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

I call this hearing to order. This hearing will be a little bit different. It is perhaps the first congressional hearing during the extenuating circumstances of the pandemic. We have a sparse crowd reflecting the committees inherence to the rules put forth by the attending physician. Staff forthank 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 Committee community. Afternoon, we move to a closed session. Aeir absence now is not reflection on the importance they place on this matter. We have asked members to watch as much as they can of the hearings from their offices, only coming into the hearing room to ask questions. I would also like to think 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. Media in the room today are representatives for the Broader Media community, and i know they will ensure qwik and andrnished fast unvarnished dissemination of what is discussed in this hearing. I am sure this will feature prominently in media coverage. I know the media will be focused on the important intelligence oversight and Community Management issues that will be discussed. Finally, i want to thank the nominee, who has patiently waited for this hearing. I know he is ready to get work leading the Intelligence Community, which has continued to do its vital work under increasingly difficult conditions. These intelligence professionals are our eyes, our ears. Thatfollow developments so they see the headlines and developments most of us will toer see from terrorists foreign Intelligence Officers looking to steal research. Countries around the world have locked down, but those threats have not stopped. Our Intelligence Community, as always, remains on watch, joining their uniformed brothers and sisters joining a grateful it perhaps distracted nation. They deserve and the country needs the certainty of a Permanent Senate confirmed director of National Intelligence. After that extended introduction, i would like to formally welcome our witness, congressman John Ratcliffe, trumps nominee to be the next director of national of intelligence director of National Intelligence. I would also like to welcome your wife and daughters. I know they would also like to be here. But i send them my appreciation via cspan. I think them for their willingness to go on this journey with you and for their support. Today, we will consider congressman ratcliffes qualifications. The congressman has already provided written responses to more than 125 questions presented by committee members. Todays proceedings allow for further in person discussion. Congressman ratcliff was elected in november of 2014 to the house of representatives from the Fourth District of texas. He serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on intelligence, the house judiciary committee, and house ethics committee. Prior to his service in congress, mr. Ratcliff was a partner any law firm. During his tenure at the department of justice, he served antiterrorism for texasstern district of during that time, mr. Ratcliff also served as mayor for the city of heath, texas. He received his undergraduate degree from the university of notre dame. He received his law degree from Southern Methodist university. You have been asked to leave the Intelligence Community at a time of profound threat and challenge. Given your experience, we expect you will lead the Intelligence Committee with integrity, serve as a forceful advocate for the professionals in the Intelligence Community, and make sure it operates ethically. Im sure this will commence in you this will continue to operate ethically. We will ask a difficult and probing questions of you and your staff. We expect honest, complete, and timely responses. I want to thank you for being here for your years of service to our country and i look forward to your testimony. Before i turn to the vice chairman, i would like take a moment i would like to take a moment to honor the passing of coburn. Nd mr. He cared deeply for the men and women of the Intelligence Community. He understood the importance of the mission of this committee. His counsel and friendship will sorely be missed. I utilized it no less than a month and a half ago. Some might wonder why my face looks a little hairy. This is the only way i could think of doing a tribute to tom coburn. To do what tom did when things were confusing and we lacked understanding as to what direction to go, tom would not shave for six months until things were squared away. I am not sure i will wait until things are squared away, but i will wait until toms memorial service. I recognize the vice chairman for any opening remarks he might have. Thank you, mr. Chairman. It is good to see you and my other colleagues. Let me start where you left off. Yearsebody who has spent with tom coburn on a weekly basis with the illfated gang of tomsfort, i got to know intelligence, integrity, occasionallyre pain in the what ever, but i share with you that he will be missed. Any time i tried to grow bea rd, i am probably doing better tribute by just saying things about him. I note these i know these are postlly things where, counting, your spouse to see the impression in the whites of your eyes. I am not sure i am going to be able to make that kind of judgment from here with my slightly aging eyes. I get the general sense of you. I can see a smile. If it turns to a grimace at times, we will know. It is great to have you here. It. Preciate unfortunately, as the chairman note that i must these are unprecedented times. Challenge to a our lives and security that we have not had for over half a century. 