board right now is something that is at issue. We have intelligence authorities and their uses are being questioned. I realize that is a difficult time, but the core responsibility as leadership and it is easy to raise your hand when things are going perfectly. It is harder to raise your hand when they are not. The mission is too important of keeping americans safe and the opportunity to lead is something i want to do and i guess i will say this. It has been the privilege of my life to serve as a member of ingress, but the best job have, it is in apolitical position. Never one party or another. I very much view that as this role for the dni. I look forward to treating every member exactly the same way. And frankly being out of politics. An important question. Ive heard skepticism raised is about experience and the experience needed to lead this intelligence enterprise. It is my view that you have pretty extensive experience on andcommittee in the house on judiciary and as a u. S. Attorney. What is that in what you have done over the last during your career that you believe prepares you best for the role overseeing these capabilities. Rep. Ratcliffe ive now seen intelligence from three different vantage points. As an enduser and a developer, as a consumer of intelligence, and as an overseer of intelligence. , i startedxperience handling National Security issues in 2005and that included intelligence authorities. My first exposure with fisa was 2005. In trying to respond to this committee, we found that in at least one instance, the theties that i used matters that i work on remain classified. From an experience standpoint, as far back as 2005, ive been using those authorities. I think the role of u. S. Attorney in particular and my time as chief of antiterrorism for four years is particularly wellsuited and analogous to the dni. As u. S. Attorney, i was running a federated enterprise, working across federal agencies, integrating, coordinating, sharing information, and doing so in an apolitical way. Is what the director of National Intelligence does, integrates and coordinates. Community better, making our policymakers better. My time in congress, as well. Legislating, creating National Security laws. Broad, deep, and more than qualified level of experience when we talk about National Security issues. Whennk i got good judgment there are problems with the use of intelligence authorities and have spoken truth to power when i see it misused. Enthusiastically support your nomination and i look forward to voting for you. Any member currently has one additional question, i would be happy to entertain. If not, senator feinsteins to mark if you have a quick one. [indiscernible] [applause] senator feinstein if i could , ive been very concerned by the growth of contractors over the last 20 plus years in the agencies. Chairman of the committee, we made a big push to ensure that all inherently government functions of the ic were performed by Government Employees and not contractors. It is my understanding that that effort continues today and we made substantial progress over the two decades in this. What is your view on the appropriate use of contractors in the Intelligence Community . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, im not saying this because you are considering me for the position as a nominee, but i agree with every word you just said with regard to contractor use and how it should be limited and where Government Employees should be doing government functions. Look inhere is always a terms of ratios and the percentages. Im not a onesizefitsall person. I would look at where things stand. The concern that you have, the sentiment that you expressed, let me just reiterate that i agree with you completely and i look forward to working with you on this issue have confirmed. Thank you. Thank you, senator. With that, the first block of time has expired. The chair would move to the second block of time and go somewhat out of order because senator wyden is not here. I will turn to senator collins. Thank you, mr. Chairman read congressman, i appreciated the opportunity to talk with you last week. Authors along with former senator Joe Lieberman of the 2004 law that created the director of National Intelligence position i have a special interest in making sure that the leader of the Intelligence Community fulfills what we envision. In that regard, i appreciated the opportunity to review your background with you in depth to make sure that you met the statutory standard of having extensive National Security expertise. So, today, i want to turn to a different issue. As some members have already said today, the ability to speak truth to power is essential to serving as a successful dni. Thed you communicate Intelligence Communitys analytic views to the president even if you knew that he would strongly disagree with them . Rep. Ratcliffe of course. Would you be willing to communicate the ics analytic communications to the president even if you believed it would place your job in jeopardy . Rep. Ratcliffe of course. When assuming your confirmation, when you participate in the next open and youe threat hearing are asked to provide an that youied assessment know that the president vehemently disagrees with, what would you do . Whethercliffe senator, you are talking about the president , whether you are talking about nancy pelosi, Mitch Mcconnell, anyones views on what they want the intelligence to be will never impact to the intelligence that i deliver, never. Thank you for that strong response. Nevertheless, im going to ask you one more that has to do with the internal operations of the Intelligence Community. If theuld you do Intelligence Community was prepared to publish a president s daily brief that directly contradicted the white houses conclusions on an important issue like north korea esther and mark north korea . Still allow it to be published . The reason i ask this question is there are some very experienced analysts within the ic that are concerned that you might attempt to shade the conclusions in order to avoid alienating the president in presenting his daily brief. Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i think before you were in the room, i that ited multiple times wont shade intelligence for anyone. Whether were talking about the president , members of congress, any policymakers. President sblished daily brief, i guess im not sure the word publish when you say how you mean that i should have used the word issued. Rep. Ratcliffe absolutely. I just wanted to make sure. Because the president s daily brief is the president s daily brief. Question,t larger again, just if i can reiterate as clearly as possible, if confirmed as dni, one of the things that ive made clear to everyone is that i will deliver the unvarnished truth. It wont be shaded for anyone. What anyone wants the intelligence to reflect wont impact the intelligence i deliver. And finally and i ask this question to you on the television ask to this question on the telephone, but i want to ask it on the record. The president has said the ic has run amok and needs to be reined in. Do you share the president s view . Rep. Ratcliffe i think what we talked about senator, about a number of things there, and im sure going to get a lot of questions about what the president says or what the president thinks and again i , but mean to be repetitive none of those things, regardless of what he says or how he says them or how nancy pelosi or Mitch Mcconnell or anyone says about the intelligence or the Intelligence Community will not impact the intelligence that i deliver. