This is two hours. [inaudible conversations] the committee will come to order. Without objection the chair is authorized to recess the hearing at any time. Beforere we turn to the substance and then members should during these proceedings in light of the cautions by wearing a face cover such as a mask so i urge unless youre speaking to please be wearing a mask. We are also conducting this hearing which affords Additional Space for those who are physically distant so before we get into housekeeping let me give my best wishes to the president and the first lady for a speedy recovery of covid19. We were all quiteor shocked and distressed this morning to learn of their illness and we hope for a speedyy recovery they are very much in our thoughts. The department of Homeland Security leading dhs office of intelligence and analysis referring to the office throughout the hearing left the committee no choice to issue a subpoena for the hearing today from counsel of the client and then the former acting head of ina the Intelligence Community element for this committee it offered to withdraw the subpoena for his appearance of the department authorize the attorney clearance in time for mr. Murphys rescheduled deposition unfortunately dhs refused to do so therefore were Going Forward today with his testimony. I now recognize myself on Opening Statement. On august 3rd amid public reporting american citizens being snatched off the street apartment by Law Enforcement officials from dhs the committee launched a investigation into allegations the dhs Intelligence Analysis Office i and a an element of the Intelligence Community also played a role in those abuses in portland. Those abuses in portland. Of domestic. Despite those efforts over the past two months the deeply disturbing picture has come into sharper focus. Time time and again dhs office of intelligence and analysis face pressure by the Trump Administration to deploy its resources in a way to politically benefit the president of United States and his Reelection Campaign at the expense of our National Security. Specifically the committee has information that number one the Trump Administration officials sought to influence the production of election Threat Intelligence by elevating emphasizing activity by china and eye round displayed acute ongoing interference operations by russia. The committee is learned dhs leaders sought to impose the protection of classified and unclassified intelligence b assessments related to elections by encouragingn ina to report more on china even though the Intelligence Communitys Public Statements indicate that only russia is engaged and active measures to denigrate one candidate and support another and sway the outcome of the president ial election. Treating these the reactors and differing intent and capability russia china and iran creates a false equivalency. It dilute the fact that the most significant threat to our election is russia which is aggressively seeking to denigrate Vice President biden and boost President Trump. These changes did nothing to serve our National Security but words serve to avoid an embarrassing to president with a focus on the dangerous effects of russias interference on behalf of his campaign. Number two cups similarly dhs officials have sought to modify the unclassified homeland threat assessment which is yet to be released to this day. Specifically the committee is learned that senior dhs officials have pressed for the assessment to elevate the threat to our elections posed by china and iran which would have the effect of misleading the American Public would bolster downplaying the most significant foreign election threat coming from washington. Number three the committee has confirmed the dhs ina sent personnel to portland at the height of dhs response to protests in the city and ina is an element of Intelligence Committee was asked to engage in activity that raises profound Civil Liberties concerns. Specifically the committee is learned ina participated in questioning protesters who werei detained by other dhs officers and issued Intelligence Reports on reporters. We have learned the federal Detective Service and other components of dhs these phones from protesters and oust ina a member of the Intelligence Committee to extract data from most phones. Thankfully that request appears not to have been ultimately fulfilled. Inas presence and activities in portland were also in the service of the presence president blog order narrative for which he deployed the federal government in response to domestic protests in an effort to benefit himself politically. The committee is examining allegations that dhs officials sought to modify assessments related to domestic Security Threats. In Service Service of prison terms preferred narrative that antifa the socalled leftwing anarchist are the most important domestic threat. This is despite evidence to the contrary and testimony by fbi director Christopher Wray that white supremacist violence makes up a significant share of domestic terrorism. This is also in the wake of the president s refusal to fully and forcefully condemn white supremacists. This very dark hour with some of our leadership and the Intelligence Community is commandeered into the service of a president s desired political narrative rather than speaking truth to power. This is in the first the Intelligence Community has refused to serve political interest of the person in the oval office. 45 years ago committees in congress investigated the abuses and of another corrupt administration abuses that included not only secretive attempt to45 assassinate foreign leaders that efforts by her Intelligence Community to spy on exercise exercising their Constitutional Rights by monitoring their political activities. In 1975 seems like an long time ago but somey of those abuses seem all to me today. The Church Committee provided a series of recommendations including Standing Committees that was act as a check on the Intelligence Community. These committees are direct outgrowth of Richard Nixons abuse of the Intelligence Community radar job today and everyday him as his committees to ensure that those abuses do not happen again and that is why we have called you here to testify mr. Maher. Joseph maher is the senior official performing the duties of Undersecretary Office of intelligence and analysis at the department of homeland securit. Mr. Maher is here due to a subpoena issued earlier this week are the committee did not wish to subpoena mr. Maher became necessary when dhs continued to slow walk the security clearances for the whistleblower mr. Murphy for his attorney. Mr. Maher the committee always expects hearing witnesses to answer its members questions but today in issuance of the subpoena compels you to answer them fully and completely. It and opening our investigation in august 3 the committee requestedna a series of documens including Intelligence Reports. By ina. On august 19 requested additional documents as well as testimony from senior dhs ina officials. On september 9 the committee released a whistleblower complaint filed by her immediate come predecessor the former head of dhs intelligence and analysis office. Brian murphy alleged serious misconduct related to oregon on Ongoing Investigation. The department agreed to make available another a number of witnesses for transcribed interviews and provided only some of the documents we requested. The department is withholding the vast majority of documents relative to this committees Ongoing Investigation and oversight of the Intelligence Community. Moreover we are dismayed that the spartan is slow walk the security clearance denying him the right to have counsel president where we could learn Additional Details of these allegations allegations that the committee has a duty to independently investigate it appears some of those allegations may prove accurate ands others may not but we hava duty to find out given their seriousness and given that some of these allegations involve a threat to the upcoming election we need to find out now and without delay. Because some of mr. Murphys allegations are classified in particular those regarding the politicization of intelligence relayed to russian threats for upcoming election it would be necessary mr. Maheric to testify in part include session. Mr. Mahers here to explain the departments of struct is efforts under investigation by the committee. We will hold the classifieds section following this open hearings so we may further testify about the allegations of misconduct we are investigating. Finally mr. Maher we may ask you questions in todays open hearing about the nature of the threats facing our country because you represent open of the Intelligence Community whose responsibility is to keep americans fully informed than the director has a refused to appear publicly before this committee or the senate Intelligence Committee toio discuss these threats and responsibilities his predecessors respected on an annual basis. Director ratcliffe has chosen to selectively declassify and publish unverified material but she admits may be fabricated undertaking a political air and for the president before election only weeks away and errand that even john dern seems willing to not perform. Mr. Maher we expect you to level what with the American People today and to speak truth to power. Thank you and i recognize mr. Nunez for his opening remarks. Welcome to another hearing of the trump impeachment committee. This committee is to be formerly known as the house Intelligence Committee. I will begin by noting there is no reason for this hearing to be held in public except to stir up media interest in the democrats latest publicity stunt. Their attack on the leadership of this department of Homeland Security. The only reason mr. Maher is here subpoenaed here today is a privilege