To discuss them with a great group with us, jeh johon is the former secretary of Homeland Security answers as general counsel of the department of defense among other positions. He also represes new jersey in th seven state council the coordinates covid related reopening. Sue gordon is the former Principal Deputy director of national intelligence, the nation secondhighest intelligence post and sheerved in the Intelligence Community for over three decades in a variety of senior positions. Carrie corderode is the robert gates senior fellow at cns and organizations general counsel. When she was in, she served at the department of justice and the office of the director of national intelligence. Its a great group. We i have got to discuss today. Well start our conversation among us and then moved to some audience questions which, can enter in the q a box on your screen and we will also have a few questions as we done in our past couple sessions that we will we then throughout so we can get a sense with the audience thinks about some of those things and topics. Lets start with Homeland Security and jay, outgo to you first. Ill go despite the really broad array of responsibility that dhs has come Trump Administration is focused heavily on immigration and Border Security enforcement as the sort of signature policy priority of the administration, in your mind what will or should the Biden Administration due to recalibrate the policy focus of the department . Are there areas that have been overweighted, neglected that need some sort of recalibration . Hey, richard, thanks for having me on. Thanks for including me in this program. And im a proud member, proud board member of cnas, terrific organization, for all those who are listening in. I have to begin by saying i was very, very please with the news a few minutes ago that alejandro mayor cruz the former deputy secretary of dhs president elect bidens choice to be the secretaryhs of dhs. He has a wellrounded experience with the department of Homeland Security. He ran uscis as deputy secretary years ago. He was u. S. Attorney in the southern california, so i can think anyone more qualified to take on the leadership of dhs. So when i was in office for three years i constantly saw to remind the public and the congress that dhs is much more than immigration enforcement. Dhs is aviation security, cybersecurity, port security, maritime security. Its essentially protecting the American People in theng homelad on the one yard line, and people inside the beltway very often overlooked the fact that whats on the minds of most americans is, is it safe for me to travel . Is it safe for my daughter or son on spring break to travel someplace . Thats what americans really care about. So they care about aviation security. They care about maritimeio security. They care about the full range dhs does toat protect the American Public. I think the more the next Leadership Team does the same, the more it will help to restore the credibility of dhs, which has really taken a battering over the last four years because as you pointed out immigration has been the signature issue of the entire Trump Administration, dhs hass been used as the hammr for driving that mission. There is a way to enforce our immigration laws in a sensible, compassionate way while pursuing Immigration Reform in this country. All he knows how to do that. Im confident he will take on that mission in the very confident way. But its important member the recent dhs was created was in the wake of 9 11 essentially for counterterrorism. [phone ringing] different ways over. Sorry about that. No problem. No problem. Let me just follow up on that and then i want to get sous take on this as well which is you said dhs founded and created after 9 11 to prevent another 9 11 and two decades later where do you sort of place terrorism in the rate of National Security threats facing the United States . Its pretty striking in very focused are on great power competition, the rise of china, foreign interference in our election, write a different things. If you look at the polls, americans put terrorism still quite high in the list of concerns that they care about. Its less north korea, iran and things like that but where do you place terrorism now 20 is after the creation of dhs . Good question. Itss important when ranking National Security threats to rememberra that something may ba secondary level threat until its not come into the moment its not. Terrorism, the threat of terrorism to this country has evolved greatly since 9 11. I saw it evolved just a watch at the department of defense and dhs, from what we referred to as terrorist directed attacks on there homeland, to terrorist inspired attacks through the internet and so forth. The principal Terror Threat right now in the United States, frankly, is domesticbased, domestic inspired terrorism. And that is what weve been seeing of late, the antidefamation w league, for example, has been tracking this for sometime now and has been repeatedly pointing out that the principal terrorist threat to our homeland is right wing pilot inspired terrorism, domestic in nature. Dhs was created by congress in 2002 on the assumption that terrorism was in extraterritorialal threat and, therefore, if you consolidate into one cabinetlevel department all the different ways somebody can enter our country, land, sea and air, you are effectively dealing with terrorism. That model is somewhat outdated and its why i, for example, while i was in office spent so much time on our cve mission, countering violent extremism here at home. While i was in office also i quickly came to the realization that if terrorism, counterterrorism was a cornerstone of the nation, the other cornerstone needs to bee cybersecurity. Done a lot both on my watch and after, frankly, on a pretty dhs cybersecurity mission. I am very proud of what since it under the