We are going to have more of a dialogue and if you have questions we will engage up for the last 30 minutes. The first is a think many of you saw jon on 60 minutes this past sunday. Is there anything on the cutting floor of 60 minutes youd like to apprise . I think i went pretty well. 60 minutes folks it was her second case on 60 minutes in the last year both of them having to do with espionage. One chinese and one russian but a good indication both of the kind of the tv we are seeing these days but also the level of interest in the media which is very different from the last time i is on the National Security division when this is really a counterterrorism job and it was 95 counterterrorism post9 11 al qaeda responsibility. This is a big shift over the last 10 or 12 years. One of the questions we all have the nsc has been quite active in the china prosecution. Youve done your china initiative. What do you see as the goal of nst in that space and what do you consider success in that space as you go forward . Well there are a lot of ways to measure success in this space and let me step back for those of you who arent familiar with what we have been doing there. Its something the last attorney general mike put together to focus on chinese espionage and people in intellectual property in order to further their Economic Development and economic plans. It was really a result of the intel that we were seeing in the morning briefings from the fbi and Intelligence Community and wanting to do something about what we were seeing in terms of chinese activity. The success is ultimately we are going to continue to see these cases as long as they continue pursuing their bad behavior. Success ultimately is going to be a change in behavior. Thats a very long road and that is not something thats going to be done alone by the justice department. It will take other agencies of the government commerce and state all focused on this issue of chinese intellectual property theft from u. S. Companies. Certainly in a microsense a the number of cases that we are bringing in any given time period will increase significantly in the last two years or so but ultimately i think as with any prosecution what you try to do is change behavior and that will ultimately be how we measure success in this area. One of the issues that has been raised for people in the private practice as the Risk Management module and coming to doj you got there when there was penetration and how they can share information without fear of being victimized in a second way. So what is the philosophy you think you are bringing in on this issues . One of the goals of this initiative has been to increase outreach to the private sector and my predecessor did a lot of this. We are very sensitive to the concerns that the private sector can have moving forward and i understand having been on the other side of this equation in figuring out when you involve the government in something an employee has done within the company and when not to do that in some of the different considerations that go into it. I often use, will start generally and ill use one example. We try to work as sensitively as we can with companies when they come forward one fear the companies have is do i really want the fbi rooting around in all of my files . The answer is no and general but we can work with companies. [laughter] you never know what youll find. So we work with companies. We dont want to burden them with expending a lot of resources on adaptation. Want to assure them that we are not there to root around for other criminal activity. We are focusing on data in the biggest concern a lot of them have is semi going to be identified . That is something we really work on. Buchanan have charged any number of cases without id done to find the target company. And if at a certain point you left identified its not something we can keep forever so we can keep it for many steps along the way. I think over the Years Companies have gotten a little bit more comfortable being identified and part of it is there was a time i remember way back with one of the first data breaches i think with tj max and people would say im never going to shop at tj max again. Vetted and shop at every store that had a consumer data breach right now youd be using cache cash of used Clothing Store down the street because the breaches are all over the place. I think the result of that is theres not the same fear of having yourself identified as having been reached although theres some of that for sure. The other thing is the best thing we can do in the most convincing example is we can show a company that we are not only going to shut the door after the horses have escaped if we are going to help you prevent future harm. An example of that is the case of micron. Micron is a u. S. Computer memory chip maker that makes a particular kind of empoko this memory chip. The chinese import. They dont have a domestic producer so a few years ago they set a goal that they would have Domestic Production capability and e. Ramp. They set up a company to manufacture it. They built a factory and they set up a company. They didnt have the intellectual property the chips. They were going to steal it and they stole it with a micron to come over and enter into and pass information over to the company which they would do a joint venture. Micron notice what happened. They went immediately to the fbi to the federal government and they cooperated extensively or theyve been very vocal about that with cooperation and the result of that was not only were the individuals charged here in the u. S. And in taiwan by the government there, the company itself, the Chinese Company was charged and most significantly i think the Chinese Company was placed by the Commerce Department on the entity list. The result of which in practical terms they couldnt import the tools they needed the they had stolen. Micron facing a chinese competitor who has stolen their property in order to compete with them. When you can tell those stories in those stories do require companies to come forward early but when you can tell those stories and you are the company or think you wow that got company help her and some of the harm that could result in theft. That is a persuasive and for a company. One of the things that makes it rate his timing and judgment and you used to work at boeing but you left. One of those issues understanding technologies and they have the general counsel of the fbi here now. One of the issues hes talking about is trying to figure out what and with the fisa court thats coming up for renewal. What is your department sends about why thats important and what tools do you think are critical and what tools do you want the nfc or do you think you have enough tools to achieve your goal in the department . Thats a question we