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 Committee community. The ice collects intelligence on imminent threats, analyzes them passionately, and presents its best estimates without fear or favor to our nations leaders. This is essential so that policymakers can craft a timely and Effective Response to protect america. Nowhere is the need for andetence, a political aPolitical Leadership clear th an and the director of National Intelligence in the director of National Intelligence. Unfortunately, everything we have seen from the president since he came to office is an unrelenting and undeserved attack on the professional men and women. Of our intelligence agencies this is not because of our our Intelligence Committee is undeserving of these attacks. Nor are they part of some deep state conspiracy to undermine our political leaders. President eve the attacks our intelligence agencies for one supple reason embellishedand on analysis are not welcome in this white house. What we have seen over the last year has been especially dangerous. Anyonetematic firing of at the odm height i who has the temerity to speak truth to power sue gordon, acting acting director of counterterrorism, to michael atkinson. And forcedgs departures from the leadership of the Intelligence Community have left the odni without a single senateconfirmed leader at the helm. Acting a an acting dni been appointed to oversee americas intelligence enterprise. S individual prompted instituted a hiring freeze whose purpose has not been committed communicated to the intelligence Oversight Committees. Fired seniorly leaders with decades of experience. We have begun to hear reports that intelligence professionals have been inappropriately pressured to limit the information they share with congress. Now, mr. Ratcliffe, the president has nominated you to this critical position of National Security and intelligence leadership. I have to say, that while i am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt during this hearing, i do not 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 or record. Some particularly damaging remarks about whistleblowers, which has long been a bipartisan cause on this committee. I will speak plainly. I still have some of the same doubts now as i had back in august. That yoursuggested main qualification for confirmation to this post is that you are not ambassador grenell. Frankly, that is not enough. Stamp we put the senates of approval and confirm the nominee to this position, senators must demand that the specifiedthe senate after creating the office after 9 11. We must expect in demand professionalism and nonpartisan commitment to the truth and a rocksolid dedication to defending those who defend us every day, the professional men and women of our nations Intelligence Community. I hope we can get a sense of your ability to adhere to that requirement. I look forward to the questioning into this opportunity. And to this opportunity. Thank you. John ashcroft was scheduled to be here to introduce representative ratcliffe. Given the circumstances, he could not attend. He sent us his remark and senator corman has agreed to represent attorney general ashcroft today. The four floor is yours. Thank you, mr. Chairman. It is always good to be with my colleagues on the Senate Select committee on intelligence. It is my honor to introduce John Ratcliffe, the nominee for the director of National Intelligence. As the chairman said, we have a letter from the former attorney general. It is rather lengthy. I will not read all of it, but i excerpts. To some i asked consents that it be made part of the record following my remarks. The reason why think it is so important for the committee and the senate to hear from former attorney general ashcroft is because of his intimate knowledge of the professional qualifications of the nominee as well as the personal qualifications. Let me start by reading an excerpt from attorney general ashcrofts letter. He said integrity is the indispensable imperative for intelligence, the best friend of National Security. National security is the singular portfolio most allergic to the infection and devaluation that results from inaccuracy and distortion. For high quality decisionmaking, sound intelligence must never be contaminated by personal bias or political predisposition. General ashcraft goes on to say i have known and worked with john for more than a decade and i know of no person, no person, with a higher commitment to integrity. I have seen him speak the unvarnished truth to those he works with and works for, whether senior government officials or corporate ceos. Point,s the important and he did in my conversation with him yesterday at his farm in missouri, that over the last 15 years congressman ratcliffe has served and crucial roles as both the developer and consumer of intelligence, a role that i think speaks to his background and qualifications for this job. Tosaid it is committed forging and Intelligence Community that delivers the most insightful intelligence possible. Decisionmakers with fulsome, transparent information to keep our citizens safe. Comingirman, i know that to this nomination as a member of congress, that congressman ratliff, as any member of congress might, people may wonder does he really understand the difference between being in adversarial atmosphere of and thatongress, especially speaks to our oversight responsibilities. As someone who has had the privilege of serving in all three branches of government, now is a legislator, i can tell has the John Ratcliffe integrity and intelligence to be the to understand difference between being a legislator and the director of National Intelligence. Different roles to be played while discharging our government responsibilities. That is something you might want to ask you more about. I have known john personally for 10 years. I am proud to support his nomination. To give you my strongest personal recommendation. The chairman has mentioned his experience on the house intelligence and judiciary committees as well as the ethics committee. As well i believe that as a former attorney and a current member of the house Intelligence Committee, he understands the vast threats our country is facing and the challenges which 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. I believe John Ratcliffe is the person to do that job. Do continueto the legacy of outstanding leadership we have come to expect from the dni and i expect him to serve as a steadfast advocate of the Intelligence Community. Memberirman, ranking warner, i appreciate your careful consideration of my friend and fellow texan John Ratcliffe. Thank you. Senator cornyn, thank you. Congressman ratcliffe, 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 so help you god . I do. Please be seated. Before we move to your statement, i will ask five standard questions the committee poses to each nominee. They just require a simple yes or no answer. Do you agree to appear before the committee here when invited . Yes. Do you agree to send officials from your office before the committee . Yes. Do you agree to provide documents or