leadership of crist grabs has done to strengthen our election infrastructure cybersecurity cisa though he was fired for reasons i dont fully understand last week. Over. Yeah, i think well, i guess we shouldnt speculate on intent of why he was fired, but seems like you said the wrong things about the integrity of the election. Sue, let me go to you, and if you have at you about dhs and its responsibilities, but also i wanted to ask y this question about whe you sort of rank their resumes of threat and maybe to drill down a little bit on his point that you have terrorists overhere, isis, alqaeda, all of theifferent terrorist groups weve been acking for whole decade now and this domestic problem here at home, and how doou think about what the rponsibility of the government should be Going Forward o the . It was a great questio and thanks for having me, and everything jeh said i support. From an ielligence perspective i will talk about three thing i put in the eventnd start with terrorism and i wil start with a partilar kind, wch is that associate with wmd, weapons o mass destruction, whether that is nuclear weapo or whether that i biological or chemical. I think those are low probability, high impactvents. And when i think of dhs,rom my Vantage Point as an intelgence officer, in a way the transportation from a threat to an action to protect. And i think that if you look at the playbook a little b, that cisa affectedith Election Security, what they did is reach all the way to state and local, theyhe reached all the way to te private sector. Th exercised the heck out of it, so when we came to an election you couldee that there was a preparedns and resilience. My question is, have we done e same thi with the ris of wmd in t hands of terrorists, and ar equally prepared . Pandics taught us the same thing wre we certainly knew the pandemic was a strategic threat, it even though we had exercises, were we prepared all the way to the localit if i think, add to jehs point about what i think are good, new age focused for dhs, i would add pandemics. Whats the Border Patrol issues there . I wou add wmd. Whats the connection with sta and local and preparednes if you have that kind of event . I would certainly keep going with cybersecurity because this is a digal world and that is just so and t low Cost Effective way to go. Let me follow up with you on this and then i want to bring in kerry you and minute. I want to bring in a in a qstin from one of the audience members of the threat disinformation activities that seemo be super focused before the election and now weve got our own problems with the president who doesnt want to ccede and all of this. Which i seems like it makes it a little hardit to evaluate kind of all those people with the disinfmation effect would have been ahead of the election a how it is compared to 26. Are we getting our hands on how to respond to this . What is your sense of how the government is doing i dealing with this information, please coming from foreign actors . I think we are aware its a real. Trust in truth of the foundation of free andpen societies i you cant be confident in Communications Going from point a t poi b in a protective fashion come i we cant count on what you hear to be true you ar going have come you run the risk of undermining the basic tenets of democracies. We know that something we need to deal with. Certainly our adversaries have watched this and see that they canpen up wrists or create opportunities for themselves through disinformation wheth that is disinformation about covid covert vcines of whether that is disinformation about suicidal behavis. I think they certainly know it suicidal behavrs. I think theres a harkin ment here in that itsot just the government whos going toe expected to protect against disinformation. A lot of transparency around this issue is really to get the citizenry t involve a little bit of critical thinking. I dont knowhether twitter a facebook have quite right in terms of what they are doing to tr and ensure the authenticity of information, but i like they are making attempts. I think it is an incredibly powerful tool of our adversary or any adversary against an open society. But i think w have a moment where we just havei to bear down and create more rules around it, the rules abo behavior, we need to get the citizenry involved in criticalhinking. Great. Kerry, let me g to you, and so cisa has come up twiceow. Youve done a lot of work on election secity during the time it cnas andlso you are also in government when other issues that fall into cisa valley which cameth abo including some of the major leaks and hacks that hit the Intelligence Community. I wanted to ask wt your sense is both on the Election Security front but also federal and cyrsecurity and whats left to be done there, given how shall we say consequential some of these leaks have been thus far . [inaudible] you are unmute, carrie. Orry, got it for it would not a virtually thatithout saying youd are unmute ateast once or twice. At lea one time. There we go. Great to be with this very distinguishe panel here. So on cisa, first of all, with respect to direcr krebs being fired last week, i think its pretty apparent why he was five picky was fired because cisa stood up a webpage called rumor control which was intded to bat down originally foreign disinformaon about threats to the election. W and a more disinformationrom even domestic sources continue to provide wrong informationo americans, cisa used that capacity to bat and rumors come in particular rumorsbout inadequate voting systems and technogy about voting systems that was just not true. It was that truth telling to the American Public that finally got the cisa director fired by the esident. What cisa was able to do was really remkable because what they did is they took the form threats to the election that we all know through birtisanly use of the Senate