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Congressman, welcome. Rep. Ratcliffe thank you. Let me begin this way. Theld trump said last year, constitution says, and i quote want i can do whatever i as president. The attorney general has said the president does not have to follow the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and can conduct surveillance without a warrant. Those two statements are a direct threat to the Constitutional Rights of americans. And it makes the director of National Intelligence a last line of defense for our democracy. Canou believe the president spy on americans outside the law . Rep. Ratcliffe i dont think anyone can spy on americans outside the law. So, would you refuse to authorize the Intelligence Community to conduct warrantless surveillance . Uhatcliffe senator, i you answered, no. So im asking you rep. Ratcliffe whatever the law do ifwhat i will confirmed as dni. Within my authorities, i will act within my authorities, but most importantly i will be guided by the constitution and the rule of law. So whatever authorities allow the Intelligence Community to do, all of our actions, if im the director, will be in compliance with what the law is. My time is short, congressman. The point is, you really didnt say no in answer to my question. You said there may be circumstances. I happen to think that answer that there may be circumstances when the president can spy on is anans outside the law exceptionally dangerous testimony. Im going to move on. Rep. Ratcliffe can i just so the record is clear maybe i misspoke then no one can spy or surveyor outside the law and if confirmed as dni, one of my highest priorities will always be to make sure that the Intelligence Community is acting in accordance with the law. So i want to make that very clear, senator. Again, you are qualifying this based on circumstances and that is what i think is dangerous. I also want to get into your views on whistleblowers. Now, it is open season on whistleblowers right now and washington, d. C. And you gave a pleasant sounding statement about whistleblowers, but i want to be very specific. If the Inspector General determines a whistleblower complaint should be sent to congress, are you going to send it over to the department of justice or the white house to get their permission . Any ratcliffe whistleblower complaint, if im confirmed as dni, is going to be handled in accordance with the law. You know, i dont know how i can be more clear than that. I think you could say unequivocally no because that is what i think is important. What i want to know is whether there is some kind of veto power over whether Congress Hears from whistleblowers and as with the previous question with respect to spying, you want to have it both ways. You want to try to portray yourself as a defender of the constitution and then you water it down with the specifics. Should the identity of whistleblowers ever, under any circumstances . Be disclosed without their consent rep. Ratcliffe no. Whistleblowers are entitled to anonymity. So, what is your opinion of those who would call for the outing of ic whistleblowers . Rep. Ratcliffe that whistleblowers are entitled to anonymity under the law. And if someone are you distinguishing between lawful whistleblowers or lawful whistleblower complaints . Again, im trying to get a sense of what you actually believe. Rep. Ratcliffe if someone is a whistleblower under the law, they are entitled to the protections of Whistleblower Statutes under the law and before you were in the room i heard the answer. One last question. I want to get it in. In your written answers, you seem to think internet voting was ok. You gave a very qualified answer. Theppen to think it is equivalent of putting our ballot on the streets of moscow. Why youd you tell me think internet voting is ok given all the threats that we have seen to our democracy . Rep. Ratcliffe i dont recall the response or how i responded, senator. That that isto me a policy issue that if confirmed as dni, i would not be in the role of making policy. We expect you to be we expect you to be a leader on Election Security and if you support the kind of Snake Oil Salesmen we got in this country that are selling some of these online voting operations, you are going to put at risk our special system of government. I think my time is up. Thank you. Thank you, senator. Welcome, congressman. Record statement for the , you wrote that the president and i have a good report. Rapport. If confirmed, you said you have my commitment to deliver accurate intelligence and speak truth to power. Dan coats, sue gordon, joe mcguire, other dedicated ic professionals had a good rapport with the president as well until they didnt. Can you give me some specific examples of when you have had to speak truth to power, in particular if it has involved the president of the United States . Rep. Ratcliffe sure. Senator, i appreciate the question. Rapporton i said a good is i think trust is important. It can strengthen the relationship between all parties , Intelligence Community, congress, the president. One of the reasons i indicated before you were in the room that i wanted this job was because it is a political and i felt a political positions before. You u. S. Attorney, that is cal role. In those instances, i frequently had to speak truth to power. There were many occasions where people wanted me to exercise my discretion in a way that considered something other than what the law was. Can you give a particular example . Soandso is you know i dont want to give examples that would give away a specific case but if someone was a good republican or a good democrat and held a position and maybe deserved some special consideration, those kinds of things. In addition. I think thats adequate. I just want to reclaim my time for a moment. Last year, the president defended nominating you for the dni position stating that you would do an incredible job and we need somebody like that in there, we need somebody strong, that can reign it in, because as i think you have all learned, the intelligence agencies have run amok. What do you think he meant by that . I dont know. i saw the comment, senator. Ive made clear that first of all, ive made clear, as i just said to you, one of the reasons i want this position, ive made that without betraying any conversation, but that sentiment, ive expressed to the president. That imderstands looking forward to this position iical in thes apolt intelligence i will deliver is unvarnished. Do you think the Intelligence Agency has run amok . Rep. Ratcliffe i have never said that. President trump has repeatedly, and without any , accused the hardworking of the icy of working to undermine his administration. Is an believe that there deep state in the ic. Rep. Ratcliffe i dont know what that means. I dont know what that is. Would you agree that it would be inappropriate, and in some contexts, illegal to remove or reassign, to screen or otherwise discriminate against korea i. T. Personnel for political reasons, including on the basis of their work assignments in previous administrations . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. The president has publicly stated that he expects loyalty from his appointees. He publicly withdrew your nomination and appointed another individual and then formally resubmitted your nomination. Urn of events raises unique questions. During your conversations with the president , what priorities did he communicate to you that he expected you to pursue on his behalf . And did the word loyalty ever come up . Rep. Ratcliffe a couple of points there. I want to be clear. My loyalty is to the constitution and rule of law. I have made that very clear to everyone, including the president. So you did discuss loyalty . Rep. Ratcliffe no, i made clear myt if i am in a position, loyalty is always going to be to the constitution and rule of law. Rep. Ratcliffe so you made that so you made that proactively clear . Rep. Ratcliffe yes, i made that proactively clear. And you were not asked . Rep. Ratcliffe i absolutely was not. One of the priorities, again, i dont want to get into specific conversations, but that the sentiment is keeping politics out of the Intelligence Community. Its one of my priorities. And one thing, i guess because it has been reported, i went through some consideration. I was not withdrawn. Record to wanted to be clear with respect to that. Senator collins, you have one additional questions you would like to ask. Chairman. Ou, mr. Congressman, the Congress Passed a law requiring an unclassified report on who was responsible for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Bill,s a law today, not a it is a law. The dni has outright confused the law,o comply with denying the public a single shred of information on this topic. Do you agree that government is bound by this law and is obligated to provide this report, which stipulates, in public, in public, who killed Jamal Khashoggi and under what circumstances . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i share your concern. I think i have seen the same information you have. I think you are reviewing to the precision referring to the precisions provisions in the ndaa. Isill ensure that the law complied with. Information,t the if we are talking about the same thing, is a request for unclassified information. If confirmed, i want to look toelf at the information, make sure that that information has been classified properly. But that is not the question. This is a law, congressman. Of thetly, and every one areas i have asked you about, with respect to whistleblowers, now with respect to the law, these are pretty much straight forward, yes or no questions. And now you have said you are going to look at what is classified with respect to the late mr. Jamal khashoggi. We passed a law that resolved it. It is supposed to be made available now. I will look forward to your adding to the record on it. But i will tell you, you have certainly been briefed with respect in coming to this hearing. But on issue after issue i have asked straightforward questions, and what i have gotten is a circle the subject and not answer it. Do you have an additional question . Just one. As you know congress has not authorized organizational changes. We have not appropriated funds, but the acting director has been reorganizing our dni. If confirmed, would you hold that reorg halt that organization and ask congress to reorganize it if you found the need to do so . Rep. Ratcliffe if i can just first comment on senator wydens point. I am certainly not trying to be evasive, but the position i am considered for is the president s intelligence advisor not his legal adviser. There is counsel i would go to. Senator, i appreciate the question about organizational changes. Not soknow, im presumptuous as to know that i am going to be confirmed. I have not considered or talked about any sort of organization organizational changes. I expect to have unfettered personnel to make all decisions if confirmed as dni. I will make them in the best decision of the ic. I will certainly work with this committee to keep it fully and currently informed. I want everyone to remember that im being considered for this position, but i am one of you right now, as a member of the Oversight Committee. America functions better when its elective representatives are fully informed by the Intelligence Community, and i intend to do that. I will bring to a close the block, the second block of members questions and we will move to the third block. Questionso has asked is excused if they would like to leave. Let me remind members that when we conclude with this at 12 00, we will reconvene in closed session at 2 00 in the capital of senate security. We will again be operating with blocks of time. There will be a Conference Room there for anybody that would like to sit and read intelligence products and listen to whats going on in the closed hearing and come in for their question period. With that i recognize senator blunt. Lunt it is good to have you here. This job has gone vacant for too long. Its a critically important job. Interestad with great the letter in the record that was given to us from former attorney general ashcroft. He has been a good friend of mine for a long time. I trust his judgment, i know you worked with him as a u. S. Attorney and also in a law form law firm that was formed after you both left the Justice Department. Is significant. Visit aboutnce to your work on the house Intelligence Committee. I appreciated your last comment about the importance of being fully open, at the Oversight Committee like this one being fully informed. I will say that when we stood up this structure after 9 11, i certainly anticipated a much ofller coordinating rather than the bureaucratic size we see today. I hope when you have a chance to look at this, that you will look carefully at whether or not the structure, as its grown, has really served the principal purpose of coordinating in some way it, may have created a stove pipe of information. I would like you to comment on your views, maybe as a house in orl member intel member, if that size is too big, too small or just write . Right . Rep. Ratcliffe thank you for the remarks and attorney general John Ashcroft, who is a great american. Thiske you, come into position, if confirmed, with preconceived impressions based on discussions i have had on the Oversight Committee. As senator collins leaves the room, i want to make sure one dni is toes of the make sure the positions are working exactly like senator collins, and those who stood up, intended it. I had a chance to visit with her about it. I come in with the perspective that you have conversations that may be indicate there is too much bureaucracy, and there is too much redundancy. But ifdundancy is good, there are 17 agencies, they dont need to do the same thing 17 times or purchasing the same things. It will be one of my immediate priorities to assess how the odni is functioning. The goal of the odni is to make canic better so that the ic make you, the president and policymakers better. I want to be as efficient as possible, but i will be thoughtful and talk with the heads of the intelligence agencies and elements to find out where they think that some of these things may just be unnecessary redundancies, and address those. Sen. Blunt another question to grown, this agency has have we let the other agencies not have the attention, or the staff they needed . As the whole u. S. Intelligence to grown, so much has grown the point where the agency that coordinated information would be left out. The last9 years 19 years, we have very much been focused on violent terrorist extremists as the focus of so much of our intelligence efforts. Certainly that threat has not gone away. Equally as certain that Great Power Competition has emerged in ways that we would not have anticipated even a handful of years ago. Talk a little bit about rebalancing the resources you eye to continue to keep an on the threats that we have so focused on for almost two decades now. But also to rebalance into the aeat power we see that is significant challenge for us today. Rep. Ratcliffe i appreciate you asking. I have had that conversation with a lot of people about what i view as the greatest threat. I view china as the greatest threat actor right now. Look at where we are, with respect to covid19 and the role that china plays, the race to 5g, cybersecurity issues, all roads lead to china there. Priorities, highest sure myis to make background, with regards to violent extremists, that is a generational challenge that we will continue to deal with. I agree with you in terms of making sure, as we look at the National Intelligence framework, and whether we are committing enough resources to the rising power that is china. When you look at the initiatives that they have. The belton road. The made in china 2025. The military civil Fusion Initiative where they literally Chinese Companies to collect intelligence. These are all the same initiative. Us ass for china to plant the worlds superpower and be able to set standards around the world. We dont want an authoritarian regime like the Chinese Communist Party Setting standards in the world marketplace. I look forward to sitting down with you, if confirmed, about how odni and the other 16 elements are dedicated to the rising threat that is china, which i view is our greatest threat actor. Russia is it sen. Blunt russia is another great threat. Do you want to talk about that . Rep. Ratcliffe they are russia,t just because, we are concerned with russia in terms of anytime you have a Large Nuclear stockpile. Dedicated toainly sowing seeds of discord. We are most concerned with them with regards to election interference and making sure we have safe, secure, Credible Elections. That is what they have been focused on. As i said earlier, they have been successful at sowing seeds of discord. But not at changing votes or the outcome. Between the two, to be clear, i view china as the rising power. Economy about the same size as the economy of my home state of texas. We need to be very concerned with them. Vladimir putin is a very that actor. Actor. Bad as dni, i will make sure we balance everything appropriately in regards to those threats. Sen. Blunt the congress and i look forward to supporting your nomination here and in the committee and on the floor and here working with us as you get this job. Rep. Ratcliffe thank you. Good morning, congressman. I would like to start with a series of questions that were from the questionnaire. I believe they can be answered with yes or no. I think they can be easily answered with yes or no. Question 35, would you ever ask or support and intelligence professional adjusting his berber adjustment to avoid criticism from the white house are political appointees . Rep. Ratcliffe no. Would you change or remove content for political reasons were at the behest of Political Leadership . Rep. Ratcliffe no. Question 39. Would you consider an individuals political preferences to include loyalty to the president in making the decision to hire or promote an individual . Rep. Ratcliffe no. Question 39. B. Do you commit to exclusively consider qualifications in ic personnel without consideration of political factors . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. If you were to receive credible evidence as dni that an individual was undermining ic objectivity and furthering a political agenda, would you remove that individual . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. D, will you or any of your staff impose a political litmus test for ic employees . Rep. Ratcliffe no. Youf confirmed, would reassure your workforce that loyalty tests are not allowed with the ic . If such occurred would you commit to committees in stopping such efforts . Rep. Ratcliffe i would. Can you give me a case were you have ever publicly differed with this president . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. Please do. Briefly. Rep. Ratcliffe the example i can think of most recently. I think it was october, the president s decision to withdraw troops from syria. There was a resolution regarding that issue that i supported which i think was referred to as a rebuke of the president. I think i am right on the specifics of that. Any other incidents . Rep. Ratcliffe im sure there are. I dont recall any of them sitting here. In your position as a member of the house Intelligence Committee or as the nominee for dni, have you seen any intelligence that finds, with high confidence or any coronavirushat the originated in a lab in wuhan rather than the market . Rep. Ratcliffe i have not. I only wanted to caveat in the sense that, because of the that the i want to say last classified briefing i had it has been a while since i have had a classified briefing on the coronavirus pandemic. Thats the answer i gave this morning myself. Not seen any have intelligence that indicates it . Rep. Ratcliffe i have not. You took the oath this morning from the chair and said you will agree to appear and share information with the committee. Will you appear before this committee if an official in the white house tells you not to . Rep. Ratcliffe of course. Id you will bring us think there is a question to the worldwide threat . He gave the right answer. If i were you i would not qualify. Rep. Ratcliffe the point was, i want to make sure we were talking about the worldwide threat here . If this Committee Requests your attendance to testify, the white house says do not go, will you honor the oath you took this morning. The president stated there is too much enhanced interrogation produces valuable results. John mccain has said repeatedly that it does not. Who do you agree with, mccain or the president . Rep. Ratcliffe i follow the law. I always follow the law. Its a violation of the antitorture law waterboarding is a violation of the antitorture law . Rep. Ratcliffe the law makes clear that torture is illegal, and that would be the army field manual. This has nothing to do with your personal opinion . You are simply saying that i will follow the law, but if the law was changed for torture, you would say that is ok . Rep. Ratcliffe i think the obligation that i have is to follow the law. The constitution and law of the country is the oath that i take, in any role. As dni, as a member of congress. I dont want to get into policy decisions about which the dni should be involved with. You are considering me for a role where i would not be making policy or i would follow the law laws or asors create the Supreme Court interprets those laws. You are running for reelection and your Campaign Manager shared polling data, which includes cross paths and detailed information about where your campaign stood with an agent of a foreign government, would you believe that is ok . Rep. Ratcliffe no. Thank you. Ratcliff,sman congratulations on your nomination. He asked if you have seen any intelligence that the coronavirus originated in one of the two labs in wuhan and you said no. Have you seen intelligence that supports the chinese claim that it started in a Seafood Market in wuhan . Rep. Ratcliffe no. I presume you are aware that the scientific journal published a study of chinese scientists in january that concluded that it did not originate in the market . Rep. Ratcliffe i have. That more than one third of original cases concluded what they believe to be the first known case . Rep. Ratcliffe i did not recall that. Are you aware that, to the best of our knowledge, there is no evidence that bats of any kind was even sold in the market . Rep. Ratcliffe that is my understanding. The point i was trying to make is, its been a while, and to no ones fault, since i had an updated classified briefing of the coronavirus pandemic. I am asking the questions not just to speak about the virus, but a matter of intelligence analysis. Everything we just discussed is not clandestine wind collected information clandestine d collected information. Its not in news sources or so forth. Much of what we know about the virus is the result of publicly recorded information or social media evidence from wuhan in the early days. Of thatical is the role kind of unclassified Public Information in the analysis that our Intelligence Committee should be conducting . Rep. Ratcliffe one of the things we are seeing is open Source Intelligence being increasingly valuable. We need to find ways to collect it and analyze it. It is large sets of data that we need to be processing. So its a challenge, but its a tremendous source of information. It should be utilized by the Intelligence Community going forward. I think there is always a bias towards thinking it. If the secret is not in class is if the secret whether we are talking about the coronavirus are what russia is up to in europe or what Nuclear Programs are stitched together in the mosaic. The mosaic is circumstantial evidence that you can reach the best conclusion. Do you want to respond . Rep. Ratcliffe to give you an example of how we might be forwardlooking on this issue, ifource intelligence we used open Source Intelligence tools, we may be able to get earlier warnings around pandemics like this or viruses like this as they are beginning. When ire the types of, was referring to how the Intelligence Committee can leverage opensource information, that is what i was referring to. The director of National Intelligence chief responsibilities, which is setting the priorities for the intelligence our nations needs to collect. A statement was really saying, the Intelligence Community will rigorously examining information in intelligence to determine whether it began through contacts with infected animals, or if it was a result of an accident at a laboratory in wuhan. The newer times reported that National Security Council Officials urged the Intelligence Community to collect Additional Information to the extent possible on the origin and cause of the wuhan pandemic. Suggestedrk times that that would be inappropriate. Is it inappropriate for the president to set collection priorities on what he thinks is Urgent National questions, and for u. S. Dni to drive those priorities as best you can, given the facts that our Intelligence Officers are able to gather . Rep. Ratcliffe that would be appropriate. That is exactly what we would expect the president and his senior National Security cabinet members to do. I have heard a lot of questions on both sides today about this. You are a politician right now. You have an r after your name. Some people wonder if you can stuff separate politics from intelligence . We have suggests that this has been done successfully if you look at someone like leon panetta, a pretty partisan Guyana Congress and when he was bill clintons chief of staff, but was an outstanding director of the central Intelligence Agency. Or if you take someone like bob gates, lifelong intelligence professional, but since he left the government its pretty clear he is a republican and supported republican candidates for office since he got out of office even though he served in a democratic administration. They have a similar need for separating politics from intelligence. This is something that can be done and has been done in the past. I wanted to see if you have comments about those precedents, or how you will separate politics from intelligence . Rep. Ratcliffe i appreciate the question, senator. Earlier i talked about the fact that i am very much love representing the people here in congress. But i held an apolitical job as u. S. Attorney. I represented the United States botheither party and kept parties out of everything that i did. I have done that, and done it successfully, and been highly regarded for the way i approached that. And i enjoyed that. Its one of the reasons i am going from a state district and asking you all to consider me as a nominee. I have not just every intention, but every confidence that i will do exactly as i am telling you. That i will be entirely apolitical as a director of National Intelligence. Senators. U. S. Ngressman, the intelligence has an Important Role in warning leaders about pandemics like covid19. Because outbreaks are not just a Public Health matter, but a matter of National Security. Based on public statements and reporting alone, do you believe President Trump has accurately conveyed the severity of the threat of covid19 to the American People . Rep. Ratcliffe are