materials requested by the committee to carry out its oversight responsibilities . Yes. You will assure that provide those materials when requested . Yes. Theo you agree to brief committee to the fullest extent possible, rather than only the chair and vice chair . Yes. Thank you. It is my intention to move to a Committee Vote on this as soon as possible. Any member who wishes to submit questions for the record after todays hearing, please do so quickly. We will now proceed to your opening statement, after which i will recognize members by seniority for five minutes. As discussed earlier, members will have the opportunity to ask followup questions in the blocks designated. Let me say for members, we have 30 minute blocks. There is time allotted in that block for additional questions. There is not time and that block for everybody to have five minutes of additional questions. End of 30 minutes, regardless of where we are in that block with those senators, i will cut it off. We have a dead stop at 12 00. I think every member for their accommodations. With that, congressman ratcliffe, the floridas years. The floor is yours. Rep. Ratcliffe i am honored to appear today. I would like to acknowledge the efforts of the committee staff, my own staff, and officers at the director of National Intelligence who helped us get here today. I appreciate their dedication in making today possible. I would also like to share a few thoughts on the times we face today. Cutcovid19 pandemic has short the lives of over 60,000 americans. It has sickened over one million americans and has impacted everyone of us. My deepest sympathies are with those we lost. The efforts of those on the front lines, including the intelligence professionals reporting for duty and carrying out their mission. These are trying times and your courage, honor, and sacrifice will not be forgotten. I would like to begin by thanking trump for his Incredible Opportunity for me to serve our nation and for his confidence in me. I would like to thank John Ashcroft for his gracious and humbling statement. I am forever grateful for your faith in me. I also want 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 constituents of texass fourth Congressional District. I cannot be with you today without the encouragement and support of my family. I would like to thank my wife, michelle, our wonderful ghters, my mom kathy, mi5 and my five brothers and sisters. Watching from above, i am sure, is my late dad robert ratcliffe. My career is a direct reflection of my familys selflessness, sacrifice, their enduring love of country and for me. I do not have doors to attic lee express my gratitude. Today has been a mixture of Public Service and private sector experience. I graduated college at 20, law school at 23, and tried my first case at 24. A decade later, i was managing partner of my own law firm and was successful, but something was missing. As the son of two schoolteachers, i was taught from an early age the virtues of Public Service and self sacrifice. Reflecting back, i realized it was those values that pushed me to a higher calling, one of service to the American People. 9 11, whent came on the first plane struck i was sitting on the 35th floor of a highrise Office Building in dallas that looked like a whole e dish looks like a whole in dallas that looked a whole lot like the ones in new york. Ofinspired me to take stock all the gifts i have been given and what i might contribute to the defense of this great nation. Within a few years, i changed careers altogether. I left that civil law practice behind to become a federal prosecutor in the United States department of justice. During my four years in the Eastern District of texas, i served as chief of antiterrorism and National Security, assistant u. S. Attorney, and finally u. S. Attorney. My responsibilities involved leading, managing, managing, and prosecuting domestic security cases, including transnational crime and illegal immigration. Districts joint Terrorism Task force activities and worked with the fbi on terrorism prevention, the overriding priority for the department of justice. I began to appreciate the value of coordinated interagency efforts and the importance of timely, accurate intelligence. For the past six years, i have been fortunate to serve with you and congress. I continue to prioritize National Security issues. Serving the citizens of the fourth Congressional District of texas has been the honor of a lifetime, i believe my passion for service, combined with my experience, abilities, and judgment makes me the right person to now successfully lead the men and women of the Intelligence Committee. Community. If confirmed, my top priority will be to present the president s, policymakers, and this committee with timely intelligence to better inform decisions about the future and safety of our nation. Principalsidents intelligence advisor, i would make sure all information is presented without bias, prejudice, or political influence. I see the director of National Intelligence is more than just a leader. Be ani must at all times aero catcher, a problem solver, and obstacle mover, addressing issues 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 advocate for the interests of the ic. As director of the dni, you have the responsibility to speak truth to power. Wantsless of what anyone our intelligence to reflect, the intelligence i will provide, if confirmed, will not be impacted or altered as a result of outside influence. My fidelity and loyalty will always be with the constitution and the rule of law. My actions at dni will reflect that commitment. Many of you have asked me what do i see is the greatest threat facing our election facing our nation . It is more diffuse than ever before. The immediate focus of the Intelligence Community must be directed to the geopolitical and Economic Impact of the coronavirus pandemic as well as its origins. The American People deserve answers. If confirmed, i pledge that the will remainthe ic focused on providing them. We face challenges on other fronts as well. Russia andde china, its continued efforts to undermine our democracy by interfering in free elections, iran with its continued pursuit of nuclear capabilities, ballistic missiles, and sponsorship of terrorist groups. North korea and its continued possession of Nuclear Weapons. Likeransnational issues cybersecurity, safeguarding