constantly ask ourselves and that is in fact the first office i led the office of Foreign Policy and the thinking behind that was you cant have operational people responsible for policies because the policy never gets done. You need to set aside an office of folks who just think about that. Thats a constant question for us. Usa freedom max is up for renewal now the Business Records division of pfizer and anything you can get with a grand jury subpoena with the 215 order. With pfizer you have to go to court and on the grand jury said you just have to get a prosecutor to sign the subpoena. Roving authority with you are swapping out cell phones and you can continue without going back to court ahead of time and then lone wolf which is a provision we have never used and i equate to having and lone wolf means you cant tie them to a specific terrorist organization. I think of that as a fire extinguisher in my kitchen. I never use it and im darned well glad i have it there in case i do. Those are the three provisions that are up for renewal. Those three provisions are the most basic and i believe noncontroversial provisions you could use. They have clear analog on the criminal side which have long history so much terminal side and those provisions obviously one has never been used in the other two have not been the subject of abuse or misuse. The controversial piece of the usa freedom act is what grew out of it and the authority that we used in the past. You get all the metadata records and currently the administration is asking for that authority to be renewed even though it is not being used right now. The idea behind act being renewed is that a National Security landscape is an everchanging one and you dont want to be caught without the authority if the need for that authority arises in the future. Those are all in congress right now in front of the judiciary committee. Yesterday there was a closed briefing and in senate intel today so those discussions keep going with congress and the difficult legislative climate right now. We have some Young Lawyers in this audience. You have seen the art of technology. What you think is required for Young Lawyers coming into the National Security arena . What kind of technological background do you think we are looking for at nfc . What is amazing about this is how much its changed in 20 years. When i want to law school and i suspect harvey when you went to law school there wasnt a lot of National Security law. Today everyone has got a National Security law and they have their j. D. And they have this program. They are much more knowledgeable and sophisticated about National Security law than i was when i first started doing National Security law. The lesson for me in all of this is im starting to go to law school thinking im going to be a National Security lawyer and most of us in the room probably didnt although some of you might have. The lesson to me is to be open to whatever the future has an 9 11 changed the world for so many of us professionally and personally. Being open to all of that one of the glories of being a lawyer and for all of those who are law students should take about you are building a set of fields of judgment in dont get too wrapped up in expertise especially early on in your career. Leave yourself open to what the future will bring. On the Technology Side again im not a believer in hiring for expertise. I might not have had some of the jobs ive had. And a tape believer in letting them learn what they need to learn in that job and on the Technology Side as a lawyer they do get asked the question. Im not really a technical person and i didnt take science how much do i really need to know when the truth is once you get into these cases if youre prosecuting cases about Cyber Espionage or other hightech focus youd do need to know something about the technology but you can learn it in that context when the time comes. You dont know the areas. We prosecute cases and if i had the china 2025 plan in areas the chinese have had that plan is everything from Artificial Intelligence to commercial airplane technology to new materials like comp of its two data. There is no way you could be an expert in that area but the point is youve got to learn it as it comes to you and what makes a really good lawyer and science are really good cyber lawyers and people who can understand technology and then translate that into words that nontechnology folks understand whether they are lawyers or judges or witnesses or jurors whoever they are. The folks he can do that is a remarkable and beautiful but they are not folks who are heavy into technology. These are people who have learned along the way and maybe because of that they learned how to translate it into the language. Im going to open it up to questions. If anyone has any questions in last 10 or 15 minutes please come to the mic and raise your hand. While they are thinking about a question what do you see as their mission . Are they going to be there for x number of years and what are the areas you would like to focus on in addition to china becoming a major oak is . Are there other areas that you would like to build up better threats on the horizon that you want to focus on . We have had three focuses in the last couple of years and one is china political and economic espionage. The second is terrorism including domestic terrorism and the third is foreign influence. That is something that we have taken a hard look at through the use of 18 usc 951 which is a sick way a registration requirement and that is the law that we use to convict mario butina as a russian agent. Thats the law that referred to ask twitter employees who were just accused of violating on behalf of the saudis just yesterday. Those tools and that issued generally too many of us are eyes were open by some of these elections but when you pull that curtain back what happens is what you are seeing is just a piece of the broader issue of foreign influence in the u. S. And something that we are now working closely on her criminal division. In ways that we didnt think of it for counterintelligence cases are running up against election finance cases. We didnt usually have to be conflicted with investigations in the past and we are realizing we need to Work Together on these more and more both in the election finance case and working on behalf of sri lanka. When you think about the american role in the world you realize why its such an attractive target who are trying to influence american policy but if youre a foreign country and you have a role in International Politics you are going to want to push a few different things. Stinnett their adversaries but have to understand the categories of how we prosecute. You mentioned and youve also the case which went south and youve had cases that were successful. The aid d. A. Is