Thank you mister chairman. Congressman Us Intelligence community have an Important Role in warning our leaders about pandemics like covid19. Because outbreaks of course are not just the publichealth matter but also a matter of National Security based on public statements and reporting alone , do you believe that president from as accurately conveyed the severity of the threat of covid19 to the American People . Are you saying presently . We are in the midst of the pandemic presently , correct. The question because i guess im misunderstanding. Im sorry as he accurately reflected the status of the pandemic . The severity of the pandemic, yes. As he conveyed the severity of covid19 to the American People. I believe so. You do and according to april 27 2020 Washington Post article resident from receipt upwards of a dozen briefings on covid19 on the Us Intelligenceagencies between january and february. Of this year. During which time he repeatedly denied the severity of the threat. On january 22, he said quote, we have totally under control on february 22 or 26, he insisted that the number of cases be close to zero within a number of days. As recently as march 10, the president stated quote,just a calm, it will go away. And im sure youre familiar with the most recent reports including today that we may see as many as 3000 deaths a day in america because of covid19. What would you do if confirmed, if you believe that the president was not taking the warnings from the Intelligence Community seriously. Under 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 deserve answers and you do as a member of the Oversight Committee and i find still a member of the Oversight Committee and 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 things that ive learned as a nominee is that members of the Intelligence Community will tell you things that they wouldnt tell you as an oversight, and overseer of intelligence and the things that i want to make clear to all the members here is concern of the men and women in the Intelligence Community , they dont want to be leveraged by anyone on either side of the aisle. With all due respect in my experience on theIntelligence Committee , the Intelligence Community has been pretty right for this when weasked the question. In our role. So what exactly are you referring to . Im saying in the perspective as the conversations that 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 have just expressed the sentiment that they want to do their job. I want to deliver the best intelligence and they dont want to be from anyone on either side ofthe aisle. I wasnt directed at you center. At all. I take it that way. And how long have you been serving on the House Intelligence Committee mark. Year end five months i guess. You were appointed to that committee in 2019 . Then in our fourth report on russian interference for the 2016 election, this committee has once again reaffirmed the unanimous consensus of 17 intelligence agencies that russian interfered with the aim of benefiting canada trumps lyrical campaign however you and other allies of the president have talked 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 the men and women of the Intelligence Community no matter your personal beliefs and do you accept the findings of the Intelligence Committee as it relates to the russian interferencein the 2016 president ial election . To your first question i will accept, to your second question about specific 2017. 2016. Im sorry, 2016. Earlier i made the point that i respect committees. I think theres a difference of opinion between the House Intelligence Committee and this committee in terms of one specific finding. I was not on the House Intelligence Committee at the time. I respect both committees but i havent seen the underlying intelligence with respect to that one finding. Thank you mister chair. Thank you senator. You touched on point with senator cotton that i think is critically important and the term i used is conclusion shopping. Its in the nature of any executive to want to be told that the intelligence supports whatever policy direction they want to go with. And this is a constant struggle that goes back i dont care whether its john f. Kennedy in vietnam or Lyndon Johnson in vietnam or george w. Bush and weapons of massinstruction. This is a human natureproblem. King said who will rid me of this nelson priest . The president doesnt have to give in order. Thats my concern and thats 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 the lab. You see the distinction im trying to make and why this is crucial and its crucial to the president him or herself because if they taint the intelligence before it gets to them theyre going to make bad decisions and we are protecting the president themselves by guarding against this human nature problem. Every executive wants to hear what they want to hear. Every person that works for the executive wants to tell the boss what they want to hear. Talk to me about this concern. I think this is a critical issue with a president who is so strongwilled and has indicated in the past a strong desire to press the Intelligence Community totell him what he wants to hear. I appreciate the question and i appreciate the fact that we had a chance to visit about this on the phone and youve made it clear that this is one aspect of politicization of the Intelligence Community, sometimes it happens even unintentionally area and i share the sentiment or the concern generally. And i tried to clear in our conversation or our conversation about that that i agree with the sentiments and how iintend to approach this. I cant comment on things that havent happened yet. Im trying to make clear my approach to i will deal with the issue. And i think ive been very clear that what anyone wants the intelligence to say wont impact the intelligence they get from me, that i deliver. I dont know. I would suggest and ill close with this if you give information to the