Intelligence committee in016, the special counsels review, rusher interference in the election in 2016, a they work with ruer interference thetate and local Party Support because its not the federal government ru elections. Its happening by professionals who know how to run ection to the state and local level. But cisa health get them resourcesan help educate them in order to harden the entire country defenses when it came to the functioning of elections and vong stems. And sohis election was the really smooth running election, especially given all of the challenges of the pandemic and coronavirus and pples health and safety of trying to run electi in that of private and yes, the actualechanics of the election with extraordinarily well, very few if any problems in the administration of the actual electio i think that was a real cisa story. Of course cisa was critical as an entity. It was a component of dhs but was formalized through legislation during the Trump Administration and so it is one realin bright spot in the department of Homeland Security of the last few years which is jeh was describing earlier, otherwise in the Trump Administration really has been overly consumed with the immigration and emigration importer security issue. On your question with respect to leaks, that takes us in Different Directions that we can talk more about the Intelligence Community issues, but we really have been in a pervasive era of hacks and leaks. One of the things i think the Bidenharris Administration will be looking to do is to really take another look at what the whole of government response is to addressing pervasive intellectual property theft, on the part of some for nationstates, continuation of criminal hacking activity they can build on the successes that cisa has brought but there still is a lot more that can be done. Great. Lets go to some of thehe questions about the Intelligence Community. We saw just a little while ago today that admiral haynes who is another board member of cnas ong witheh and others has been named the nominee signated for national intelligence. Let me go to jail and then i want to bringfo in sioux here on this. Odni is about in its 15th anniversary. I think its safe to say that we will enter and administration where the president has a very different approach to intelligence comes use both personally and his policy matters than the current one. Reportedly the president elect is an avid consumer of intelligence including briefings, including in person tbt types of briefings. The dean i could go in a in a r of different ways leaning heavily into the aspect of the primary intelligence prefer of the president or the role of coordinator of the ic more proud of the role of managing the budget potential of the roles as well. Howr el do you see the superstructure that now exists over the Intelligence Community and the best possible direction that it should go as we go forward . Let me go to jeh first. First, he is simply an extraordinary human being. I have spent literally hundreds if not thousands of hours working with her duringot the Obama Administration. She is one of the hardest working people i know and she will be fantastic at dni. Ii will confess that when the di bureaucracy was first created in 2002 by congress, i was not a big fan of it, having been at the pentagon once by that point. Because i thought was an added layer of unnecessary bureaucracy. I have to say now that ive become a fan of the way it works. I think jim clapper really did bringy it along way in coordinating all the different intelligence agencies in thef alphabet soup. And as the consumer of intelligence for a number of years in National Security, i see now the virtue of doing it the way we do it. It got to the point where i too am a big fan of briefings. It was a most important part of my day w to read the daily intel and then give a verbal briefing later on, and would all be corrugated through dni and every once in a while you would get a dissenting opinion out of the alphabet soup. It would say dissenting opinion here and so i had the analyst come up to headquarters both majority and dissenting opinions to explain the different views, and the process works pretty well now. I cannot emphasize the importance enough if youre a National Security of consuming intelligence on a daily basis. It really is your eyes and ears for doing your job, and the people who worked with me when i set Homeland Security would tell me that it was a firstnet did when i got to work, then i would spend an hour, half hour verbally getting the daily intel and then if i have time left over i would turn to the washington post, New York Times and others to see how the press was covering what i knew to be reality. I cant stress enough the importance of a well running, functional, bipartisan, credible Intelligence Community. Sioux, i suspect you may have thought or two on this. What do you think . What im smiling add jason he wasnt initially a fan of information of the dni, i was at the cia and we were like, dont you understand about the word central . Why do we a need this additional layer . I will tell you in the years since its been instrumental in that bringing the fbi in dhs more homeland, more domestic agents to bee part of the same thing to achieve the whole of government responses that we need w to adversarial event. It keeps us from allowing them to hide here because intelligence im huge fan. Listen, the art of the position of the dni has been since its inception it was really kind of oversight and policy adherence. In the middle years of the integration. I think a real couldnt agree more is a fantastic choice just for so many reasons. But i think her challenge is going to be it is yes about the production and the conveyance of integrated, relevant intelligence, but theres also a leadership job at the dni via to do for the Intelligence Community. There are a lot