you saying presently . Harris we are in the midst of the pandemic presently, correct. Rep. Ratcliffe repeat the question. I guess i am repeat the question, because i guess i misunderstanding, im sorry. Has he accurately complained conveyed the severity of covid19 to the American People . Rep. Ratcliffe i believe so. President trump received upwards of a dozen briefings on covid19 on the u. S. Intelligence agency between january and february of this year. During which time he repeatedly denied the severity of the threat. , we have 22, he said a totally under control. He insisted that the number of cases would be close to zero within a number of days. As recently as march 10, the president stated, just stay calm, it will go away. Theim sure your aware of most recent reports that we may see as many as 3000 deaths a day in america because of covid19. What we do jew, if confirmed, if you believed the president was not taking the warnings from the Intelligence Community seriously . Rep. Ratcliffe the intelligence that i would deliver as the director of National Intelligence, the statements that the president said this, none of those things will influence the intelligence that i deliver to this committee and the committee in the house and members of congress. I made the point in my opening, this is one of the highest and first priorities is getting answers to the American People who deserve answers, and you do as a member of the Oversight Committee, and i do if i were still a member of the Oversight Committee. Whatever those answers are, senator, you will get them. They wont be shaded, regardless of what anyone says. I will say this. One of the the things i have learned as a nominee is that members of the Intelligence Community will tell you things that they wouldnt tell you as an oversight as an overseer of intelligence. I want to make clear to all the members here that concerns of the men and women of the Intelligence Community, they dont want to be leveraged by either one on either side of it by anyone on either side of the aisle. Communityelligence has been pretty forthright with us when we ask questions and our role of oversight. So what exactly are you referring to . Rep. Ratcliffe im just saying the conversations ive had over the past few months, as i have been considered for this, ive had exposure to a lot of Intelligence Community members who express the sentiment that they want to do their job, they want to deliver the best intelligence and they dont want to be leveraged from either one from anyone on either side of the aisle. Directed at you at all, senator. How long have you been serving on the house Intelligence Committee . A year and five months, i guess. You were appointed to that committee in 2019, correct . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. Onin her fourth report russian interference into the 2016 election, this committee once again affirmed unanimous consensus of 17 agencies that russia interfered with the political campaign. However, you and other allies of the president have sought to cast doubt on the consensus conclusions, raising concerns for many of us about your ability to be unbiased, which is a necessity to head the dni. Will you accept the intelligence provided to you by the men and women of the Intelligence Community, no matter your personal beliefs, and do you accept the findings of the Intelligence Committee community as it relates to the russian interference in the 2016 president ial election . Rep. Ratcliffe to your first question, i will accept. To the second question about im sorry, 2016, i made the point earlier that are respect both committees. I think theres a difference of opinion between the house Intelligence Committee and this committee in terms of what one specific finding. As you point out, i was not on the house Intelligence Committee i have not david seen the underlying intelligence with respect to that one finding. Chairman. Ou, mr. You touched on a point i would like to followup that i think its critically important, the term i use is conclusion shy. Its in the nature of any executive to want to be told that intelligence supports whatever policy direction they want to go in. Struggle, instant dont care whether the president is john f. Kennedy and vietnam are Lyndon Johnson in vietnam or george w. Bush with weapons of mass destruction. This is a human nature problem. Rid meg said, who will of this meddlesome priest, and a couple of nights went and killed beckett. The president had to give in order. That is my concern, and that is where it worries me that the president apparently has been pressing the Intelligence Community to find what he wants them to find. The question should be, where did the virus come from . Not, dont you think it came from eight lab . Do you see the distinction im trying to make and why this is so crucial, it is crucial to the president him or herself, because if they taint the intelligence before it gets to them, they are going to make bad decisions, and we are protecting by president themselves guarding against this human nature problem. Every president wants to hear what they want to hear, every person that wants for that executive wants to tell the boss what they want to hear. Talk to me about this concern. I think this is a critical issue, particularly with the president who is so strongwilled and has indicated tothe past a strong desire press the Intelligence Community to tell him what he wants to hear. Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i appreciate the question and appreciate the fact that we had a chance to visit about this on the phone. You made it clear that this is one aspect of politicization of the Intelligence Community, sometimes it happens even unintentionally. Absolutely. Rep. Ratcliffe and i share the sentiment or the concern, generally. Ive tried to make it clear in our conversation about that that i agree with his sentiment and how i intend to approach this. I cant comment on things that havent happened yet. I tried to make clear my approach to how i will deal with the issue, and i think of been very clear that what anyone wants intelligence to say wont impact the intelligence they get from me, that i deliver. I would suggest, and i will close with this, that if you give information to the president that isnt accurate, that is an unvarnished, that is an act of disloyalty with the president , let alone to the constitution. Thank you, i appreciate you. Before were transition to our last block today, i want to remind members we will get together at 2 00 for a closed session in the cbc senate intel committee. I want to turn to myself for one additional question for the congressman and then i will turn to the vicechairman for one additional question before we turn to our last block. Congressman, your experience with house Intelligence Committees illustrates the importance of comprehensive oversight. Part of that is being able to dig into the finished intelligence products. For those of us that have been on the intel committees prior to what we understood processing raw intelligence was really like because we didnt have finished products. Do you commit to the committee that in the rare instances that the Committee Asks for raw intelligence to better understand the analytical conclusions that have been calm to, that have been determined, that you will provide that raw intelligence for the committee . Rep. Ratcliffe i will, as appropriate. Caveat in just of the standpoint of within my authority and with due regard for the sources and methods at that time. Lastly, technological innovation is increasingly happening overseas. I haveechairman and been incredibly active on the issue of 5g, not because of the jurisdiction of the committee, but because the Intelligence Committee both in the house and senate is unique in that we see trends before the policy committees do and we also see the tech side of it in a way that would take other committees and jurisdictions months, if not years, to get the same understanding without the degree of clarity that the Intelligence Community gets it. Rep. Ratcliffe i think it is a great question that ties into what you said, the issue of 5g and where that race stands right now, and where rising powers like china are with regard to the development of 5g Global Networks, and our ability to ensure that interconnected Global Networks are safe, really consistent with the 5g strategy and senator cornyns that we work harder to work with the private sector and take advantage of the Technology Expertise that we need their to make sure that we are first in all of these places. We talk about emerging we have the best intelligence enterprise in the for that to beue the case, we have to continue to innovate and weve got to be first and best cyber issues, on ai, and ultimately on quantum. 