to force dhs to rush the topsecret security clearances without the appropriate background checks. In fact there was no reason for democrats to make this t whistleblower complaint public ate all. Ofs course handling whistleblowr complaints with discretion as his committee had always done before this congress is not helpful for publicity stunts so here wee go again. Lets recall the democrats on the committee were at the forefront of the russian collusion hoax. For years they claimed they found secret evidence of trumps conspiracy with russia. They should memo the fisa warrant to spy on Trump Associatesp and even tried to t pictures of trump from russian pranksters. They also touted the credibility of the steele dossier that they have paid for themselves the Democratic National committee and the clinton campaign. They even read the steeled dossier under this committees congressional record during hearings in the past. After a twoyear investigation however special counsel mueller filed to find secret collusion evidence that they democrats claim to secretly possess and since then we have learned the steele dossier the democrats championed was a mix of fake stories rumors barroom gossip and jokes collected by a suspected russian spy at the behest of the Democratic National Committee Hillary clinton campaign. Furthermore the department of justice and the Inspector General found the fisa warrant application that the democrats defended for years was riddled with mistakes, omissions and evena withheld exculpatory evidence that relied on a doctored email hiding a Trump Associates cooperate should with u. S. Intelligence. The democrats have not called a single hearing to investigate any of these issues even though this committee is supposedly dedicated to overseeing the Intelligence Community and investigating abuses. They have held a hearing on Global Warming but dont care about documented corruption of the fisa process or suspected russian agents compiling political dirt for the Democratic Party. After mueller testified in this committee and again failed to expose the mythical collusion conspiracy the democrats suddenly switch tracks and the peach President Trump based on an anonymous whistleblower complaint from a bureaucrat who we later learned had coordinated attack of the democratic staff of this very committee. Despite the democrats insisting they had never had any contact with this whistleblower. Democrats brought oversight work to a hault and even holding ridiculous secret depositions that were leaked nightly to their media stooges followed by public show trials with the witnesses they found most useful. The impeachment and the house was such a transparent fraud that not a single republican voted for it. After the collapse of the russian collusion hoax and the failure to oust President Trump via impeachment the democrats suddenly ginned up an investigation issued their slew press releases and is now forced us into an open hearing and its certainly amusing that although this complaint is supposed to be handled by the Inspector General first the democrats have dispensed with the ig as an unnecessary middleman probably because the ig investigations take time and the doma kratzer operating on an election deadline. This all has a familiar ring to it. Almost all the democrats are following the playbook. I wouldld note usually you dont follow a playbook from any game that you have lost multiple times. Once again they are pushing into the limelight the complaint by a whistleblower. Small world. It may seem the whistleblower has some credibility problems. After all the whistleblower centanni melt directly contradicting his allegations. Furthermore the democrats themselves call them a liar just a few weeks before he filed this armplaint even threatened to criminally refer the whistleblower but now suddenly he is their star witness. Nevertheless i doubt my democratic colleagues will breeze past these contradictions in the media mouthpieces wont draw any attention to these upward problems just like they will ignore the testimony of multiple career officials delivered during the interviews that we have scheduled and conducted over the last few months which direct wayhe contradicts their new whistleblowers claims. So here we go again indulging the democrats dreams that they will find thetr holy grail of scandals that finally gets rid of trump without beating him in the election. Of course foreign threats and intelligence challenges dull grind to a hault while they pursue these sick fantasies. This one is clearly sick. We have had violence all over this country and it involves the bizarre antifa that have been burning down many of her countrys major cities. I know some few antifa as an idea. Thankfully the Trump Administration does not. I yield back. We will now proceed to questions under the fiveminute rule. Mr. Maher the allegations leveled against your office are credible serious and wideranging. They cover everything from abuse of authority and mismanagement of intelligence programs to the politicization of intelligence. We are going to review these allegations during the course of the hearing and i want to give you a chance to respond as well to other important issues under your purview. Let me start with a few which should be fairly easy questions. Rush interfering in our elections, yes or no . Youll have to turn your mic on sir. Yes. Is rush actively spreading disinformation about our elections . I would refer to the director of National Intelligence statements in office to the public about russian interference and russias efforts. Are the statements outlined that russia is spreading disinformation do you have any reason to quarrel with that . Theres a reason to quarrel with that. Is rush amplifying usdisinformation about mailin ballots and voter fraud, yes or no . That i dont think i can open open session answer in open session. Have you issued a bulletin on the subject . We have issued a number of bulletins on foreign influence and those are usually issued not for public consumption and so we have issued a number of all it ends on foreign influence by russia. Is rush actively trying to denigrate joe biden . Yes. Im sure you so recently during the testimony the consensus is russia continues to our elections and we seen activeve efforts by the russians to influence our luck since in 2020 and the russians were trying to quote denigrates Vice President haden and what the russians see as an antirussia establishment. Do you agree with that . I do agree. That makes it hard to explain a september pressa report that dhs leadership delayed publication of intelligence bulletin in july that warned of russian efforts to denigrate joe biden. The dhs bulletin was at one point during the process title quote russia likely disintegrates help the u. S. Candidates to b influence 2020 election. Do you recall that ill attend mr. Maher . E i dont recall that. Sydney was the title changed to remove the word rush a . Im not going to discuss internal deliberations about products but i can tell you the product was issued in Early September and i stand behind the concept of that. So you will not answer the question of whether russia was the liberally removed from the title of that product . Im not going to discuss it in deliberations. So there was internal deliberation about changing the title . There were a number of deliberations about a number of aspects. I think the committee has the product in its possession and like i said the intelligence analysis off the stands behind the concept of it entitled in substance. One of the titles being changed when the odni issued a Public Statement during that same period that quote rushes using a range of measures to primarily denigrate the former Vice President biden. To discuss the timeframe of it it was a Public Document issued by her Intelligence Office and im happy to discuss it more in closed session but again im not going to discuss it during deliberations but we do stand behind the product. When we go into closed session we explain to us why it was changed . Am not going to be able to discuss internal deliberations but the committee can can read it or the document speaks for itself or its civic his ear position mr. Maher that you were given improper political instructions or others were to alter the intelligence analysis and work product that you would somehow decline to answer questionsre about it because it would be considered an internal discussion and . If i was givenec improper political intelligence product various Inspector Generals and possibly others but i have not been given political direction on any intelligence. You are not drafting the intelligence product but if you are aware others who are inserting political interference to change the content and title and withhold materials you will answer those in closed session will you not . I will clearly tell you that i will not have anybody taking political directions on any intelligence product in my current position but ive not seen that. The head of ina intelligence and analysis and if iti did i would correct it. How long have youve been in your position and . Since early august the. And you have become aware of evidence of politicization of intelligence and are you going to declined to answer those questions . I will decline to talk about decisions or actions of the agency but im not going to talk about internal deliberations. Even if those internal deliberations involved the politicization of intelligence who sued the political narrative . This point today im not going to talk about internalic deliberations i will not however the t Inspector General of the Intelligence Community and the department of Homeland Security is aware of the allegations regarding the politicization and they have full access to any document or any communications within dhs to look at those allegations. Mr. Maher