of things it needs to address in terms of change priorities. The introduction of much more Information Technology to be able to deal with the data that is now available and the fact this is a world where the threat or through and through information. And justnf making sure that the community isnt dragging its past of the cold war and counterterrorism to such an extent that it is trying to do with great power competition, Global Competitiveness with whats left over. I think theres also a leadership job that she is going to have the opportunity, and there is one of the great powers of the office of the dni in addition to being that single voice that can share the wisdom of the community with president andre administration, its to he budget control. Youre trying to shape toward a new future. You really do need that in order to make someo of the decisions rather than just carrying on the past. So great human, greatecec time, thatat stage voice that allows intelligence to be brought to issues but also the would be a leadership challenge here in bringing the community into the dynamic environment we have right now. Great. Just to add my two cents of praise to her, i think shes one of the sharpest hardest working and flat out kind this speed is just such a decent human being. Youll ever meet and have that nearly unique accommodation skills to be truly exceptional leader of intel community. Shai korman, more formally known as dj shy, has an audience polling question. So over to you. Absolutely first of all, that you so much to the hundreds of folks that are on theive stream right now. Thank you f sending in your questions. Just scroll right below your video box on a webge cnas cnas. Org like and you can enter questions in the chat like before or you can hit ask a question and travel question in the a so theres a couple ways ask russians. We of course every time we do one of these events we have estions for you to hel shape our discussion. The first question of today is just an openes in the chapter we see people voting. Theirst. Question is which country should theiden administration worry aboutost as the biggest National Security threat to the United States . And yr options are china, russia, iran and north korea. As the votesommit i will be back in bit but, of course, i would love to know whathe panel would vote if they were observing at home right now. I will be back in little bit. Back to you, richard. You say by recalling dj shy. Great that we will come back on that. You can answer that question but i want to pull something out of that and also asked jeh and sue their views on this. And that a is about how to shut off right of National Security related issues but one of the patterns weve seen through Obama Administration into the Trump Administration is criminal prosecutionsns to address nasas goodie dirty threats in particular, the indictment ofio chinese nationas for the theft of international property, russian agents for interference in the 2016 election. Do you have a sense of, we believe this deters the activities . Doesnt have other the implicae should be aware of . Is this a big tool in our toolkit to do with these National Security threats, or is it something we get on top of other more t potentially consequential carrots and sticks . And then how do you see the efficacy of that Going Forward into a new administration . Its interesting because the use of criminal prosecution and bringing these major indictments against individual officers or foreign nationals who are involved in major hybrid attack against the United States is actually a through line from the Obama Administration through the trump t administration. It is one aspect of National Security activity on behalf of the government that have been relatively consistent. It was under the Obama Administration that major indictmentsha were brought and more of those plus the russian indictments, the fact russian officers were 2016 election in events happen under this administration, under the special counsel. Its been consistent. I suspect hell continue as a tool. In terms of its value, obviously we dont really expect these individuals to set for trial in the United States but what it does do is it communicates to the world, communicates to the adversary and communicate to the public what is going on behind the scenes. The really is a significant transparency value in addition to just the valley of bringing come using our Justice System in order to bring consequence to individuals. There arequ some marginal tax in terms of individuals affected in their ability to travel and things like that. But what it cant be and so im sure this is something that the Bidenharris Administration will be thinking that is it cant be one of the only things that we do. I suspect one thing will see in the future is more effort to what is the overall whole of Government Strategy to approach these types of activities. If i can come along to follow up for second on the conversation you are having with both sue nj of institutions of odni in dhs. Because as a post9 11 government come National Security for and having been out for a long time one of the things we have to keep in mind is these institutions, they are not just set it and forget it. In other. In other words, just because we created the dni and department of Homeland Security after the september 11 attacks and in response to them doesnt mean we can then let the legislation stint as it always is. I dont believe in going backward. My perspective is we need to take these institutions and build on their success but also they do need to modernize and the need to have a forwardlooking vision and one of the most important things to that is for them to be able to adapt to the changing threat environment. Compounded by new threats. And one of the things we have not talked about yet is the corona virus pandemic. These institutions we are talking about today were the institutions created in response to the september 11 attacks. We were having as Many Americans die each day as died on that attack on that one day. One of the things well talk in the future. How do we need to not throw out and start over with our institutions that better protect americans from such a significant threat and international event, but how do we improve them so that the public can be better protected. Thats a great point and certainly, thats it strikes me to see not just hhs is in the pandemic response, but the Intelligence Community has a role to play and dhs. Lets get a look at the results of the poll. What are we looking at here . All right, our results from the poll are in. 74 say china is the country, the biggest intel threat to the United States that the baidu administration should worry about. 