starting a committee about reform. Are there any thoughts on if there is going to be tinkering with the statute that youve thought about at this point . When you ask how you measure success . How do you measure success . The number of registrations. The number of foreign registrations tripled. Its not just the amount of foreign influence the one of three times prince because people are finally being open about the fact. Thats how i measure success. We will be using additional prosecution and certainly the last couple of years we invited more cases than we did in the prior 30 years. But the focus isnt going to be on a number of criminal prosecutions that we bring periods going to be what are all the tools we use for the Civil Enforcement in the 1990s last year. We are increasing the number of recessions going back and focusing on records so there are variety of sources we can use. The two biggest tools that we have been thinking about our administrative subpoenas and civil custody. Currently the way its structured you have voluntary compliance and letters of inquiry were you voluntarily respond to the letter of inquiry or you open a criminal investigation that you wish you and your subpoena. This is an area where perhaps theres something in between those two. Opening a criminal investigation is a big deal and requires a certain number of predication to show willfulness etc. Can you give people a little bit nervous. See especially lawyers. And then the other piece is the civil penalty. The way farrow works showing willful criminal violation if i havent registered for 10 years might get a little bashful letter of inquiry and that i register theres no penalty for not having registered in the past. We need to think about whether there are some ways in between. At the of ignorance is always powerful. Any questions for the director . You have cowed the audience. Unfortunately we do have a question. He meant you never asked the first question when you are the speaker. During copiously during the reception. Well be far more entertaining. Spent the general counsel for verizon but we know him as the son of daschle there. Jon you talked about the debate about whether to reauthorize authorities. There are some of the rooms were young enough to say whats the big deal and there are others that are old enough to remember it was only six years ago they had to declassify a fisa order. Im interested in your observation not just about the Department Technology but also the involvement of public views of National Security and sensitivity if you see things moving in one direction usually around the Public Perception discussion of things like that of data. Are you complementing bopper criticizing him . You are complementing him. Okay. I think, so you know its interesting on the National Security side and for those especially students who are thinking about practicing on this side think about the moment of 9 11 when folks like david in the collapse of the 5 so law. The fisa law was a strict reinforcement of law in the federal government. It was conventional wisdom year after year fear the judiciary and the executive inn in congress. It was conventional wisdom that few people questioned. In one day it became conventional and anyone who ever thought it was unconventional wisdom was thought of as foolish one is a warning. They are both warnings but the first is constantly questioning conventional wisdom and the second thing is watch out because the ground could shift under your feet are numb and metadata side i think Jack Goldsmith talked about the pendulum of National Security authorities going back and forth we had this pendulum and we talked about the National Security letters and all of those werent statute that protected peoples information because of congressional opinions. There was no constitutional protection so Congress Said the people really do want some protection for their banking information are the telecommunications information. I think on the metadata side landscape in congress is really different. The last time i was here when we did the fisa amendment when Jack Livingstone worked on the Senate Intelligence committee side when we were working on that i knew we had basically in the senate virtually every republican in the house almost everyone although there were few that didnt like it and then you can count on half or more of the democrats and the real controversy was over immunity for providers who have been alleged to work for the government. But that is change so much on the hill right now. Both parties are so divided and so i think its just a harder push. On the public metadata side i dont know. The recent Supreme Court cases like jones and carpenter there was a hesitation on the part of the american political system with just the amount of data that is streaming in these days that is stored in this accessible. We used to have very bright lines about thirdparty data and metadata content. Those seem to be suffering from some erosion. I think one of the difficulties will be the lawyers who practice in the area and some of that erosion is predictable and if you dont have clean lines its always a difficult area to practice in. People in the room have written about the Third Party Doctrine and its evolution. Its hard to imagine 30 minutes have flown. We have to remember that jack was from the fbi not doj and one of the issues is we want to thank you for your service. Its great to have someone who approaches the law the way you do with that level of integrity. We all admire what you do and we thank you for taking the job. Its not easy. We have two gifts. What is our coin which allows you to get refreshments. Any member of the committee when you need it. Stack to give it back to you . Just renew it. And then we are giving u. S. Intelligence enforcement. Not the doj needs the law. We will give it to the fbi general counsel. We find it helpful and sometimes you may need that. Please join me in thanking him. [applause] [applause] the russians have elected him against all odds to be president of the united states. A russian spy, think about that for a minute. But like mandy daman thats like landing a man on the moon. Thats like the assassination of julius caesar. Thats one of the greatest events of World History if they were actually able to achieve that. Philosophers happening privacy and the like. They have never had to think about these things in such a precise way that you could actually ride them into a Computer Program or into an algorithm. I realized this it was socially and economic way a lot more known than my corner of new jersey. I started to read all these other writers. Began to wonder why my friends and i had such a narrow conception of this really rich cultural tradition why i thought my father was some outside of this culture when in many ways he was exemplifying it