5g is where we are with regard to that issue now and its the pathway to being first in those areas. Again, its something that is vitally important, and thats my perspective. You, i hope you give me the discretion to get in two quick questions. I think a couple of my colleagues have raised some of the questions about the hisidents comments about notion that there is somehow a deep state in the Intelligence Community or within Law Enforcement. Going againstw his wishes. Have your made any statements about a deep state within the Intelligence Community, or statements rep. Ratcliffe not that im aware and the reason im hesitating is sometimes you are asked questions by reporters about these terms. Have you made any statements saying you believe the Intelligence Community is now acting inappropriately to target the president . Rep. Ratcliffe no. And you have any view on how the Intelligence Committee professionals, what kind of effect that would have on the folks who are hearing these kind of accusations . The effect on morale . If the commanderinchief is making comments saying, somehow impugning the intel that they are somehow some part of some secret cabal acting against him, would you agree that has some negative effects upon the communitys morale . Rep. Ratcliffe my impression, and i can only speak to the conversations ive had, without getting into specifics, i think the sentiment that ive heard not the president , its Intelligence Community writ large, it is specific ,ndividuals, and pointing to for instance, misuse of intelligence authorities by again, individuals, but my focus i want to look forward, not back. I think thats one of the reasons i want this opportunity. All of this underscores the point that the relationship is and what it should be acrosstheboard between the intelligence communities and the president and congress and its Oversight Committees. Again, it may be difficult, but i would like the opportunity to strengthen that relationship for the reasons i talked about earlier. I want to come back later and ask you a question about nato but i would simply point out that it is somewhat unique to me that not only has the president made these comments about longterm professionals, but literally every person, i think without exception, that this president has appointed for Senate Confirmation within the director of National Intelligence has been fired or removed or pushed out. , because all of those individuals, when they took on these positions, did what i thought was right, which is being the one to street to speak truth to power, and that cost them their job. If you get this job, i hope you will continue in the vein of the dan coats and sue gordon and joma choir and andrew hallman, who i think honor their commitment, even if it cost them their job. Anka, mr. Chairman. In an effort to get back on have i know many of you thought why do i exit up there. So weommodate the time dont have to wipe down every seat. This afternoon when we meet at 2 00 in the closed session, we will be wiping down the seats because we dont have as many, we dont have the same accommodations in the Senate Intelligence committee. With that, i recognize senator cornyn. Sen. Cornyn congressman ratcliffe, this morning when i said a few words of think what id like to hear from you, and forgive me if you have already talked about this extensively, but how do you view the transition from the adversarial process of either as a prosecutor or as a member of Congress Battling over Public Policy issues, or maybe conducting vigorous oversight into the role of the federal government. How do you make that transition to become this head of the Intelligence Community and be willing and able to provide unvarnished intelligence to the policymakers . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i would say i view it as a welcome transition, hopefully. Again, i love serving the people of my district and serving in congress, but again, respectfully, when i was at the department of justice, there is something about representing the United States, standing up to represent the United States where you have the ability to say, you know, politics will play no part. I wont let Party Allegiance play any factor in the work that i do, is very analogous to this position, and it is one that i very much look forward to. The mission is too important. I look at the threats we are facing around the world and what is happening and what we are living in right now with this we will only continue to be the world superpower if we have the best intelligence enterprise, and has to be one that is a political. It has to be one that gives the unvarnished truth, as senator king has said repeatedly, without shading and without consideration for what anyone wants that intelligence to say. I have been in that role, and that is what i offer in terms of reassurance, in terms of my time at the Justice Department and leading, again, federated therprise, not just to scope and size of the Intelligence Community, but the u. S. Attorneys office is significant and put in perspective, theres 435 congressional districts the country is divided up into. Theres only 93 federal districts and in my case it was 35,000 square miles, more than 3 million residents within that, so operating and coordinating and integrating in pursuit of National Security priorities like prevention of terrorism i think is good training for this, but it is something i found, again that i enjoy doing and i look forward to the transition on a larger scale at a time i think our country really need to. And again, i think im wellqualified to do that. My friend, the ranking frames senator warner this as speaking truth to power, but we framing a little differently. Do you have any problem telling the president the truth about what our Intelligence Community has produced to allow him to then make the best decisions in consultation with his team . Rep. Ratcliffe respectfully, senator, i dont have a problem telling anyone, the president , members of this committee, anyone that would be a consumer of intelligence and entitled to see it whether as an overseer or whatever respect. Intelligence has to speak to exactly what the men women who are doing the collection and analysis of it, we are all better served with the best, unvarnished intelligence, and that is truth to power, and i look forward to doing that, to anyone. If het is the danger somehow shaded or nuanced the information for the policymakers, including the president of the United States . Rep. Ratcliffe everything that we as the Intelligence Community does is designed to inform all policy makers, the president , the National Security council, our military leaders, and members of congress, to have the best information to make our National Security decisions. So to give anything other than the best information is to jeopardize our National Security. Its something that i just wont do. In closing, i would like to see our mutual friend write an oped piece supporting your nomination. Will served in the cia before he came to congress. He is steeped in these issues like very few are, and i was glad to see that vote of confidence. Thank you, mr. Chairman. You, mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity. Cornyn this morning read a really great letter from attorney general ashcroft, you should be very pleased with how he commanded you in the letter. This is attorney general thet, he said the best friend and National Security. National security is a singular most allergic to the infection and evaluation that results from an accuracy and distortion. For high quality of decisionmaking, sound intelligence must never be bias orated by personal political predisposition. You agree with that statement . Rep. Ratcliffe i do. Thaty is it so important sound intelligence, above all else, really must never be contaminated by personal bias or political predisposition . Rep. Ratcliffe simply because it would jeopardize National Security decisions. Can . . You elaborate rep. Ratcliffe well, again, what the Intelligence Community does, the best men and women in the world, the best collection, the best analysis, it has to be delivered accurately so that you as a legislator, the president as the commanderinchief, our military leaders advising him, have the best information and if it has been shaded or colored or change are impacted at all, that means you dont have the best information, which means you are not making the best decisions. I agree with that. Do you think in a situation where you have leadership that that there is risk to the jobs of people in the Intelligence Community who could report that accurately, lets say in north korea somebody delivers bad intelligence, something the great leader wouldnt want to hear, and bad things happen to a person there. Can you see how that would distort potentially the work of the Intelligence Community . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. Protect theyou Intelligence Committee at all costs including at the cost of your own job . Rep. Ratcliffe yes. I appreciate that, because i think your job is confirmed is to enable the Intelligence Community to do their job, which all of us need them to do because we are american citizens. And we love this country. Rep. Ratcliffe i agree. And they need to be able to do without fear of political reprisals. We face a situation now, you are inheriting an agency where the inspectorfired the general because he didnt like the way the ig did his job. How are going to undo that . How specifically are you going to deal with the impact of the Inspector General being fired because the president disagreed with the way he did his job . He did his job according to the law. Do you think there is Collateral Damage as a result of an action taken like that . Rep. Ratcliffe well, i dont know until im confirmed what the reaction is within the community. What would you suspect it would be . Rep. Ratcliffe to your point about the Inspector General, i dont want to relitigate issues. This is what the president of the United States is projecting to the many women of our Intelligence Agency. President said the intelligence agencies have run amok. That was in the context of nominating you. Do you think the intelligence agencies of . . The United States have run amok rep. Ratcliffe no. Do you think there is any effect on morale among the men and women of our intelligence agencies when the president of the United States says they have run amok . Rep. Ratcliffe again, i try to address this earlier. Earlier,d the answers by the way, but im asking it again because i dont think you addressed it. Do you think there is an effect on morale when the president of the states describes the members of the Intelligence Community as having run amok, and thats why he is nominating you . Rep. Ratcliffe i hope not. Do you think . . Intelligence agencies are running amok rep. Ratcliffe no. Do you think it would be your responsibility when you disagree with the president on something so important as whether our intelligence agencies have run amok that you will say so on the Public Record . Rep. Ratcliffe as i have said many times, it doesnt matter what the president says or what nancy pelosi, Mitch Mcconnell i heard you say that before. I think theres no equivalent between the chief Law Enforcement officer of the country, the commanderinchief saying what he says on and with all respect to the people around this table, what a Politician Congress might say, although i will say i think there are constructive ways of serving in congress and unconstructive ways. This idea that we are septic accepting that people are just bitter partisan members of congress, i actually dont accept that. I think it reflects poorly on us when we do, but i still would like to have an answer to the saidion, if the president tomorrow this intelligence agencies in this countries in this country have run amok, would you disagree with what the president said . Thats not the question that i asked. If the president said this afternoon that the intelligence agencies in this country are running amok, will you publicly disagree with the president . Give theliffe i will president my best intelligence, unvarnished. Im not understanding how im not answering. I think that if you couldnt do it if you couldnt bring yourself to say that the men and women of the intelligence agent intelligence communities are not running amok rep. Ratcliffe just to be clear, senator, i dont think the members of the Intelligence Community are running amok. I would know he said earlier to question that he did not believe they were running amok. Thank you, congressman. Congressman, congratulations on your nomination. Senator cornyn underscored the bed, i think its important that folks here read that as well. Thanks for the time we have had over the last few weeks in the classified session, im going to ask you some more questions to press you on whether you think the odeon i works right now, whether it is a functioning bureaucratic layer or whether its an encumbrance, whether the post 9 11 reasons it was created are being advanced, but one of the specific pieces we will talk about in the classified setting i want to unpack more fully here, you know there is no more pressing National Security threat the United States faces than the next decade of the tech race with china. All 17 of our intelligence agencies, but especially the cia and the nsa, getting that message and they are ramping it up. Fore been talking about it 10 or 15 years in this country and i think the agencies are still slow to devote sufficient money, personnel, cetera to the china threat. In this public setting, a rare thing for the Intelligence Committee, where you can speak to the American People, can you explain what the maiden 2025 China Initiative is made in china 2025 China Initiative is . Rep. Ratcliffe thanks for the question, senator. You and i have talked earlier and identify china as the greatest threat that we face, the graded greatest threat after that we face moving forward, for the exact reasons that youve talked about. Is one ofina 2025 many initiatives that the , the militaryment civil Fusion Initiative, all are all smokes spokes of the same initiatives of china to supplant us as the global power in all respects. Thats why i think you and i agree that china is a rising threat and what we have to look at the National Intelligence policy framework and our budgeting and a resource allocation to make sure that we are dedicating toward all of these different initiatives where an authoritarian regime wants to set the marketplace rules him as i do with made in china 2025 as they do. They want Chinese Industries dominating across 10 different sectors, just as they want with the military fusion, Chinese Companies gathering and collecting intelligence and sharing it with the Chinese Communist partys, whereas they want to dominate all the hubs for trade routes and telecommunications. All these things are china supplant essentially free marketplace standards and values like liberty and free speech and all the things that we have with authoritarian values that are reflected in some of the things that are happening in this covid19 pandemic. We get to coronavirus and covid, just say for that the Chinese Communist party, and emphasizing ai in particular, how to the common is to lead china, and to be clear, when u. S. Businesses pretend that theres a publicprivate sector distinction in china, they are exaggerating. Theres not much of a publicprivate sector distinction in china, but its u. S. Ndable because there are more middleclass people in china than the u. S. Theres a lot of consumers in china, it makes sense that u. S. Produces would be interested in having access to those markets, but its important to underscore that are upon it is not the chinese people, it is the communist leadership of china. But what is common is party trying to do with tech and ai in particular . Rep. Ratcliffe 5g leads to ai, ai leads to quantum, at and to about wheret the Chinese Communist party stops and starts, its hard to tell with the company like huawei, and if huawei has an obligation to share information under chinese law that the Chinese Communist party, they are creating Global Network Center Information is going over those lines, and our allies that we are sharing information with, thats jeopardizing our information, our troops, all these things are basically put at risk with respect to that. Just why you are so correct, senator, in terms of making sure that we are balance in terms of where we are investing in terms of the global , 5g,t landscape pandemic ai, i dont want to say all roads lead to china, but a lot of them do. What are the technical fields that youre most concerned about them being at or equal to us in terms of their longterm plotting against us, eric about a talks generation is being 18 months. What tech technical fields are you most concerned about their near parity with us . Cybersecurity generally, tying in makers of 5g, the general i think we agree is that national treasure, but first, weets quantum are in trouble. The, for me, was one of when we look at investments and looking forward and the challenges we face, the fact that china is investing more toward those technologies then the United States presently, we need to rebalance. The just want to underscore point you just made. Im a small government guy, but we are radically under assessing in a lot of the feels you just mentioned. Lots of at the nsa, their work is made obsolete if the quantum voice