18 with russia. There was a little back and forth between russia and china and then china just blew past russia and 5 for iran and 1 for north korea. All right, i get a little worried when i see 1 for north korea because every time the north koreans see their number go too low, they have something to raise it. And they have someone every time so they have a fan. Let me go to you on the question of prosecutions of, you know, foreign actors for National Security, particularly the kind of things that we talked about and then also, maybe you could just say a word, given your role on that covid response, and reopening commission or task force about the role of the various National Security agencies in that, over, you know, the next at least, say, six months or so . Sure. So, im going to go back to what we were just talking about, the rankings. Most serious National Security threat. You know, one of the problems with doing that exercise is what you just pointed out, richard. 1 of the audience here, and i have to believe its a pretty sophisticated audience, only 1 believe north korea is the number one threat. Each one of those countries on that list represents a threat of a different kind and character and to, you know, put north korea at 1 suggests to the unsophisticated consumers, dont worry about him. Thats obviously not the case. Its a little like saying theres an 85 probability and so you have to be careful with the rankings because each one of those represents a different type of threat. So i know from personal experience that the Chinese Government, Chinese Government leaders in particular, get really, really upset when you indict Chinese Government officials. Even if the defendant is indicted in abstentia and never sees the inside of a federal courtroom in the u. S. , it does have an impact, i believe, to some extent, it has a deterrent impact because its the u. S. Government spelling out what we know in terms of the criminal behavior of a Foreign Government official and very often, how we know it. And it tells the public the story of the crime, the National Security crime, so to speak. I thought there was value in the mueller indictments laying out extensively as they did the Russian Disinformation Campaign from 2016 even though those indicted may never see the inside of a federal courtroom. When you talk about the federal criminal justice process and National Security, you have to always remember the number of al qaeda, alshabaab terrorists who have been indicted in our federal criminal Justice System who have been brought to justice and who are now serving long prison sentences so there definitely is a role for federal criminal justice Law Enforceme enforcement in defending and protecting National Security, over. Im sorry, covid, covid. So whenever anybody asks me about covid and dhs, its a little like, you know, you cant help, but be an armchair quarterback because were now very far along in addressing this pandemic. And its easy to say i would have done it differently had i been back in the first inning, but it is clear to me from my own experience that fema should have been part of the governments the National Governments response to covid from the beginning. Fema is, in my view, the agency of our government, best at deploying, marshalling resources like ppe, like ventilators, for example. This administration did not, in my judgment, make effective use of the defense production act and so theres simply a lot more we could have done at the National Level with the resources we have and that we train to use over the years to shepherd resources and allocate them to the communities that need the most at the time they needed them. And so, theres been an underutilization there. I hope our government at the National Level now is thinking about the vaccine and how the vaccine can most effectively be deployed in the places, for the people that need them most on a priority level. And thats the next big challenge. Along the way, its basic messaging to the American Public about physical distancing, good hygiene, the mask, wear the mask. Were all in fatigue right now after nine months of dealing with this virus, but we know what it takes to flatten the curve. If people have the discipline to stick with what we know works. Great. Sue, let me go to you on a question let me try to combine one question, i wont combine it on you. This is pretty broad. How do you expect different technologies, for example, ai, affecting dhs. Thats a subject, i dont know, 100 hours of discussion, but maybe you could pick a little bit there. There are technologies that we want to protect and ig networks and things like that. Technologies that the Intelligence Community wants to keep out of the hands of others, things like that. Maybe break it down a bit. Are there Top Technology issues on the front burner over the next year, and then, also, you know, is there enough kind of for the Technology Fluency among the policy makers and kind of the general leadership and the ic to be able to make as informed decisions as we would want on the pretty