do you want to the American People who are watching why it is you wont be up until congress and tell the American People why you are privy to evidence at discussion of the politicization of intelligence about an upcoming American Election . Ive not been involved in discussions about whether to station. Im not asking about discussions but have you become aware of evidence that intelligence supports were altered with held for political reasons . Are you telling the American People you will not share that information with congress . Now im telling them that if i become aware of evidence i would disclose it to theco appropriate authorities including the Inspector General. Im asking about congress. You were under subpoena and we are asking the questions are you telling the American People you are not going to answer . So we go into closed session you will tell us whether evidence has come to your tent attention that intelligence was withheld or altered to suit a political narrative . Im not free to discuss internal deliberations about products. Im aware of changing things for political narrative i would tell you that. Mr. Maher you are aware of public press reports and a bulletin about Russian Foreign interference in our elections. In july was withheld from distribution are you not . I was aware. Is the press report accurate . This occurred beforeib i goto intelligence analysis. Let me ask you was that olufsen withheld from publication to those Law Enforcement agencies . I dont think it was withheld. It was published in september. There was additional work that was done on the bulletin by the intelligence product and it was released in Early September. It that it was finished in july. Did chad was the president s political appointee intervened to withhold the distribution of that document . I have no knowledge of what happened ton the document you forgot the best of the Intelligence Analysis Office. What is your understanding of what was withheld . My understanding is there were concerns raised about tradecraft concerns and the report in particular was reviewed and reworked by intelligence professionals in a product consistence with Intelligence Matters with a product that was. And that was the tradecraft concerns raised by chad wolf, is that correct . And note that there were some raised. You havent looked into this issue enough to know who withheld the document for period of months . No. I know thatav it was reworked within the office of intelligence and analysis are then no there were concerns raised at some point. I dont have the details of who and when and what exactly so i dont want to speculate. I can tell you that intelligence professionalss looked at the Intelligence Reports that was reworked and. And i stand behind a product that was. When was that reworking done . I dont know exactly. I became aware of it, dont know exactly when i became aware of it but i would say sometime in late august. I dont know to what extent the work that was done before that. Was the work being done because the document was withheld . Now to my knowledge. I became aware of this around the time of it and told what the status was to review and published. Of mr. Maher do you commit right here and now on behalf of ina to never withhold delay or change intelligence bulletins due tomm political pressureow were suspected political preferences by dhs leadership or the white house . Yes, i do. Mr. Maher let me turn to the delay that has brought you here. We have repeatedly sought to schedule the whistleblowers deposition and the clearance for his attorney has been continually delayed. What are you doing to make that witness available to congress . Let me just kind of explain for the committee the security clearance process is run and managed by the Security Office with the undersecretary of management so its not an Intelligence Office responsibility. My understanding is that process is currently working on doing the professional work that it takes to grant a security clearance to those individuals. We have never seen a problem like this and delays like this for the simple matter of declaring it to the attorney to be president with his client during a hearing. Who is making this decision and is the politically appointed general counsel to your knowledge intervening discussing involved in any way with the attorneys that are normally doing to clarence . I have not been involved in discussions about howay the clarence is going to run or how it should run. The decision is made through security clearances by the chief Security Officer and that departments and or the deputy undersecretary of management. Thats a politically appointed counsel been in contact with those that are doing the security clarence . I dont know. When we met a couple of weeks ago mr. Maher and as for your cooperation youve committed to provide cooperation i asked you whether you were decisionmaker and as i recall the answer wasnt particularly clear. The decision to provide documents or in this case r withhold documents the decision to withhold security clearance those decisions being made by others or do you take responsibility . Wi those decisions are ultimately made by me or the leadership in the department decides on decisions aboutf respect to the security clearance issues that is decided i the chief Security Office in the deputy undersecretary for management that not by me. The document decisions are not made by you they are made by political appointees at dhs headquarters . That would be the case for every administration and the decision is to make this witness available through counsel that is being made by the internal Security Office of dhs or you dont know whether the political appointees have been in communication with them. Is that correct . Mr. Nunez you are recognized. Recognized. Welcome, mr. Maher. How are you doing today . Thank you, sir. I dont know what youre doing here to be honest with you. Youve been on the job a couple of months, month and a half . Yes, sir, less than two months. So this committee as i said in my Opening Statement, weve you have no business being here but i want to take you back first of all where were you in 2016 . I was in the general counsels office. Read into any intelligence products at that time . I did run into some intelligence activities. The russia expert . No. The familiar with any history of russia or the Old Soviet Union . No. Not call myself an expert in that area. I think so you are aware of the press reports. This is not a trick question but did you read our committees report on those measures by any chance . I i have not. And that report for many decades it was very quiet and classified that the russians and soviet union were involved in an electionru interference in fact during the Obama Administration they had interference in other countries and what they usually do it was nothing new that intelligence was shared with this committee but in early 2016 republicans on this committee were so concerned about the interaction of the Obama Administration of russia , it is odd that russia did whatever they wanted involved in syria or libya and this committee made very clear statements since 2001 and with that ability to understand putin. And because what we ultimately found during the same timeframe 2016 the campaign of the democrats stuff that they continue to hide from the American Public with a series of dossiers they hired a former French Agency that went through a law firm through a former british spy and actually claimed working with thee russians and then to previously work from the Brookings Institute and now we find out he is a suspected russian spy. So they put together these dossiers have you heard of those . Yes. Did you readve those when they came out in early 17 . They were fairly salacious. Yes. You been a career official for how many years . Seven years to dhs as a servant. Not a political appointee. We surprise the Fbi Department of justice would use a dossier salacious and unverified as a former fbi director to get a fisa warrant . Im not an expert dont have those details. But you do to those were paid for by the dncco with the clinton camp. So here we are four years later the democrats continue to try to cover up and blame russia that we know what they were doing the last 70 years. The they decide to make a public do you know who really interfered in the election . They did. Democrats. They interfered of the 2016 electionly papers and the minds of millions of americans with their via lies what the dnc had paid for. They used to to raise money in the 2018 election even in the other night in the debate do you have a chance to watch the debate . Joe biden, their candidate began investigating trump professionals based on the informationat they had gotten and that they paid for paid for dirt on him with pfizer warns on Trump Campaign officials they place in the minds of millions of americans and still made the claim although that trump had something the various with tpressure. No question he didnt answer with the moderator did not even ask how did he get three three. 