president that isnt accurate, isnt unvarnished, that is an act of disloyalty to the president let alone the constitution. Thank you. I appreciate. Before we transition to our last lot today, i want to remind members we will get together at 2 00 for a closed session in the cdc senate intel committee. I want to turn to myself one additional question or the congressman and then i will turn to the vice chairman for one additional lesson will be returned to our last lot. Punishment your experience on the House Intelligence Committee as illustrated the importance of comprehensive oversight, part of that is being able to date into the finished intelligenceproducts. For those of us that have been on the Intel Community prior to 9 11, we understood what processing raw intelligence was really like because we didnt have products. Do you commit to the committee in the rare instances that the committee asked for raw intelligence to better understand and the analytical conclusions that have been determined, that you will provide that raw intelligence for the committee lesson mark. I will, as appropriate. And im caviar and just to the standpoint of within my authority and with regard for the sources and methods at the time. Absolutely lastly technology , technological innovation is increasingly happening overseas. The vice chairman and i have 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 said is unique in the fact that we see trends before the policy committees do. And we also see the tech side of it, the policy side of it anyway with the other committees of jurisdiction months if not years to the same understanding. Without the degree of clarity Intelligence Committee. Whats your view on how the Intelligence Community today with the private sector on delightful innovation. I think its a great question that ties into what you said. Of 5g anywhere that wristband right now and the, we are 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 will demand consistent with the 5g strategy and senator cornyn still, now ball with regard to. We work harder to work with the private sector and take advantage of the Technology Expertise that we need their to make sure that were first in all of these places. We talk about emerging technologies chairman. We have the best intelligence enterprise in the world. To continue for that to be the case we got to continue to innovate and we got the first. With the first and best on cyber issues, ai, on ultimately on quantum but 5g is where we are regard to that issue now and its the pathway to being first in those areas. So again, its something thats vitally important and thats my perspective. Thank you vice chairman. Ill have the discretion to get in 2 quick questions. Number one, first is i think a couple of my colleagues have raised some of the questions about the president s comments about his notion that theres somehow heat state. In the Intelligence Community or within Law Enforcement. That is somehow going against his wishes. Have you ever made any statements about the state within the Intelligence Community or statements . Not that im aware of, the only reason im hesitating sometime to ask questions by reporters using terms though its not a term. Have you made any statement saying that you believe or are inclined intelligence communities is not acting inappropriately to target the president . Do you have any view on how the Intelligence Community nationals, what kind of effect that would have on the morality of folks who are hearing these kind of accusations . The effect on morale . It the commanderinchief is making comments saying somehow impugning the integrity of the Intelligence Committee to professionals, that they are somehow of some of all ask acting against him area would you agree that as some negative effects upon the communities kind esprit de corps andaround . My impression senator and i can only see the conversation that i had with without getting into the specifics, i think the sentiment i heard from the president is its not Intelligence Community writ large, its specific individuals and pointing to you know, for instance misuse of intelligence authorities. By certain individuals and but again, my focus is i want to look forward, not back and i think thats one of the reasons i want this opportunity. All this underscores the point that the relationship is and what it should be across the board between the Intelligence Community, the president and congress andits Oversight Committees. Again it may be difficult but i like the opportunity to strengthen the relationship. For the reasons i talked about earlier. A good me to come back later and ask you a question about nato that i would point out that it is somewhat unique to me not only has the president may be comments about having a longterm professionals but literally every person without accepting that this president has appointed for Senate Confirmation within the director of National Intelligence has been fired or removed or pushed out. My conclusion, maybe not shared by all my colleagues are because all of those individuals when they on the physicians did what i thought was right it was being willing to speak truth to power and that cost them their job. If you get this job i you will continue in the vein of the dan coats and the subordinates and the joe maguires and collins honor their commitments to the cost of their job, thank you mister chairman. Effort back on time let me explain the members i know some of you came in and you felt why do i have to sit down there area for you to set up. We have to wipe down every seat of the person that was already in the, it unlocks. Not exclusively you, senator bennett but this afternoon when we meet at 2 00, for 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 Community and with that i recognized senator cornyn. ,radcliffe, this morning when i worked with introduction, i alluded to the unique nature of the job which you beennominated. And i think when i like to hear