supply chains, and venting terrorists. This list is by no means exhaustive. Range ofs the full threats and threat actors, the Intelligence Community must work continuously to win the trust of the president , congress, and the American People. The dni is about leadership. I hope to be a stabilizing force to build trust and break down barriers to information sharing in order to sharpen the analytic work of the Intelligence Community. Odni remains the office best positioned to lead the integration of the Intelligence Community. We can never underestimate the coordination or assume the agencies would do so on their own without strong leadership from above. If confirmed, i will work with Intelligence Community leaders to assess what is working well and where we need to make adjustments to make the community more effective, efficient, and resilient. In closing, to remain the worlds premier intelligence enterprise, the Intelligence Community must continue to recruit and retain the best, brightest, workforce our intelligence can unity has to offer. If ever, received ofll recognition to their sacrifice. As dni, there will be no greater champion of their hard work and dedication to this country than me. I am on her by the opportunity to be here with you today. I thank you for your consideration of my nomination during these difficult times. I look forward to answering your questions. Thank you for those remarks. I will go into the first block of time. Members will have up to five minutes. 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, but also to the Inspector General. To powero speak truth or critical. You share your expectations of what the office of that office is dni . As dni . I have beenfe enacting official for some time and acting official. I understand why confirmation is important. I also appreciate the comments you have made about speaking truth to power. That ifuch intend to do confirmed. With regard to the Inspector General position, i have a strong record of supporting and defending and working with Inspector Generals. For example, i have publicly defended Inspector General michael for would and Inspector General, even when my colleagues have criticized his work. I understand the importance because there will always be misconduct, waste, fraud, and abuse when you have government. I am very committed, if confirmed, to working with to make sureeral that the Intelligence Community has that type of process in place to ensure that the Intelligence Community is always acting in the best interests of the American People. Over the course of the last three years, this committee has issued for reports about russias meddling in our elections, covering its intrusions into state election systems, their use of social media to influence the election, 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 . Russiaiews are interfered with active measures in 2016, and 2018, and will attempt to do something to do so in 2008 team. Goal of sowing discord and have been successful. On the good based work of this committee, we know that they may have been successful in that regard, but they have not been successful in changing votes or the outcome of any election. The Intelligence Community plays a vital role in ensuring they have safe, secure, and Credible Elections. Commit to bringing information about threats to the information to the election infrastructure to congress . I will. What you commit to testify at this committees annual worldwide threats hearing . I will. We have issue for reports. We have issued four reports. Number five is finished. Gold you expeditiously through the classification process . Yes. Took some of my questions. My eyesight is good. Radcliffe mr. Ratcliffe, i want to followup on a couple of the chairmans questions first. As we discussed, we are on volume five. Our first four volumes have all been unanimous, maybe with the exception of one dissenting vote. If we get this document to the odni, we need your commitment that not only we do expeditiously, but as much as possible to get that volume five reviewed, redacted, and released, ideally before the august recess. I know you have not seen the report yet. All i would ask is, aspiration only, that you commit to that aspirationalyl that youu commit to that goal. Clarify, recognizing that you have not seen the document, that you would try to get this cleared prior to august. I will commit that i will work with you to get that declassified as expeditiously as possible. Get itn, our goal is to out before august. Following up on the chairmans comments, and we talked about this in person, but for the committee and for the record, you have indicated that you believe that russia interfered. What this committees judgment was throughout all volumes was that not only did russia interfere but during their interference in 2016 had a selected candidate they were four and a selected candidate they were against they were four and a selected candidate they were against. 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 . Can you comment on our volume four . Ratcliffe i appreciate the approach this committee took. Theow volume four confirms Intelligence Committee community assessment. I have no reason to dispute the committee that i serve on, the house Intelligence Committees finding, which is a different perspective with regard to that one issue you mentioned. I was not on the committee at that time. Irespect both committees, but have not seen the underlying intelligence to tell me why there is a difference of opinion between the two committees. Appreciatery much volume four and the work this committee put in. I would reiterate that the most important take away from the findings of both committees is that as russia continues to so beenrd, they have not successful in changing votes or the outcome of elections. We need to remain committed that that does not happen in the future. Respectfully, to make 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 also alter how we counter those efforts. I really hope you will spend the time and look at the underlying intelligence. A you find that you reach conclusion that is different than the unanimous conclusion of the Intelligence Community or sicunanimous conclusion of here, i would like an explanation of how you found our conclusions are inaccurate. Will. Another thing i would like to discuss. An area of the community that seems under a soul with the acting under assault with the is the care unit. There are different parts. One of the most important is the group that is that was stood up by director coats. It includes intelligence professionals like shelby pearson. They havent briefed us on a regular basis. I would like your commitment that, since we are literally less than six months away from this years president ial elections, that you 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. Senator, i have no intention of making changes in that regard. 