complicated technical questions . Lets see, three ill answer in three. The first is, hey, listen, this is a technical world and so many issues go through technology. For the Intelligence Community, it has got to win at being able to use the information that will help it answer its question more effectively and its got to be able to with integrated into the human processes and have more wisdom and insight. Its not as much that were behind as that it has to become integrated into the way we do work. And so, just the introduction of the Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence into the craft of intelligence from collection processing and analysis is really important and has to be a focus sat the exact same time. There has to be a National Effort on ai assurance, because if you cant trust the data or the algorithms, youre going to have a hard time. Thats one. The next is Technology Leadership in general and how we maintain that and how we protect it is going to be a Huge National issue. It used to be that the secured technology is the most important, were produced by the government and we knew how to control it. Now the most important technologies are being produced outside the government and were trying to shut the barn door after theyre already out and were going to have to balance this, securing the technology and allowing the Technology Leadership for our companies because if we shut us down, that will not serve our purposes, so if its me, im going to really emphasize leadership at dot and department of commerce and do the same sort of thing while bringing them into the intelligence family that you did with dhs and fbi years ago because Technology Leadership and Technology Advance is going to be applied. And to the third, your question about are our leaders and our leadership and our work force technologically savvy enough, no. And where that comes into play at the leadership level is you cannot, if youre not comfortable with technology, if youre not comfortable with data and i understand it limits its abilities, you will view that as adding risk and you will retard the introduction of new ideas and so were really going to have to invest in technology. If youre a leader you have to be comfortable with technology today. Weve got to work on the leadership that can lead this. Great. Thank you. Lets go to our next question here. Sure. Our next poll question has to do with federal criminal prosecutions. Are federal criminal prosecutions useful tools for deterring National Security and intel threats, for example, the chinese nationals for ip threat or for ip threat, russian agents, election interference and your options are, yes, keep them up. No, fight fire with fire. A little of both, or none of the above and well be back in a little bit with those results. Over to you, richard. All right, well see how persuasive the previous discussion was on members of the audience. As were waiting for that. Carrie, let me go to you and id love to bring in jeh and sue as well on this, and theres a question from the audience about domestic white extremism and whether this should be classified as quote, a National Security threat and if it does, does that invite the National Security, dod gets involved or should it be kept as a Law Enforcement priority within dhs and doj . Do we need legislation . How do you think about that . Sure. So, first lets just to set the table in terms of the way the government currently handles it. So domestic terrorism, the primary responsibility for investigating that falls to the fbi. Not on the National Security side though. Generally on the criminal investigative side and remember, the Intelligence Community is foreign focused. So its focused on foreign intelligence threats, not domestic threats and thats really important because we dont, in the United States, have an internal security system, in other words, a set of investigators thats looking for americans for domestic activity. And thats why traditionally we reside the investigations into domestic terrorism at the fbi and then we use dhs as a conduit for intelligence sharing through the department of Homeland Security to intersect with the locals. The challenge is, in changing that is what we dont want to do, is create some type of intel, internal Security Service looking at americans based on their First Amendment activities. Thats why we split out the criminal investigative part on the domestic terrorism side. However, were currently in an environment where we are starting to see greater and greater threats on the domestic side. So one way to address that is to make sure that within the justice department, this is adequate the investigation of domestic terrorism is adequately resourced, is adequately made a priority under the umbrella of the existing and if they need to be modified at all. Under that umbrella of investigations that are conducted according to attorney general guidelines with appropriate consideration for privacy and Fourth Amendment and First Amendment rights. Jeh, i see youre nodding your head to at least some of those things. Does that generally concur with where you come in . Yes, i couldnt say it any better myself. Terry nailed it. Look, theres an impulse in this country which weve seen, to label certain Domestic Groups or movements a terrorist organization. There is no Legal Mechanism for doing that. As carrie points out, our government has the ability to designate an overseas terrorist organization, a foreign terrorist organization. Thats done by the state department, but theres no Legal Mechanism for designating a Domestic Group or a movement to be a terrorist organization. It would have no legal effect. The laws under title 18 should be adequate for dealing with people, groups, conspiracies that turn criminal in nature. I think carrie is right that the department of justice, the fbi, need to constantly reevaluate whether