5 million from a Russian Oligarch with his close ties. Its like we live in a fantasy land whatever they are doing themselves. I have no idea just millions of dollars cause extent even china the fbi was invest on interested in getting investigating those in into the Trump Campaign and the Republican Party this committee with Intelligence Services all over the m world those in the middle were always concerned whether or not our electionie interference and intelligence agencies. And with so many meetings with Senior Intelligence officials around the world to say hope you speak truth to power and hopefully we can work with you. And here we are the shining city on a hill the Democratic Party crop share intelligence service. With the Department Homeland security to say that they are protecting this country i dont have all the details yet of those transcribed interviews but i know this much and in. Inslee is not an idea i did expect that to from insecurity to protect federal property and the statues and 1 mile from here torn down even africanamerican leaders were torn down. The department of Homeland Security that you have a responsibility to protect federal property . Radio a specific statutory responsibility. You are doing that providing intelligence with these reports that go out. Right . We have even seen some foreign involvement. Its pretty alarming as a radical group a lot of groups like them i have no idea why the democrats would be protecting antifa this is bizarre what we are witnessing right here is some in the media will cover this but i doubt it. What is truly bizarre is the Ranking Memberim statement its never happened its never been alleged what we are here to talk aboutan is not antifa but those conspiracy theories with those allegations of the violation of american Civil Liberties and to extract information from those in Portland Oregon and then to detailed those stories of individuals with no history of violence to target federal agents of dhs one of those innocent citizens told the post i didnt know if i would be seen again others detained by dhs was by foreign nationals we understand many individuals detained had their cell phones confiscated and Committee Interviews with officialss corroborated some of those protesters still had not had phones returned months later and then without a search warrant witnesses have testified to the committee with the federal protective service seized and discussed with ina the extraction of data from those phones in order to identify connections between protesters that cames down to hijack office at the director testified they did not initially exploit that data because there was no search warrant. They do Network Analysis on his criminals as part of organized crime or a gang of some kind for i am concerned that situation is Intelligence Community is being asked to use tools for counterterrorism threats against americans who are exercising their constitutionalte rights. So my question is did dhs ina, the unit you lead request to exploit and conduct Network Analysis to those in portland . We have not exploited cell phones of any individuals. That wasnt my question did ina receive a request to exploit . I heard that but also the Inspector General is investigating those activities and specifically asked me not to o interview those things that are under investigation so i have not spoken to all the people that were investigating that. So you just said that you had heard that but who did you hear that ina received such a request . I dont recall. You repeated it here today do believe there is credibility . I didnt repeat but i said i heard it and i just cannot remember who told me that within the office. Know. T you have reason to doubt there was a request to exploit the funds of american citizens. Ever reason to doubt it. Word ina typically or commonly look at information and characterize that is unprecedented . The authorities for our Intelligence Office are different than Law Enforcement and other intelligence agencies operating outside of the United Statesen and that we dont have authority to covertly have information like that it through open source means. And for that reason its pretty legitimate and maybe even in shocking if that was asked to exploit especially without a warrant . Correct . I suppose someone not familiar with our authority i dont know the specifics of his conversations. So you said you heard those discussions occurred to do here who the people were or the elements that were asking ina to exploit those phones . I dont know those details. I yield back. Let me mention the votes and started because we go in shifts we will vote. Members who had a chance to ask questions go voting come back. Those who havent some time i want to go vote now. Im not sure why you are here either. The previous question we are trapped you into saying something you didnt mean to say. And i heard is the allegations that ina was asked to exploit telephones from the questioner so your answer could happen to you heard it from him so just be careful when youre answering questions. The background check process is important to our nation. Right . Who has access to the information that doesnt go to the background check other than members of congress . Nobody. Is there something about the law profession. You are a lawyer. I am a cpa, is there Something Like an oath that they take that makes it more or less likely to use classified information. No. It doesnt matter your profession. You been there long time even though a person longer is the chairman with constant conversations of the length of time to do background checks they have good people they need a good folks and they cant get the background check done. The system has worked to try to shorten the time frame for purposes of getting people employed. It does take some time to do that. You are two hats today deputy chief general counsel and acting undersecretary of ina. Just to be clear under either one of those has to have the authorityy b to waive the background check . I do not. You grant one. Know the chief Security Officer exercises that authority. Does he would feel . It is not. Okay. So to me look like a hostage. You said you are here simply because like you said in your Opening Statement the majority could not believe the agency into doing something the agency should not do which is grant a security clearance who has not gone through the back of check for answer the questionnaire that is appropriate for anyone who is requesting a background check the Committee Majority wants to circumventneis that to the detriment of our nation. I know they think its good for their purposes because they get the attorney in here this is an open session. He can be here today he could be sitting right there. So is your professional judgment is appropriate to a background checks and the circumstances. No its not. Are you aware of any conversation that use the background check as obstruction to slow down the testimony . Now. No is playing games . Now. You been a Public Service a long time. I have. Is the Trump Administration the first to have political appointees . Because earlier from the role the agency it sounds like it was unique and and forward for the Trump Administration so the Obama Administration have political appointees at dhs . With a figureheads and just collect a salary or do they have a role. Political appointees have a significant role. Thats appropriate on inappropriate. It is not. Thats hard to tell that from the question he will somehow political appointees are automatically a risk to the nation and the things they shouldnt do without any evidence to that, fact. The documents that you fill out how many pages is that quick. Its quite a few in the link the what has to be reviewed depends on how much foreign travel you have doneg if individuals have interacted wit with. If the lawyer has been involved with those it could be extensive and it could take some time. It could, yes. I apologize for our side of the committee you should not be here. I yield back. I would just point out we are not talking about a background check for purposes of a new higher in the Intelligence Agency but the background check for purposes of sitting in on a deposition or an interview those are normally conducted within 24 hours or the most a few days during the time mr. Nunez chaired the bush ministration we never had a delay of this kind of this is unprecedented. Thank you mr. Chairman i would like to turn to the disturbing allegations dhs is try to minimize the threat posed by violent white supremacist groups to play up the threats of radical leftwing groups and also antifa in a bid to support President Trumps political narrative. September 17 director ray testify that white supremacist pose the greatest domestic Security Threat so within the domestic terrorism bucket the category as a whole motivated violent extremism in the biggest bucket with the mac group and within thatt group bucket people subscribing to a supremacist type of ideology is the biggest chunk of that. Do you concur with director raise assessment regarding the fact that white supremacisti groups are the largest chunk of that bucket . You have any reason to question the accuracy of director raise recent testimony racially motivated violent extremism makes up the majority of the domestic threats . No. Earlier this week President Trump seemingly ignored his fbi director during the debate to denounce White Supremacy and did just the opposite and all the boys, a notorious and Violent Group to stand down and stand b by. They interpret that as the endorsement equally disturbing your predecessor acknowledges in may and june of this year he met with t acting deputy secretary coach in l. A. To ask about the release of the dhss assessment on domestic Terror Threats is said he made the threat of White Supremacy of your less severe and to include information on violent leftwing groups and anti for and in addition acting secretary wolf allegedly directed your predecessor to change other Intelligence Briefings with federal state and local enforcement agencies. But what about playing down the threat of white supremacist. I want to speculate. You can neither confirm nor deny that such an assessment was done . But its our the character but the mr. Murphy would not have been asked bymi them. You know that is true. Or not. That authority of dhs is to protect federal buildings irrespective of the damages them. Is that correct . Sor do you with those intelligence assessments to treat and extremist groups that treat any federal vbuilding the same and with federal facilities does dhs produce it assessments based onon intelligence but the thought