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 . I want to make sure that i am dni, that, if confirmed as and i look at the Global Threat Landscape i mentioned the concern, but the other is safe, secure, and Credible Elections. I will make it my highest priority to make sure we have those elections in 2020. It is important that that group that has briefed this committee on a regular basis continues to have bit billy continues to have that ability. Echoing with the chairman has said our clocks . They are not running. Did i have my five minutes . Then. T question areld you be confirmed, we already past the due date on when we would have the traditional worldwide threat hearing. You have committed to the chairman that you would hold that. My hope would be that that we can dish happen within 60 days of you being concerned. I will make a commitment to i look forward to appearing as dni in a worldwide threat hearing. I do not want to make a commitment in terms of time. I do not know what i am promising exactly. I will commit that, if confirmed, i agree that it is important and will work to make that happen as if viciously as possible as expeditiously as possible. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Congressman 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. Mr. Chairman, congressmen, welcome. I would like to ask a couple questions about whistleblowers, if i might. This committee has adhered to a 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. You also attacked staff for providing guidance to potential whistleblowers on 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 issues of what happened during 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 will leave 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. On 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. Do you share the belief of 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. And very much appreciated his approach and work and some of the concerns i raised were presented in his findings in his report. With respect to 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. The flipside to that is, that the legal opinion within the odni 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 acting Inspector General tom in manheim s 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 . And to promptly produce the full membership and staff of the congressional Intelligence Committees, 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, if 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 . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, as you know, the challenge with north korea is visibility. I think 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 caveating that we may have we may have more information. I would 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 standards we may need to employ. Thank you. Congratulations on your nomination. Let me 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. You have an 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 in politics is pretty intense. Why is this a job that you are 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 ought to consider a way to salute smartly and say yes. Beyond that, you have to want this job. For the same reason in my opening, i talked about leaving a successful law practice to make a fraction of that to be a federal prosecutor, the mission is too important. What the Intelligence Community means, 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 congress, but the best job i had, was to be a u. S. Attorney, and it was an 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. That is 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 the committee in the house and on judiciary and as a u. S. Attorney. What is it in what you have done over the last during your career that you believe prepares you best for the role of overseeing these pillars of our intelligence 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. As far as experience, i started handling National Security issues in 2005. And that included intelligence authorities. My first exposure with fisa was in 2005. In trying to respond to this committee, we found that in at least one instance, the authorities that i used the handling National Security matters that i work on remain classified. From an experience standpoint, as far back as 2005, ive been using those authorities. 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. So 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. That is what the director of National Intelligence does, integrates and coordinates. Making the community better, making our policymakers better. National informed on security decisions. My time in congress, as well. Legislating, creating National Security laws. I think i got a broad, deep, and more than qualified level of experience when we talk about National Security issues. I also think i got good judgment when there are problems with the use of intelligence authorities and have spoken truth to power when i see it misused. I enthusiastically support your nomination and i look forward to voting for you. If any member currently has one additional question, i would be happy to entertain. If not, senator feinstein . If you have a quick one. Sen. Feinstein if i could ask one question, ive been very concerned by the growth of contractors over the last 20 plus years in the agencies. When i was 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. I know there is always a look in 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 if 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. As one of the 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 envisioned. 