the authorities they have, the tools they have, are adequate to deal with an evolving Law Enforcement threat picture, the threat of violent White Nationalism that i talked about earlier. But its against our values, its against who we are as a nation to start labeling people and groups domestically as somehow terrorist organizations and the like. We have to be really, really careful there. Why dont you give us the results of the poll and tee up our last question for the audience. Sure, and our poll results were, he think most of the folks were really just in, you know, were in the middle on that. It will be interesting to see with our next poll question, we have 59 with a little of both. Im going to bring up our next question where this will be interesting to see the divisions on this one and this is which of these activities poses the more significant threat to u. S. National security, intellectual property theft, Cyber Attacks, disinformation or hacks and leaks . That poll is now open. The votes are already pouring in, and so ill be back a little bit later with those results. I will vote on that one. Go for it. Ill wait. I dont want to well find out, yeah, well find out the results and then come to you on that. One thing, too, maybe i can go to you and then back to jeh on this, both from the intelligence, theres a question from the audience on climate and how that plays the question is about dhs, but i think the Intelligence Community and really just the broader National Security enterprises is at question here given that the Incoming Administration is this may be one of most dramatic policy shifts going from, you know, the president often is very dismissive of commitment change and says it showed the other day and therefore it doesnt exist all the way to today, john kerry presented special envoy for Climate Change is going to be a top Foreign PolicyNational Security, i think, slash economic kind of priority for the incoming team and will have little effect on the priorities and activities of various agencies. Sue, you know, where does where is the Intelligence Community on this particular question and where does it go from here . And jeh, ill ask you from a dhs perspective. So, the Intelligence Community is going to have to figure out its priorities because there are a lot of them. Would i say there are three that emerged in the last year. Pandemics, immigration, and climate, that are certainly National Security challenges. You just they are. And the Intelligence Community in general has had a relatively light hand in terms of involvement and certainly not the leadership position, even though we have. And part of that reason is because that is not typically where our strengths and our collection strength is. So, our collection strength was 1947, the things we did and other people do it. But if you agree its a National Security threat and you understand that intelligence is about the craft of being able to do with widely dispersed information, being able to put it in a format to allow people to deal with that uncertain information with uncertainty and have an objectivity to it its hard to argue that the Intelligence Community shouldnt have more of a role in those three issues. And you see as strive increases on each one of those, theyre going to have ripple effects into an eco system of displaced persons, economic strive strife. But its figuring out what they have to contribute and what other areas of focus will be. But my bet is they need to look at it pretty seriously since those are significant National Security threats. Great. Lets get the results from the poll and then jeh can give his answer and an answer he didnt want to reveal beforehand. So, every week, we have theres always one question that is, you know, theres a real hot debate and here we have this week, neck and neck, Cyber Attacks and disinformation, 41 and 43 respectively, and then ip theft and hacks and leaks at 8 and 5 . So, a real back and forth photo finish for Cyber Attacks and disinformation. Back to you. All right. Weve got to get him a radio show. He just enjoys this too much. I agree. [laughter] jeh, go ahead. I just want to say, too, i would put disinformation right up there because disinformation is one of the drivers of the polarization we see right now in our politics and given the polarized political environment, its tough for our democracy to get stuff done. Its tough for our democracy to address all of these other issues we have been talking about if theres a basic debate about whether the earth is flat or the earth is round. And so, as long as we live in this environment where vast numbers of people in the american electorate are susceptible to disinformation out there, that is an underlying problem that affects our ability to solve these other problems that we face. On the issue of Climate Change, it is a Homeland Security matter, most immediately because of the Severe Weather events effect on aging infrastructure in this country bridges, tunnels, railroad tunnels, you know, weve got a taste of this, for example, with Hurricane Sandy here in the new york area and dhs, fema, specifically, is in a position to help evaluate our aging infrastructure and what is it thats more vulnerable to the increasing number of Severe Weather events that we see. Little known fact, dhs gives out hundreds of millions of dollars every year in grants to bolster Homeland Security. I hope we are continually evaluating whether we are adequately addressing the threat picture with these grants, including the effects of Severe Weather events. Carrie, id ask you to come in on this question of disinformation. Youve done a lot of work in this area and it seems, as jeh is saying, to run a democracy effectively, you need at least two things, right . You need a shared understanding of reality and some basic level of trust, and it looks like those are going out the window to some