quantum race is one by china and we are investing in that space. Mr. Chairman. Welcome, congressman. In your view, have we made nuclear in reversing development . Rep. Ratcliffe i view north that as the same danger they have been. I understand, and i appreciate the diplomatic negotiations that are taking place, and i hope there might be some concessions about their Nuclear Weapons in exchange for but i cannotief, address whether or not we may progress with respect to that or not. The information ive been privy to at this point, perhaps if confirmed as dni and i have a chance to visit with secretary pompeo, because i think theres a diplomatic piece here that i cannot speak to that i dont know the answer to. Changing the subject, were they in compliance with the jcpoa when the president went there . Rep. Ratcliffe im not sure. I dont know technically if they were out of compliance at the time. Since that time, do you think their activities have become more maligned since the withdrawal by the United States this year . Rep. Ratcliffe i think iran has become increasingly desperate as a result of the maximum Pressure Campaign and thats reflected in the fact that we see more provoking activity from them. You talk aboutn iran, you have to really look across, youre talking about yemen, syria, their proxies. It is a regional issue, and they are getting more aggressive everywhere. Because i think they are. Ncreasingly more desperate the internal strife that is ofng on in that regime, one the common ways to deal with the internal conflict that is happening is to try and coalesce andnd an outside adversary, the u. S. And our interest in that region provides that. That is how they are trying to maintain control. I will say this, senator. This is one of the things when i talk about the impact of covid19 pandemic, where in places all around the world, but in the middle east, where you dont already already have social unrest and the conditions for a people, those conditions can get sharper when you have what we believe is underreporting in iran with respect to the impact of covid19. From your comments, the maximum Measure Campaign has made them more hostile, more repressive and more disruptive. Rep. Ratcliffe i think more desperate is how i would characterize it. Do, fromare trying to my perspective, is to leverage the International Community to that drawsething into something that might provide relief from the crippling sanctions they are under. Let me change is subject to something that has been discussed several times here, that is Election Security. Thatieve you would concede in 2016, the russians were involved. Rep. Ratcliffe yes. In 2018 and 2020, they are involved. Rep. Ratcliffe yes. The Senate Intelligence community concluded in 2016 they were in favor of supporting President Trump and in disfavor of secretary clinton and taking steps to promote one and deter the other. Yet in your written response to the Intelligence Committee, you did not publicly commit to notifying the American Public when you had critical information of russian involvement. I think as a fundamental aspect of democracy, people should know when they go into a voting booth who is doing what, what candidates are being supported by who. That is something that goes back to the beginning of democracy. And yet you would not commit to that public notification. You had mentioned the need to safeguard the confidentiality interest of the executive branch, which is basically to cover the president s position. Is that your position . Rep. Ratcliffe im not sure of the question, i think ive answered 150 different questions. I want to be real clear about russia and other countries, but russia in particular. I agree with the way you they interfered in 2016, 2018, 2020, they are going to continue to do it. I am for safe, secure, Credible Elections and will do everything i can at dni to ensure that they are not successful. So i dont know the question and answer in specific that you are referring to but if i need to elaborate or clarify i think you should review responses. N it sounds a lot like the president comes first and if it doesnt really bother him, then i will let it go. Rep. Ratcliffe well, that was certainly not my intent and i will reiterate that again, i think i made clear throughout so disclosing to the American People if the Intelligence Community Intelligence Committee confers with high confidence that the russians were involved in promoting a certain candidate. Rep. Ratcliffe if that is the conclusion of the Intelligence Community if im confirmed as dni, is that your question . Yes, sir. Rep. Ratcliffe yes. Thank you. Close theings to a public session. Commerce men, let me say to you, this point is not to solicit an answer, it is to create a thought process as we venture pandemic. Road of the i for one believe the private sector will look very different when we come out on the other end, as companies assess productivity from work at home, the need for highrise Office Buildings crammed full of people , the way we interact, i think will change, and the private sector is very capable of making those assessments and accomplishing that type of change. I would suggest to you that when your confirmed, now is a great opportunity to begin to think about not just reorganization of the dni shop, but reorganization of the Intelligence Community reflecting what senators have said about technology. Funding just about technology to be competitive. Its creating a model that actually generates the type of rake throughs that we know we , ai, these members and i have talked, if we were faced with the 5g issue starting late we would be with our partners throwing everything onto the research bench, the best and brightest working together, and we would create something far superior to what huawei had, and thats how we would win the 5g war. Its not too late, but weve got to begin to think like that the ic,ut the whole of just because weve done it one way for 50 years doesnt mean that the future necessarily means we have to do it that way. And ichink weve got that has changed greatly, but its leadership that enables change to happen expeditiously, so hope you will consider that. Rep. Ratcliffe i will. I want to thank you for your time this morning. I want to thank the members for working under this temporary construct, to continue to conduct the committees important work. I look to advancing your nomination rapidly entered voting in favor of your confirmation in the full senate, again, if any member wishes to submit questions for the record after todays hearing, please do so quickly because it is my intention to bring congressman ratcliffe up for a vote inside the committee soon. At this point we will recess and reconvene this afternoon close roomon in the senate intel in the capital. 217. This hearing is adjourned. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] yez, oyez. O the court is now sitting. For the first time in history, here the u. S. Supreme court live, this month. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the justices are hearing oral arguments in cases before the court by teleconference. Cspan will provide live coverage from each of these sessions. Wednesday at 10 00 eastern, the justices here to cases, Little Sisters of the poor versus pennsylvania, and trump versus pennsylvania, a consolidated oral argument on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care acts Birth Control mandate exemption, which was expanded by the trump bar versusion, and American Association of Political Consultants inc. , a First Amendment case and automated calls to cell phones in order to collect debt on behalf of the United States. Be a part of history and listen to the Supreme Court oral arguments as they are heard by the justices, live, wednesday at 10 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan, on or listencspan. Org, on the free cspan radio app. Immediately following the live Supreme Court session, joined Jeffrey Rosen of the National Constitution center, leading a live discussion with scholars. The president s, from public affairs, available now in paperback and ebook. Resents biographies of every president , organized by their rankings, by noted historians. From best to worst. Leadership styles. Visit our website, cspan. Org the president s, to learn more about each president and historian feature. Order your copy today, wherever books and ebooks are sold. Cspan has unfiltered coverage of the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic with white house briefings, updates from governors and congress, and our daily callin program, washington journal, hearing your thoughts about the coronavirus crisis. If you missed any of our live coverage, watch any time on demand at cspan. Org coronavirus. The report is