theno President Trump. Or his political appointees you have a very tough job and with the Intelligence Community and then is based on intelligence and not conjecture thank you. But to correct what connecticut official said the two former officials a request to exploit funds was never received peripherals were taken from those for federal crimes and then a warrant was required before they would ever exploit the phones and moving fromas there thank you for being here so this committee should never be used as a platform for fictional playwritingg but here we are again. In 2018 we went to the minority and the majority and with this committee should be doing and thats a shame with foreign influence on elections they try to sway the elections and disrupt society and its are will to prevent it and then try to prevent it so free and Fair Elections without outside influence theres nothing more revolting but to be against the opponent and to be reassigned to dhs management director. Enough acting secretary wolf said those investigations cannot be done in a fair and unbiaseder manner and then to director manipulate during the investigation. I know they were concerned about those reports are issued that the Inspector General wanted to look at the situation. R says he filed a reprisal complaintt. I am order that but those inconsistencies that he did that the complaints expressly contradict what were would you. But i have a concern that maybe he is going back to explain away the inconsistencies from the thing that he said and did and thats what the contradicts. I agree that is not a good course of action. And then to explain away those inconsistencies about the things he said orr did that complaint that expressly contradicts it is disconcerting to a number of people that may be a future boss. It was disconcerting to some people. Did any staff member come forward to you to express their concern with this taking place . I have heard from a number of peopleace . That had happened. Directly or indirectly. I heard from some directly or indirectly. It sounds like those concerns to be manipulate the staff a reasonable i think those that ina are somewhat distracted by a lot of this they will have passion to focus on the were to secure the country and they will be glad when the chapter is passed and then to protect the homeland. A massive they want them to be doing as well. I appreciate your service to the country buts. Are you aware of mike baker. Rom the New York Times i think Inspector General is doing a review it has asked me not to interview particular employees. They have been rescinded and they should not have been created. Are youhy aware of any other reports intel products on any other journalist . Not that i can think of. There are a number of other reports. After i came in having two reviews with an initial review done and those that are issued in a subsequent review and there are number of other reports that should have been issued i recall any of them specifically. You dont know if they were about a specific reporter or any other journalist or not . I dont think they were about journalist specifically but reasons why they were not appropriate. The acting secretary put out a statement condemning the activity with an open investigation we assume he is sincere about that. My understanding is some of thenc information these two reporterss created on protesters they gather information onit protesters. Correct. I dont know the specifics i know the specifics. So to your knowledge where the space bar card used to collect information on Peaceful Protesters or any protesters . Not with my knowledge but i have not specifically dealt into that in a way if there was not another investigation going onder ly. Typically they are used on terrorist by somebody who has been convicted or arrested her violence or terrorism. So using the baseball cards in this manner it equates anyone out there protesting as a terrorist . I dont know specifically those who are protesting there should not be reportsts created with First Amendment protected activity. Can you restate that quick. I know specifically about the reports you are mentioning the Intelligence Reports should not be generatedpo over americans who are exercising First Amendment protected activities. And baseball cards are part of that . Ec to collect and use in a fashion . Like i said my understanding of that term typically to identify people who are either terrorist or have been convicted of violent activity. At this point today believe the protesters in portland are terrorist . No. There are a lot of protesters simply exercising protected activity and other people who are committing violence in those circumstances a lot you are just exercising. You agree we should not create files on american citizens. Correct . Correct with their other federal crime. But the assumption is they are out there protesting does it make them a candidate to be a terrorist spent the fact that they are just protesting anywhere in the United States is not a basis for intelligence officials to be collecting information on them. My time is complete i yield backtean. I think i speak for all of us thank you for your 17 years of service i have to echo with the Ranking Member said that im sorry you are here you are a part of this committee and fortune is proven they can do so well and thats the destroy the reputation and lives of innocent people and sometimes it appears they do that with false accusation and malicious accusations from treason to working with foreign agents to cohort with agents every single one of these malicious accusations made for years every one of them is untrue and i have to tell you you have little firsthand knowledge of the primary concerns. He will not be expected to have firsthand knowledge this is outside of your responsibility. Dhave and then to drill before the committee in open session. Which is nothing but a political exercise. And i mean to minimize the role you are a popped and with the nonsense and you get a front row seat and this is another example with those absurd accusations that already has been made why the committee has lost itshe way and why it no longer does his job to provide credible and honest oversight and another example of what used to be the crown jewel of bipartisanship the most of us wanted to be on this committee i would hope the same reason all of us wanted to be with thest importanceas in a bipartisan manner and now the partisan and trusted minimize committee and all of congress and what happened for you happen for years, again and again and again to innocent people. And then to do serious intelligence work are so disappointed that we are doing this television drama. And in this hearing there are number of things that have been said i know that are untrue because they are relevant and important it has been said only russia is using active measures to influence the campaign we know thats not true. Every one of us has seen the analysis. We know thats not true china is doing the same thing so are other countries to say that the president continues to refuse to condemn White Supremacy what nonsense. Outon teunde bbe he has done so again and again and as recently as two nights ago i understand where they keep going with that story was cnn or reporter but this should not be involved in Political Hackery saying things that we know are not true but is not the first time thats happenedoa so what would happen to the National Security if we set the precedent if all you have to do is have a whistleblower complaint and we will waive all National Security concerns and read in any attorney what would that do to National Security and asking what they would be done now. And. And to present a grave danger that has disclosed e ur o National Security. There are reasons why a those are experts conducting background checks and security clearances spend a lot of time. It doesnt take a genius to figuref out this endangers the National Security if you do with this committees asked you to d do. Thank you chairman i want to correct something. It is not the view of the Intelligence Community they are equally acting in this election in fact the Intelligence Community cited the assessment earlier russia has a preference for donald trump seeking to denigrate joe biden and to help President Trump. Is that correct . Right. I would agree with that statement from the director of National Intelligence on the. So the director said china is doing the same thing with a preference for a candidate actively seeking to help the candidate or tear down a candidate that is not accurate . I can say in open session that is false for the American People and mcmaster said donald trump is aiding and abetting putins efforts the president s former National Security advisor and with that exist be one if its in denial is with anyone who does not acknowledge it. Do you agree . I will not comment on political statements. Is it your understanding beginning march 2020 dhs t that. That was before i joined the Intelligence Analysis Office. Is it your understanding dhs continue to produce products on attacks between march and september . We produce a number of products that go to the Intelligence Community as well as russiasts influence. Nothing was sent to congress during that period . Im not familiar. Do you agree internally should congress be made aware . And that this committee has access to finishedaw intelligence on topics like that. Are you aware of alleged direction National Security advisor obrien to dhs to stop producing intelligence assessments on election interference and said focusing on china and iran . I am not aware of that. Are you aware of the same allegation and those with the same instructions of the predecessor. I am not aware of that as a fact. You know former acting dni Richard Grenell directed or requested the Intelligence Community including