from you and forgive me if youve already thought about this extensively, but how do you you 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 us oversight area into the role of the federal government, how the transition to become this of the Intelligence Community and the willing and able to provide unvarnished intelligence to policymakers . Senator, i would say i view it as a welcome transition , hopefully again i have loved serving the people of my district and serving in congress. But again, respectfully when i was at the department of justice theres something about representing the United States, standing up to represent the United States where you have the ability to say politics will play no part area i dont, i wont let Party Allegiance play any factor in the work that i do. Its very analogous to this position and its one that i very much look forward to. The mission is too important. I look at the threats were facing around the world and whats happening and what were living in with this pandemic and we will only continue to be the world superpower if we had the best intelligence enterprise and have to be one at apolitical. It has to be one that gives the unvarnished truth. Senator king has said repeatedly without cheating and without consideration for what anyone wants that intelligence to say. U. S. Attorneys office is significant. Theres 435 congressional districts that country is divided into. 100 United States states sitters. Only 93 federal district. In my case it was 35,000 35,00e miles, more than 3 million residents within that, and so operating and coordinating and integrating in pursuit of National Security priorities like the prevention of terrorism i think is good training for this but its something that 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 needs it. And again i think im wellqualified to do. Congressman ratcliffe, my friend the ranking member, senator warner, frames this is speaking truth to power. But let me from it a little differently. Do you have any problem in 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 . Respectfully,. Translator 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. The intelligence has to speak to exactly what the men and women who are doing the collection and analysis of it. Were all better served with the best unvarnished intelligence, and that is truth to power and i look forward to doing that to anyone. And whats the danger if you somehow shaded or nuanced the information for the policymakers, including the president of the United States . Everything that we, 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 i just wont do. In closing, i was glad to see our mutual friend, congressman will hurd, write an oped piece supporting your nomination. Well as we both know served in the cia before he came to congress. He is a steeped in these issues like very few are, and i was glad to see that vote of confidence. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you again center, for your remarks this morning. Senator bennet. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I very much appreciate the opportunity to ask these questions. Congressman, its nice to see you. Senator cornyn this morning read a great letter from attorney general ashcroft. You should be very pleased about how he commanded you. In the letter he said, this is attorney general ashcroft. He said, integrity is the indispensable and imperative for intelligence. The best friend of National Security. The National Security is the singular portfolio most allergic to the infection and evaluation that results from inaccuracy and distortion. For high quality decisionmaking, sound intelligence must never be contaminated by personal bias or political predisposition. Do you agree with that statement . I do. Why quick to follow up on the question, why is it so important that sound intelligence, above all else really, must never be contaminated by personal bias or lyrical predisposition . Simply because it would jeopardize National Security decisions. Can you elaborate . Well, again, what the Intelligence Community does, the best many women in the world doing the best election, 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 is shaded or change or color are impacted at all that means you dont have the best information which means you are not making the best decision. I agree with that and so do you think in a situation where you have leadership in this government that seems highest or predisposed to an outcome thats not supported by the intelligence, and that theres risk to job the people in the Intelligence Community who could report that accurately, like lets say in north korea if somebody delivers that intelligence that the great. Would 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 . Yes. And will you protect Intelligence Committee at all costs . Yes. Including at the cost of your own job . Yes. I appreciate that, because i think your job, if youre confirmed, is to enable the Intelligence Community professionals to do their job, which all of us need them to do, not just because we are on this committee but because we are american citizens. I agree. And we love this country. I agree. And need to be able to do it without fear of political reprisal. And we face a situation now, youre inheriting an agency where the president fired the ic Inspector General Michael Atkinson because he didnt like the way the eiji did his job. How are we going to undo that the ig didnt do his job. How specifically we do 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. So do you think theres Collateral Damage as a result of an action taken like that . Well, i dont know and tell them confirmed what the reaction is, you know, within the speedy what would you expect it to be . I honestly dont know what the, to your point about the Inspector General. Again, i dont want to reiterate issues, but speed is i dont think this relitigating relitigating issues. This is what the president