degree. And thats a gigantic Pressure Point for our open society and our democracy. So one, and without leading the witness here, do you put the same priority on disinformation as jeh did and also, what do we do about this . Well, i tend to look at all of the four things as sort of different side of the same die, really. When were looking at because they all pertain to the information environment and some either theft of information in it or manipulation of it. So, you know, lawyer fighting the hypothetical, but i will say, theres an aspect to this that i think is relevant to the Intelligence Community. And id be curious what jeh and sue think about this as well, which is that traditionally the Intelligence Communitys role has been to provide information and warning to policy makers and the president being the consumer, the number one customer of that information. One of the questions that i have Going Forward that has, you know, been in some of my work, has been the concept of transparency and what the Intelligence Communitys obligations are as something that is funded by taxpayers, to the public to provide warning. Now, we have the congress and the intelligence committees that are supposed to be that proxy, between the Intelligence Community and the public, but in some ways particularly in the house and recent years, weve seen a breakdown in the effectiveness of that intelligence oversight. Hopefully that will change with the new congress. But when it comes to disinformation, one of the things that i think we need to be thinking about is what is the Intelligence Communitys obligation, we started talking cisa and how that played an Important Role in establishing Ground Troops and saw drawing on lessons from 2016, election interference. We saw a real concerted effort on the part of multiple Intelligence Leaders this summer from an individual who is in the dnis the odni office combined with the fbi director and the assistant National Security, and they issued statements together talking about here is what we know about foreign interference, some were criticized, some did not go as far as some would like. But it was a big shift with regard to transparency. With regard to other threats, one of the things well have to think about Going Forward is what, in order to beat down some of this information, what role is there for the Intelligence Community to play in it or not . May i jump in on that one . Yeah, i was going to say, i saw you totally agree, carrie. The way to think about it, who are the decision makers, and where is the threat surface . Right . What we know now, the threat surface is the private sector in our citizenry. So you have to provide them with the information, theyre also decision makers. Theyre making decisions about National Security with their actions. So i think a move towards transparency is really important. Ive been really proud since 2016 that the ic has done it with other elements. I will say theyre going to have a develop a little more craft around how you talk to, you know, theres arcanity to intelligence and analysis and when we talk to the government everyone kind of understands its limitations. In order to talk more to the public, more openly about it, and theyll have to develop craft about it. And jeh, you know that, theres how we talk to the Intelligence Community. When we were First Talking about it, we were giving information, but not the information, and then go for it. And the second prong what you need for democracy trust, so thats going to have to, you know, get some attention, too. All right. Well, were at time. So, jeh, sue, carrie, thank you so much for spending an hour to talk over these issues and cover a lot of territory and i think its a great discussion. Thank you to the audience for tuning in, for asking questions and answering the pl questions and everything else. We will continue toake opportunities, do discussions like this on whats to com as e opportunity arises, so watch thispace for more and thank you once again to our speakers and to you and the audience and of course, to our crack technal team included, butimited to dj for doing everything theyve done. Have a happy thanksgiving and well see you again. The u. S. Supreme court Court Hears Oral Argument in trump v new york today 10 a. M. Eastern on cspan. The court will hear whether President Trump has the authority to exclude documented individuals living in the u. S from the census apportionmenbase. Listen live on cspan, cspan. C cspan. Com Supreme Court or the radio app. Watch live this morning 10 30 a. M. This morning on cspan2. Tonight, on the communicators, netflix founder and Ceo Reed Hastings and business professor aaron meyer discuss the unorthodox Business Culture in one of the Largest Tech Companies in the world. No rules rules. Netflix and the culture of reinvention. You have to do what you think is right to help the customers and the company. You cant be trying to please your boss, me, youre not allowed to let me drive the bus off the cliff. You have to, you know, fight for the benefit of the company and in general, we say, dont seek to please your boss, seek to please the customers and to grow the company. Soway want people to actively think independently, not just to implement their bosss wishes. Watch the communicators tonight at 8 p. M. Eastern on cspan2. Next, former ambassadors and Foreign Policy experts have the new report on the atlantic council. We here with putinism and the incoming baidu presidency. This is an hour. Hello, everyone, and welcome from london. My name is it maria logan and im the trustee of the u. K. Charity, the future of Russia Foundation and i have the honor of introducing todays event, which is part of a series, future russia series, which my Foundation Supports in collaboration with the atlantic council. Todays event is largely based on the reports which was prepared by distinguished ambassador