dhs report more in china and iran despite russia being a direct threat . I am not aware of that. And that that instructed your colleagues to focus more on china . I have never been told that by people in my office. According to testimony provided are you aware mr. Wolf and gooch and aliid both told leadership to expand the scope of interference with china even though the Intelligence Committees Public Statements only russia is engaged in active message on activist one heasures to denigrate another candidate. I defer my time if you have questions. I do not. Im sure you agree the southern border is a preoccupation of the administration for some time obviously a Campaign Issue in 2016 with the chant of build that wall and during the last four years guns were illegally diverted for that purpose. All of that to keep foreigners out of the country. You will recall in 2017 and 2018 the president rallied for the hardening of our borders to protect the country from migrant caravans coming from Central America. At the time there were all kinds of conspiracy theories who is funding the caravans and october 17, 2181 of my colleagues made accusations that george soros or ngos offered cash to migrants to encourage them to join the caravan. Are you aware of any efforts by ngos or george soros to secretly give out cash to migrants to encourage them to join the caravan . I am not but i think the officials of Customs Border protection are much more closer. You are personally not aware of any information to that effect a. Correct. The day after that the president suggested on twitter that democrats were somehow supporting the caravans. Surprise. This issue has raised its head again during the investigation. We have learned individuals discuss whether the Intelligence Community should collect and report on the Funding Sources of the migrant caravans. Not just at one ill advised meeting but with numerous conversations to discuss a utpossible plan to report on the ngos looking at those migrant caravans. And to engage with other intelligence agencies about this idea of tracking Funding Sources. Mr. Mar are you aware of any discussions to report on the ngos purportedly assisting migrant caravans . Now. As an attorney and in your current role performing your duties do believe the ina should be conducting intelligence activities with respect to ngos quick. I would need y more details i think the mission of thee Intelligence Office and with the guidelines that go along with that executive order so if youre looking at if its an appropriate activity for the Intelligence Office to be collecting or reporting on various activities you need to see. You think its appropriate to spy on american ngos . Our office does not spy number one and number two its not appropriate to collect information on an organization just because they are governmental. I hope not. Mr. Chairman your indulgence i know me more times i know i can speak in open session but i have about had it s there are lots of pars of this place i will miss considerably its a privilege and honor to be here but in the state legislature we had a rule againstst imputing the motives of the body. Today i have sat here and listened to members being accused of malicious accusations and lies and i have had it. This institution cannot function as a course of regular diet t to impugn the motives of our colleagues we should keep that to the subject matter at hand and policy matter at hand and not impugn the motives of other we cannot function that way or craft legislation or reach a principle compromise and sure as hell cannot exercise our constitutional responsibility and obligation to conduct oversight. I apologize but that has been boiling up in me for quite some time. I yield back. We would deeply miss you in this committee and in thisd congress. Im sorry i did not see where you were seated mr. Castro you are recognized. I will follow up on those questions so to give you some context on january 11 with a letter on behalf of the committee to Nick Mulvaney and then head of ina concerning efforts of the white house to exaggerate the threat from the alleged caravans of migrants of south and Central America headed to the us southern border at the time President Trump attempted to convince congress to fund the border wall and noted the white house and dhs repeatedly claimed in 2017 dhs prevented 3755 known or suspected terrorist from entering the country in fiscal year 2017 when making the case to fund the border wall that they misleadingly failed to disclose how many of those tried to cross the southern border and mr. Murphys whistleblower complaint he claims the leadership was potentially aware of those that was cited to support President Trumps argument for a border wall what was not disclosed is the number of alleged terrorist was nowhere near the figures the administration was using according to mr. Murphy it was less than ten so heres my question we were involved in the discussions of late 2018 early 2019 with dhs leadership with the white house with a number of alleged terrorist crossing the southern border . Yes or no . Now. Since and has there been any pressure request from the white house or dhs leadership or anyone else to modify or underplay the intelligence assessment to support the continued crusade with the border wall on the southern border . Not blame aware of. Are you aware of anybody elses activities to fit the bill . No have you heard any complaints about that or allegations who made a comment to you or an offhandeded remark to suggest this . No. I read newspaper reports like you but i am not familiar with those specifics. And those reports if you see that have you followed up with anyone who was quoted or try to figure out who that anonymous source was within the departmentrt department . We are getting away from the specific details that i can think. Of. As we sit here today how many known or suspected terrorist were stopped at the southern border 2017 and 2018 and 2019 . I have that information with me right now. We provide us that information . This is the body that would have information like that. The efforts of this administration to manipulate intelligence to deceive the American People for the threats facing this nation are beyond disturbing the president s efforts to justify his inhumane and wasteful wall on the southern border by misleading American People by those is just one more example of that is not just cynical but does real damage to the National Security when the intelligence agencies began falsifying information d to appease the president or allowing the president to use their product to mislead the American People we have truly gone the way of authoritarianism. I also want to say as chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus last few years as of the people that work there that would be interesting on the history of the nation the reputation of those that contributed to that work would not be forgotten beyond those years. Aq chairman very basic question what is ina . Can you describe that . Sometimes in those conversations and make it sound Like Department of Homeland Security like in my five what is ina . The Office Intelligence analysis for the department of Homeland Security in the wake of 9 11 as part of the and Intelligence Community the office has limited authorities information from the Intelligence Community as well as operatorsat and then to provide analysis or intelligence not only department of Homeland Security operators in the field have that intelligence but also to state and local officials that have intelligence information from their operationeli operation. You had a limited authority to collect information overtly . Do you plan clandestine sources . No. No authority for human intelligence operation . We do have somewhat authorit authority. Ve. Os ir and open Source Intelligencean report. So is raw Intelligence Report. We say raw. What does that mean. Is not finished intelligence. So finish intelligence involves analysisge of the information ad is a product that is a finished product is not subject to revision typically. But Homeland Security or an ina is doing in os ir, that raw intelligence and human, the chewable collected. It is possible that there is nonclassified human intelligence for example in circumstance that it the example that i gave where it might involved even interviews of Law Enforcement officers. That the officials that might be interviewed and get information about tactics being used in things like that. This type of things could be put into an opensource route Intelligence Report. Or more likely finished intelligence. So is sending someone a newspaper article considered intelligence. Now. If youre referring to the open Source Intelligence report that involved journalists. That is not an appropriate production of Intelligence Report. But ist it, i think the government all of the times and information about this reporter just wrote thiss thing about something that they have something to do with us prayed is that considered espionage or collective intelligence. No, that would not be done in Intelligence Report. I know these are very basic questions. Is one make sure that we clarify all of this. Sir. Is i still think that the definition of intelligence. This is new to me. Are you aware of any politicization of intelligence and ina. I am aware of some of the center review by the Inspector General. And that was a subject the news articles just before i came to ina. Gotcha, and this whistleblower. He filed his complaint on september 8th and then had to file a corrective complaint. Two days later, is that your understanding. To correct falsehoods potentially. Yes, im not sure about the specific dates. And you aware thatti the emails contradict his complaint. I am aware of that. Gotcha. I yelledco back. Mr. Welch. Thank you mr. Chairman. The committees investigations, thank