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. Would you communicate the 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 conclusions 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 worldwide threat hearing and you worldwide threats hearing, and you are asked to provide an unclassified ic assessment that you know that the president vehemently disagrees with, what would you do . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, whether 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. What would you do if the 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 . Would you still allow the pdb 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 reiterated multiple times that i wont shade intelligence for anyone. Whether we are talking about the president , members of congress, any policymakers. As far as published on the president s 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. But to that larger question, 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 asked this question to you 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 dont mean to be repetitive, but 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. Donald trump said last year, the constitution says, and i quote here, i can do whatever i want as president. The attorney general has said, the president does not have to follow the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act fisa 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. Do you believe the president can 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 . Rep. Ratcliffe senator, i uh you answered, no. So im asking you rep. Ratcliffe my answer is consistent whatever the law is is what i will do if 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 americans outside the law, is an 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 surveil 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. Now, i also want to get into your views on whistleblowers. Now, it is open season on whistleblowers right now and in washington, d. C. And you gave a pleasantsounding 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 . Rep. Ratcliffe any 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. I happen to think it is the equivalent of putting our ballot s on the streets of moscow. So, could you tell me why you 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. But it seems to me, that that is a policy issue, that if confirmed as dni, i would not be in the role of making policy. Wed not matter expect you to be a leader on Election Security and if you support the kind of Snake Oil Salesmen weve 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. Determine thank you. , thank you, senator. Welcome, congressman. In your statement for the record, you wrote that the president and i have a good rapport. So, if confirmed as dni, 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. The reason i said a good rapport 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 apolitical and i have held positions before. As u. S. Attorney, that is an apoltical 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 . Rep. Ratcliffe 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 . Rep. Ratcliffe i dont know. I saw the comment, senator. Ive made clear that, again, 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. And he understands that im looking forward to this position because it is apoltical in the and the intelligence i will deliver is unvarnished. Do you think that the Intelligence Community or even a Single Agency has run amok . Rep. Ratcliffe i have never said that. President trump has repeatedly, and without any basis, accused the hardworking men and women of the ic of working to undermine his administration. Do you believe that there is an deep state in the ic. Rep. Ratcliffe i dont know what that means. I dont know what that is. So, would you agree that it would be inappropriate, and in some contexts, illegal, to remove or reassign, to screen or otherwise discriminate against ic 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, but then formally resubmitted your nomination. That turn of events raises some unique questions. During your conversations with the president , regarding this position, 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 that if i am in a position, my loyalty is always going to be to the constitution and rule of law. So you made that proactively clear . You were not asked . 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. So, i just wanted the record to be clear with respect to that. Senator collins, you have one additional question you would like to ask. Additionalwyatt, one question. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Congressman, the Congress Passed a law requiring an unclassified report on who was responsible for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. This is a law today, not a bill, it is a law. Not a bill, it is a law. The dni has outright confused refused to comply with the law, 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 provisions in the ndaa. If confirmed as dni, i will ensure that the law is complied with. I realize that the information, and the report, if we are talking about the same thing, is a request for unclassified information. So, if confirmed, i want to look myself at the information, to make sure that that information has been classified properly. But that is not the question. This is a law, congressman. This is a law. Consistently, in every one of the areas i have asked you about, with respect to spying 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. So i will look forward to your adding to the record on it. But i will tell you, you have certainly been briefed with respect to 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. Sen. Heinrich, do you have an additional question . Just one. As you know congress has not authorized organizational changes at odni. We have not appropriated funds, but the acting director has been reorganizing odni. If confirmed, would you 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 was hoping to make the point that i am certainly not trying to be evasive, but the position i am being considered for is the president s intelligence advisor not his legal adviser. There is counsel i would go to. Dni. Nfirmed as senator, i appreciate the question about organizational changes. As you know, im not so presumptuous as to know that i am going to be confirmed. So i have not considered or talked about any sort of organizational changes. I want to make clear that i expect to have unfettered discretion to make all personnel decisions if confirmed as dni. And i will make them in the best interest of the ic, to make the ic better. 