nominating you, congressman, the president said the intelligence agencies have run amok. That was in the context of nominating you. Thats this hearing. Do you think the intelligence agencies of the United States have run amok . No. Do you think there is an effect on morale among the men and women of our intelligence agencies when the president of the United States said they have run amok . I can, i think ive tried to address this earlier. I heard the answer earlier, by the way. At an asking it again because i dont think you addressed it. Do you think there is an effect on morale when the president of United States describes the Intelligence Community a sudden run amok, and thats why he is nominating you . I hope not. You hope there isnt an effect. Right. You think the intelligence agencies of the United States are running amok . No. Do you think it would be your responsibility if youre confirmed for this position 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 . As i have said i think many times, senator, it doesnt matter what the president says are what any, nancy pelosi, Mitch Mcconnell i heard you say that before. I think there is no equivalence between the chief Law Enforcement officer of this country, the commanderinchief saying what he says, and with all respect to the people around the table, what a politician in 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 accepting the people are just going to be eager partisans because they are in congress. I dont accept that. I think it reflects poorly on us when we do, but i still would like to have an answer to the question. If you disagree is the president said to mark duffy intelligence agencies in this country have run amok, would you publicly disagreed with what the president said . Nothing the president says will impact the delivery of thats not the question that i asked. Would i if the president says this afternoon that the intelligence agencies in this country are running amok, will you publicly disagree with the president . I will give the president my best intelligence, unvarnished. I dont know if im not were not im not understanding how im not answering i think that would meet the ashcroft has been i think you couldnt do it without if you couldnt bring yourself to say that the men and women of intelligence agencies, communities are not running amok, i dont think you speedy just to be clear, i dont think that the minute women of the in Intelligence Community are running amok. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I thank you and would note he said earlier to your question that he did not believe they were running amok. I did. I think theres a disconnection. Im sorry if i misunderstood. Senator sasse. Thank you congressman. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Congressman, congratulations on your nomination. Senator cornyn underscored the will hurd oped. I think think its very important and i hope folks here read that as well. He is widely respected on these issues. Thanks for the time weve had over the last few weeks in the classified session. Im going to ask you more questions to press you on whether you think the odni works right now, whether its a functioning bureaucratic layer of whether its an encumbrance was in the post9 11 reasons that it were created are actually being advanced. What one of the specific pieces of data that doubletalk and a classified said adam want to unpack more fully here is, you know its my view theres no more pressing National Security threat to the United States aces in the next decade of the tech race with china. All 17 of our intelligence agencies but especially the cia and nsa are getting that message and their wrapping it up. Weve been talking about pivot to china for ten or 15 years in this country, editing to agencies are still slow to devote sufficient mind share, money, personal, et cetera to the china threat. So in this public setting, everything for the Intelligence Community, where you going to speak directly to the American People, can you explain what the made in china 2025 initiative is and why china is pursuing it was the American People should be concerned . Sure. Thanks for the question, senator, and you and i have talked earlier. Identify china as the greatest threat that we faced, greatest threat actor that we face moving forward for the exact reasons you talked about. Made in china 2025 is one of only, is one of many initiatives that the chinese government, the belt and road initiative, the military silver fusion initiative, all initiatives of the same, all spokes of the same initiative for china to supplant us as a global power in all respects. And so, you know, its why i think you and i agree that china is the rising threat of why we have to look at the National Intelligence policy framework and our budgeting and our resource allocation to make sure that were dedicating towards all of these different initiatives where an authoritarian regime wants to set the marketplace rules as they do with made in china 2025, where they want Chinese Companies dominating industry across ten different sectors, just as he want with the military fusion. Chinese companies doubt it and collecting intelligence and sharing it with the Chinese Communist party, whereas belt and road they want to dominate all of the hubs for trade routes and telecommunication. All of these things are china trying to essentially supplant 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. Before we get to the way they are using coronavirus and covid, just stay for a second, that Chinese Communist party use attack and emphasize a i in particular. How do the congress of the china come to be clear when u. S. Businesses we are leaving this senate Intelligence Committee hearing from this morning to fulfill our longtime commitment to bringing you live gavel to gavel coverage of the u. S. Senate. And now live to the senate floor here on cspan2
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.