you for being here and thank you for your service. They revealed than the fact that i find alarming, and is that the ina Intelligence Officers debriefed the protesters were taken into custody in portland. As you know, ina supposed to be in the business of intelligence gathering and analysis. Not questioning u. S. Persons arrested it a protest i worry the recent reports suggest that ina may have crossed the line and that questioning for engaged citizens engaging in constitutionally protected activity. The specific allegations are that the witnesses have testified during the protest that ina surged from the offices important. An executive who decided wednesday, some of these people are involved in questioning protesters when they ifwere being held in federal custody. And the persons testimony is collaborated by two of the witnesses. Who previously testified before this committee. Would you clarify the record on this and please describe for us what role that ina played in responding to the protest in portland. Joseph maher so dont know all of the details. The Inspector Generals image before during an interview an investigation in portland, i would assume including those activities. Generally, our office to the extent. Not generally specifically targeted. Joseph maher i wasnt there at that time. So i cant answer that. Such understanding. It did ina personnel questioning protesters directly. Joseph maher again, i dont know the specifics because that is under investigation. That is a specific is just a specific question. If there wasec a certain personnel, to portland. That something they were intending to do their prayed normally to try to get intelligence and the gathering and they started questioning. Full played with a there and did they question protesters. Joseph maher my understanding, subject to the Inspector Generals ongoing enunciation is the ina officials were not there to be kind of knowing run with protesters. In collecting information in that fashion. Why were they there. Joseph maher again, this would happen before i came to the office. My understanding they engaged in activity such as, like us in interviewing Law Enforcement officials as it would come off duty or come off of their stands out there. Im just try to get specific carefree to understand that you werent there. But you know have a very important position. Do you have any i information to collaborate with these witnesses have said that ina personnel did in fact question or more in the room during questioning of protesters who were in custody. Joseph maher im not trying to withdraw from the question. Dont know the specifics becae i havent interviewed people and i have not gone the length to theover that because of Inspector Generals role is Ongoing Investigation. I just want to understand this. You know the acting head. But youre telling me if im hearing it that you dont want to find out what happened. Thats incorrect. Joseph maher i do want to find out what happened. A bullet front end find out what happens when the Inspector General conducts his investigation. And will you tell us what happened. Joseph maher i would have no problem telling you what happened. Is a your understanding that is improper for ina officials to be questioning protesters. Joseph maher generally yes. Ina position does have the authority and open fashion and voluntary basis, talk to people. I would assume that ina people identified themselves to protesters. Joseph maher yes it should be. I dont know the specifics. My understanding is that does not. They just did not randomly interview protesters. What im hearing is that you dont know yet but you will know at some point. Joseph maher ha yes. And the reason youre not telling us is because you were not in your job at that time. Correct. Joseph maher correct. You know if they have policy or personnel can participate in questioning u. S. Persons in federal custody. Joseph maher for definitely our written guidelines with respect to the conduct of human intelligence for ina. And it talks about the parameters under which i can be done. I yelled back because my time is up. Thank you. Mr. Maloney. Lets get a couple of things straight. My calling seem to be confused about why youre here today. My correct the tornado currently the acting Principal Deputy under secretary of the department of Homeland Security office to intelligence and analysis. Is that right. Too great not quite right. It. Filling the job right. No joseph maher im performing the duties of the undersecretary. Why are you doing it. Joseph maher the secretary asked me to do that in early august. Was an opening sir. Joseph maher now. It was not. Country performing mr. Murphys duties. Joseph maher yes. This what im getting at mrr intelligence official at the farman home Homeland Security. And that office is the intelligence component of Homeland Security in my right. Joseph maher bright. Will only refer to the Intelligence Community over which is committee has primary jurisdiction, that office is one of those 17 elements of intelligence communities correct joseph maher it is. And the reason doing this job is because immediate predecessor has been or alleges, retaliatory way, dismissed. And is filed a whistleblower complaint in fact. I think you and i could get a grade that thatis complaint is well contained very serious allegations is that fair to say. Joseph maher allegations. Those allegations include improper political interference in their reporting of russian interference in american president ial election, views of civil and Civil Liberties of american protesters and perjury before congress. That is what it was and that whistleblower complaint with a senior official in the intelligence component of the department of Homeland Security. I think it is a fair summary. its this with an alleged. Joseph maheryounodding your hea. Theres nothing controversial is trick question. That is what were doing here. it in your department is also blocking right now, your department is blocking your predecessor we just a grade is a Senior Intelligence officials the department of homeland city over which is committee has jurisdiction. The complaint alleging serious allegations and violations of law. Your department his right now blocking that official from testifying before this committee and because congress on those abuses. That is what were doing here here. That is all my question. My question is, in case theres still confusion of care about why so much is showing avenue hard job days to oversee serious violations or allegations of violations of the w highest levs of the Intelligence Community. So, my question for you is who is david. Joseph maher hes a former undersecretary in the office. You were with him. Joseph maher he does not work for the department anymore. So now. Testify before thehe committ, that russia he confirmed that they had interfered withel the election and he was subsequently drugged up in front of the Senior Leadership of the department we are told from the whistleblower complaint i was told to secretary nelson and secretary kelly had convinced the president s give to give him another chance. Even though the president wanted keto fire. Joseph maher gi unfamiliar with the allegations but not familiar with that happening. You had no knowledge of that you never talk to him about that joseph maher no. About mr. Murphy. Joseph maher no. Would you agree with me that if an intelligence official testified before congress and then threatened with termination for that. That that would create a Chilling Effect. Joseph maher if intelligence he testified before the committee. He n apparently was in front of the chief of staff and secretary of Homeland Security and told according to the complaint, the president wanted him fired for that. And convince the present to give him another chance. So like thats the kind of situation that could have a Chilling Effect on somebody testifying before congress. Would you agree. Joseph maher i dont know the specifics. In fact related to the police will not going comment on those i yield back mr. Chairman. Mr. Murphy. Thank you for your service. When christopher ray, the fbibi director testify before the house Homeland Security. That when he said that recently motivated violent extremism remains a top domestic threat in the United States. In the u. S. But he said that within that racially motivated extremism bucket, people ascribing to some kind of white supremacist type ideology is certainly theas biggest chunk of that. Ray said. Youust have no reason to doubt t testimony correct. Joseph maher this part. Sir, do you condemn White Supremacy. Joseph maher yes. And wise White Supremacy a hithreat. Joseph maher will there are a lot of ideologies that people are here to any of which people would disagree with. Whether it is connected to violence. It becomes a concern for my department in other parts of the federal government. So it is this ideology that is connected to violence the makes White Supremacy especially threatening. Now what is your do you interact with acting secretary wolf about this particular issue. Joseph maher y i interact with him about a lot of issues. Including this one. Joseph maher yes. What is your plan to deal with this particular threat this any people are concerned about right now. Joseph maher the department has a number of activities associated with that present onn is that we part of the Intelligence Department but on a intelligence products to make sure that the audience for our intelligence products is about situations that the department has a grants program for organizations that work to counter violent activities. Have you heard acting secretary will condemn white promising publicly. Joseph maher i wasnt all this public comments. Is in a yes or no. Have you heard him say that publicly bring. Joseph maher ic im sure he condemns the White Supremacy. The