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 elected 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. Anybody who has asked questions 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 capitol of senate security. We will again be operating with blocks of time. And 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 blount. Sen. Blount it is good to have you here. This job has gone vacant for too long. Its a critically important job. I have read with great interest 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 know you worked with him as a u. S. Attorney and also in a law firm that was formed after you both left the Justice Department. And his view of you, which he shared with me personally and in this letter, is significant. We had a chance to visit about your work on the house Intelligence Committee. I appreciated your last comment about the importance of being fully open, at an 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 smaller coordinating of opportunity, 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 information, or, 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 intel member, or if that size is too big, too small or just right . Rep. Ratcliffe thank you for the remarks and association wtih former attorney general John Ashcroft, who is a great american. I, like you, come into this position, if confirmed, with some preconceived impressions based on discussions i have had on the Oversight Committee. As senator collins leaves the room, i want to make sure one of the goals of the dni, if confirmed, is to 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. Like you, i come in with the perspective that you have conversations that maybe indicate there is too much bureaucracy, and there is too much redundancy. Some redundancy is good, but if there are 17 agencies, they dont need to do the same thing 17 times or purchasing the same things. So it will be one of my immediate priorities to assess how the odni is functioning. The goal of the odni is to make the ic better, so that the ic can make you better, the president better, and policymakers better. I do think that 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 ask is, this agency has grown, have we let the other agencies not have the attention, or the staff they needed . As the whole u. S. Intelligence has grown, so much has grown to the point where the agency that coordinated information to be sure nobody would be left out. During the 19 years the last 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. But it is also 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 have, to continue to keep an eye on the threats that we have so focused on for almost two decades now. But also to rebalance into the Great Power Competition we see that is a 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. One of the priorities, highest priorities if confirmed as dni, is to make sure my 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 belt and road. The made in china 2025. All of the militarycivil fusion initiative, where they literally want, by law, Chinese Companies to collect intelligence. These are all the same spokes of the same initiative. That is for china to supplant us as the worlds superpower and be able to set standards around the world. We clearly do not 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. Sen. Blunt russia is another great threat. Do you want to talk about that . Rep. Ratcliffe you bet. They are different just because, russia, we are concerned with russia in terms of anytime you have a Large Nuclear stockpile. They are certainly dedicated to 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 in changing votes or the outcome. Between the two, to be clear, i view china as the rising power. Russia has an 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 bad actor. So, as dni, if confirmed, i will make sure we balance everything appropriately in regards to both of those threats. Sen. Blunt thank you. 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. You did not answer them thusly in the questionnaire but i think they can be easily answered with yes or no. The first one is question 35, would you ever ask or support or encourage an intelligence professional to adjust his or her perspective to avoid criticism from the white house are political appointees . Rep. Ratcliffe no. Would you change or remove content in an intelligence assessment 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 hire, fire, or promote an individual . Rep. Ratcliffe no. Question 39 b. Do you commit to exclusively consider professional qualifications and ic personnel decisions, without consideration of partisan or 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 immediately 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. If confirmed, would you 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 considered, 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 confidence for that matter, that the coronavirus 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 pandemic, i want to say that the last classified briefing i had was it has been a while since i have had a classified briefing on the coronavirus pandemic. Thats the answer i gave this morning myself. You, like me, have not seen any intelligence that indicates it . Productligence 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. And you will bring us i think there is a question to the worldwide threat . You gave the right answer. If i were you i would not qualify. Rep. Ratcliffe then i will leave it alone. The point was, i want to make sure we were talking about the worldwide threat here . Generally, if this Committee Requests your attendance to testify, the white house says do not go, will you honor the oath you took this morning. I will. The president stated there is that enhanced interrogation such as waterboarding 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. Do you believe that waterboarding is a violation of the antitorture law . My understanding that the law makes clear in several places that torture is illegal, and , that would be the army field manual. This has nothing to do with so your personal opinion . , you are simply saying that i will follow the law, but if the law was changed to allow waterboarding or other forms of 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 mean i dont want to get into , policy decisions about which the dni should not be involved with. Im a policymaker now but youre considering me for role in which i would not be making policy or i would follow the law as legislators create laws or as the Supreme Court interprets those laws. One final question. Forou are running reelection and your Campaign Manager shared polling data which includes cross tabulation 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. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Congressman ratcliff, congratulations on your nomination. Let me followup on senator kings question. 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 originated in a Seafood Market in wuhan . Rep. Ratcliffe no. I presume you are aware that the scientific journal, the lancet, 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 had no contact with the market and included 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 any kind, to include the horseshoe bat was even sold in , the market . Rep. Ratcliffe that is my understanding. To be clear the point i was , trying to make is, its been a wild, and through no ones fault since i had an updated , classified briefing of the coronavirus pandemic. I understand and i am asking the questions not just to speak about the virus, but as a matter of intelligence analysis. Everything we just discussed is clandestine 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. How critical is the role of that 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. It is vitally important. 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 could not agree more. I think there is always a bias towards thinking it. If the secret is not in class if the secret is not stolen through clandestine means, that it is not valuable information, went all of these pieces of information, 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. Not direct evidence and not conclusive proof. Do you want to respond . Rep. Ratcliffe to give you an example of how we might be forwardlooking on this issue, open Source Intelligence if 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. So, those are the types of, when i was referring to how the Intelligence Committee can leverage opensource information, that is what i was referring to. Moving on, one of the director of National Intelligence chief responsibilities, which is setting the priorities for the kinds of intelligence our nation needs to collect. Last week, a statement was really saying, the Intelligence Community will rigorously examine emerging information in intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contacts with infected animals, or if it was a result of an accident at a laboratory in wuhan. The New York Times subsequently 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. Other Media Outlets digested 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. I think that would be completely appropriate and that is exactly what we expect that cabinet or 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 have raised the question of whether you can separate politics from intelligence . ,e have discussed in the past that this has been done successfully at times. If you look at someone like leon panetta, a pretty partisan guy when he was in the 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. Even though those were not the dni job, but the director of Central Intelligence job 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 and neither party, and kept both 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. It is one of the reasons i am going from a safe 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. Thank you very much. Senators. Congressman, thehe u. S. Harris u. S. Intelligence committee has Important Role in warning the publichealthut impact like covid19. Based on public statements and reporting alone, do you believe that President Trump has accurately convey the severity of the threat of covid19 to the American People . Are you saying presently . We are in the midst of the pandemic is ugly, yes. You repeatffe can the question question mark has he accurately reflected the status of the pandemic . Sen. Harris has he accurately convey the severity of the pandemic . As he accurately conveyed the severity of covid19 to the American Public . Rep. Ratcliffe i believe so. Sen. Harris you do . Upwardst trump received of a dozen briefings on covid19 between january and february of this year. During which time he repeatedly denied the severity of the threat. Onthreat. , 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. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] coronavirus tonight on a look at q a, american president s through the lens of books they have written. Jack kennedy wanted that Pulitzer Prize. He told another historian, i would rather win a Pulitzer Prize and be president. Because he had this strong desire for literary fame, even though he did not really want to do literary work, he got himself the prize. In new york city and washington, d. C. , people were talking, did kennedy really write that book . I wonder who really wrote that book question mark i wonder how much money theyre getting out of those royalty checks . The pulitzer made it a different question. I looked at the letters that kennedy was receiving in 1957 and librarians were sending him letters, saying, did you really write this book . And responding to the interview you would not have accepted the prize he did not write the book, would you . Thats not the right thing to do. Watch on cspans q a a number of cases coming before the Supreme Court next week to read on monday, whether states can prosecute native americans for crimes committed on tribal land and then whether parochial schools are exempt from discrimination laws. On tuesday, two cases that deal with President Trumps financial records and whether the president positives personal financial records president s personal president s personal financial records can be subpoenaed. Live coverage of next weeks Supreme Court oral s on cspan. Org and listen with the free cspan radio app. Earlier today at the white house, treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin sent me minutes stop for a p