viewer to him say that publicly. Joseph maher i cant recall. I cant recall a time. Is easy, yes or no. I do not recall a time. You cannot recall him saying it publicly. Turn to me ask you another question. Nn the l reason why we brought you and capitol hill is actually very simple rated theres no mystery. It is because dhs among other things refuses to grant a security clearance to mr. Murphys attorney. To facilitate him coming to testifying about his whistleblower complaints. Noac sir, im just going to ask you a couple of very easy questions. Have you interacted with anybody in dhs with regards to the issue of granting mr. Murphy a securityh clearance. Joseph maher i am generally that the office who handles those clearances is handling it. Been told is being done an expedited passion. A second. Expedited fashion. When the average person watching at home heres you say expedited fashion. That usually means perhaps its done in hours prayed perhaps it is done in days. But now it has been weeks and is approaching months. So why isnt the case that this gentlemans attorney cannot receive basic security clearance to be able to testify before us. Joseph maher first call this is not basic security clearances a very high security clearance. Second, what is it expedited, and does take months. And has not beenur months. The process is been started. When i say expedited it could be months. He could be months is that what youre saying this particular set case. Joseph maher no it is not what i am saying. When will he receive a security clearance under an expedited fashion. Joseph maher you cant say because you dont know whats in the background and take a look. Somethingur is nothing in the background for cause of concern. Is there something in his background thatsso concluding m from receiving a security clearance. Joseph maher im not part ofkg that. You said there could be something in his background im just asking you to identify is there something in this attorneys background of the concludes him from getting security clearance to testify to us one month after we ask them to comees here. Joseph maher you are putting forth inty my mouth and the ansr is that as a general matter get in the topsecret security clearance, it takes months usually for that to happen. My understanding is the process for these individuals being expedited, but that would probably mean to me is that they put this ahead ofn some of the other ongoing parts that they probably have their. And probably trying to do it more quickly than they ordinarily would. Cannot prejudge how long it will take because you dont know until you look what concerns or may or may not be. I have no familiarity with these particular individuals. Or the status of what is being done in their particular it is been a month now you just have to judge whether or not therecu is something wrong with this guys back on parade is just that. Not asking you to. Or prejudge freedom not asking you to anticipate freedom asking you to just tell is is there something wrong that disqualifies the sky, the attorney from showing up to defend his whistleblowers clients brings great as i said i am not involved in the process. So i cannot tell you what may or may not be in his background. Thank you. Were going to take a brief recess to move to another secure room. Reporter reve up i just want o follow up with the question. Mr. Hurd and asked you if you are aware of any politicization in the intelligence at your agency. Think he was of his present you said that you were aware of some intelligence. What are you referring to. Joseph maher email for mr. Murphy. That was sent to the workforce. Subsequently reported to the press. What is that email alleged. Joseph maher and instructed the intelligence professionals to characterize activities for certain individuals in a certain way. So my understanding is thats been reviewed by the Inspector General. And what individuals in what way. Joseph maher my understanding, we need to look back at the emails. My understanding is was angege instruction to characterize certain individuals as an argus. Warranty for affiliated there something along those lines. So youre aware of some evidence of an effort to put aside ellen and trent intelligence by accentuating a threat from anti for and downplaying the threat for white supremacist bring. Joseph maher know, is not what im saying. Then what are youfa saying. Joseph maher as its understood in the Intelligence Community involves to predetermine how the Intelligence Report will be written rather than based on beliefs of the intelligence professionals that are gathering and analyzing the situation. And so, my understanding is that the instruction without a cause for concern and being looked at as i understand it. Do you finalal comments. Were going to submit questions for the record, both in the public portion of this and then we may or may not send classified questions and hopefully you will respond quickly on those if you turn this aroundop quickly, we would appreciate it. Some members are voting in a committee hearing. So i know there are additional questions for the record. Will you respond to those prayed. Joseph maher yes or. I yield back. Before we break, just want tt underscore something my colleague mr. Maloney was putting out about why we take these issues so seriously. There was a time when members of both parties took issues of politicization of intelligence seriously. As time went wouldve gotten a passing bit of inattention. Advisor for aity sitting president. They were in aiding and abetting aen foreign adversary and that foreign adversaries in effort to interfere in our democracy. There was a time that kind of thing would be of concern to both parties. Apparently that time has passed. But for us, we are still concerned when we hear serious allegations that the president of the United States and e political appointees that intelligence agencies including dhs are withholding intelligence because it would be embarrassing to the president if it were revealed that a foreign powers intervening on his behalf. Never mind what it means to the country orea our elections will withhold because of some embarrassing. Those allegations creep take seriously. We take it seriously allegations that intelligence, agencies to political narrative, or having a threat in our southern border. Or reporting falsely to congress whether it is the home and committee, our committee 20 and the committee. We take that seriously. We takehe it seriously when a predominant domestic Terror Threat a White Supremacy is politicized were buried or diminished. Emphasized in favor of a political narrative that would emphasize Something Else that would be more pleasing to the president like and shiva. We take those allegations seriously. I am baffled when i get course wanted is from your office saying that you dont really have jurisdiction to look into a whistleblower complaint alleging these things. Of course we do. And i also get concerned when i hear people make the disingenuous argument that it takes months to do a security clearance for a lawyer for a day. A lawyer by the way, already has a security clearance. In the four years, to chaired by myself and we have never seen security clearance for a one day testimony of a whistleblower takes a long. I guess you would ask us in us the whole country to believe that this is for a perfectly benevolent reason. Theres too much history for us to take that for granted. I worship and were otherwise. Theres just too much history the stalling and stonewalling and avoiding the necessity of responding to lawful Requests Congress credit too much evidence. So that is why we are here. That is why we are here to help in a closed session, you will feel able to be more forthcoming about what youve heard and what you know. And not simply different tune Inspector General investigation. If you are for the moment, for however long the administration lead you in the position, you are running Intelligence Unit to 104 agencies. Given the seriousness of these allegations, you cant simply click away and say, im just going to wait for the Inspector General. Anymore than we can. We will resume and a half an hour, and the secure spaces for the portion of this hearing. Thank you. Hearing. Thank [background sounds]. [background sounds]. Book tv on cspan2 has top nonfiction books and authors. Every weekend, saturday at 9 15 p. M. Eastern, Donald Trump Jr on his book, literal privilege. Then 11 00 oclock, the virginia dynasty, form a second lady, lentini chronicles the leadership of the first five president s from virginia pray to George Washington Thomas Jefferson James Madison and james monroe. And on sunday, and 9 00 p. M. Eastern on afterwards, former cia director john brennan speaks about his life and career in his book undaunted. Fight against americas enemies at home and abroad. Hes interviewed by New York Times National Security reporter julian barnes. Much book tv, this weekend on cspan2. The Senate Confirmation hearing for judge by Judiciary Committee members introduction of the nominate followed by an Opening Statement by judge barrett, watch live coverage on cspan. Org listen live in cspan radio. This was about judge amy coney barrett. All 435 policies are up for election in november plaintiff according to the political report, they are competitive. When is new jersey second Congressional District where incumbent jeff switch parties from democrat to republican last december. Facing democratic competitor. Is debate night at the academic center. Facing off, jeff will be joining the Republican Party. He made National Headlines after a very public party switch targeted. The reason i left is because the Democratic Party is lurching his opponent, amy kennedy, former Public School teacher and a member of one of the most
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.