comparemela.com

Mr. Thompson is the president s tomny to be the next inspector jen olof the cia. Congratulations on your nomination. Id like to start by recognizing your family you brought with you today. Welcome to both of you. Patricia, this is as much your day as it is peters and were all grateful for the support, the patience and encouragement youve now doubt provided him in helping him get to this day. This is most certainly a professional achievement you should both take pride in. Our goal in conducting this hearing is to enable this committee to have a thoughtful consideration of mr. Thompsons qualifications to be the next Inspector General of the cia. Mr. Thompson has provided written responses to questions from the committee from its members, and this morning members will be able to ask any additional questions they have and hear the answer directly from the nominee. Mr. Thompson is a double grad kwt. He spent 23 years as a prosecutor with the department of justice as a u. S. Attorney for the Eastern District of louisiana. During his time with doj peter served on special assignment with a National Security agency. Since 2011 hes been in private practice in new orleans where he he has done dozens of criminal trials and litigated at the state level as well. Teaching Trial Advocacy and giving back to his alma mater. Mr. Thompson, youve been asked to lead a statutorily created office that is responsible for independent oversight of the Central Intelligence agency. If confirmed you will conduct audits, inspections, investigations and reviews of cia programs and operations. You will play a very Important Role in ensuring the cia carries out its mandate efficiently, accountably and always according to the law. The satisfaction of this committees oversight will at time require transparency and responsiveness from you and your office. We may ask difficult questions of you and your staff and we expect honest, complete and timely answers. At the same time we will also want you to feel free to come to the committee with situations that warrant our attention and our partnership. I look forward to hearing from you today to ultimately supporting your nomination and ensuring its consideration without delay. I want to thank you for being here, for your years of service to our country and your willingness to resume that service and we all look forward to your testimony. Now i recognize the vicechairman. Well, thank you mr. Chairman, and welcome mr. Thompson. Its good to kind of see you again in this awfully large room. And let me add to the chairmans comments in terms of congratulations in your nomination to serve as Inspector General of the cia. The job of an Inspector General is critical to the effective operation of any agency. Should you be confirmed you will hold one of the most vital roles at the cia and within the whole Intelligence Community because independent independent and impartial inspectors general help to ensure theres robust oversight of an agency that by necessity undertakes its most important and Effective Work in secrecy. Now, we all know by statute the cia Inspector General is expressly mandated to report not only to the cia director but to this committee. And specifically made accountable to congress. This is necessary to ensure were able to conduct robust oversight of the cia and be made aware of any significant problems and deficiencies. This committee relies upon the inspectors general of the intelligence agencies to ensure the ic organizations are using taxpayer dollars wisely, conducting their activities within the rule and spirit of the law and supporting and protecting whistle blowers who report waste, fraud, and abuse. Unfortunately, what weve seen from this president and this administration convinces me that the independence of the Inspector Generals is under grave threat. We have seen the president attack without justification the brave men and women of the ic simply because they were doing what americans expected them to do, telling truth to power. Dni coats fired, deputy dni sue gordon fired, acting dni maguire fired, atkinson, fired. Fired for no reason other than doing his job and reporting to congress as he was legally mandated to do reporting the serious complaints of a whistleblower. Unfortunately, weve seen this administration go after other independent inspectors generals as well. At the state department, at hhs, at the Defense Department who have issued reports unwelcome in the white house or because they undertook investigations that were embarrassing to the president and his allies, but this is precisely why we have inspectors general. Not many like to be called in front of you, but your independence and doggedness are what help keep fraud, waste, abuse and malfeasance in check. So ill be looking for you today to explain why we can trust you to be independent and how youll go about your responsibilities. How you assure the men and women of the cia that if they bring forward a complaint against if they bring forward a complaint using legitimate channels they will be protected against retaliation. What are your red lines if you become aware of abuse or are asked to undertake actions that are not in keeping with what i hope will be your expectations and our expectations of you. If confirmed youll be the first Senate Confirmed i. G. At the cia in over five years. Youll have a difficult job to ensure your independence, to reassure whistleblowers and to take over an office that has been vacant for so long. Mr. Thompson, again, thank you for being here today and agreeing to serve in this Critical Role. I look forward to todays discussion. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Thompson, i understand youre going to be having two of our Senate Colleagues present introductions on your behalf. A lot of history have occurred in these halls so its appropriate that senator kennedy whose name is on the wall though its not named after him but will be one of your presenters. So welcome to your home, senator kennedy. Were always ready for you, sir. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Its an honor to be in front of the intelligence committee. Ive never been in front of the intelligence committee. Im going to assume im being bugged so ill choose my words carefully. Its a delight for me to introduce and recommend enthusiastically and unconditionally mr. Peter thompson for this important post. I agree with so much of what senator warner said. We live in cynical times. People correctly or incorrectly dont trust government. I understand that. Ive been in and out of government for, i dont know, 25, 30 years and i always tell my constituents that on occasion as bad as it looks from the outside you ought to see it from the inside. And inspectors general help balance that. Not only do they report impropriety, they address issues of the appearance of impropriety and both are important. Just recently i happened to sit on the judiciary committee, and i was very proud of the work done by Inspector General horowitz at the Justice Department. Im convinced had it not been for general horowitz we never would have known about the abuses of the fisa process at the fbi. Committed by a small group of people at the fbi. So this is an important job. Senator rubio did as usual a superb job of welcoming peter and also patricia and kaelin, his daughter. Peter brings a very unique background to this position. Right now he works at a law firm called stone pigman in new orleans. Im not going to tell you its the best law firm in louisiana. Wave got a lot of good one, but the list they dont hire dummies and the list stone bigmans on it doesnt take long to call the role. He heads the white collar criminal defense practice there, and hes also involved in Information Security practices. He has been special assistant to the chief at Dance Network operations at the National Security agency. He served for years as an assistant United States attorney. He has expertise in not just criminal defense but extradition matters. Hes assistant corporations with the foreign corrupt practices act. Hes litigated civil matters, regulatory matters and administrative case. As marco mentioned hes also been an adjunct professor for years. But let me just say a personal note before i conclude. Peter is a mature and serious person. He is hes not an especially good politician, but i dont think thats what this job requires. Hes more of an intellectual, as i think youll see this morning. He exercises power intelligently and nonemotionally. And he has extraordinarily able and good judgment, and i think thats what we want in an Inspector General particularly at the cia. So again, its my pleasure to be here today. And for what its worth mr. Thompson has my highest possible recommendation, and i appreciate your time. Thank you. And thank you for that presentation. Senator cornyn, i understand youll be presenting senator cassidys remarks. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator cassidy did send a letter recommending the nominee and he asked me to read it if youll indulge me for just a few minutes and then id ask consent it be made part of the record. Im writing today to express my strong support for Peter Thompson to become Inspector General of the Central Intelligence agency. Peter has a long and distinguished career in Public Service. His 23year career as a federal prosecutor in louisiana gives him deep firsthand experience rooting out fraud, waste, and abuse and wrongdoing. His peers attest to his competency and his character. On may 1, 35 of his colleagues in louisiana Law Enforcement signed a letter citing peters high ethical standards, work ethic, patriotism, legal competence, and reputation for integrity. I share their sentiment. Peters career has included overseeing the use of Government Funds which makes him well suited for the role of Inspector General. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina peter worked on the Katrina Fraud Task force. Catastrophes can bring out the best in people and i witnessed ax of courage and generosity in the midst of tragedy. However, some seek to take advantage of bad situations. Peter kept them accountable and he prosecuted the first significant public Corruption Case following the disaster. Not content to serve in government only in government peter took time to teach as well. He spent 20 years as the associate adjunct professor at two Lane University school of law where he mentored young people just starting their careers. In both his personal and professional life peter has shown us the conduct we hope to see in all our public servants. I ask for your support in the nomination of my fellow louisianan, and friend. Signed dr. Bill cassidy, United States senator. Without objection that will be in our record. Mr. Thompson, before you proceed with your statement if i could ask you to please stand and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear to give this committee the truth, the full truth so help you god. Thank you you can be seated. I want to ask you the five standard questions this committee poses to each nominee who appears before us. They can be answered with a simple yes or no if you prefer for the record. Do you agree to appear before the committee here or in other venues when invited . If confirmed do you agree to send officials from your office to appear before the committee and designated staff when invited . Do you agree to provide documents or any other materials requested by the committee in order for it to carry out its oversight and legislative responsibilities . Yes, i do, sir. Will you ensure your office and staff provide such material to the committee when requested . I do, sir. And do agree to inform and fully brief to the fullest extent possible all members of the activities and covert actions rather than the chairman and vicechairman. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. Well no proceed to your Opening Statement after which ill recognize members by seniority up to five minutes each. Mr. Thompson, the floor is yours. Thank you very much. Chairman rubio, vicechairman warner and distinguished members of the committee, i am honored to be here today as the president s nominee to be the Inspector General of the Central Intelligence agency. I would like first to thank senators bill cassidy and john kennedy for introducing me and for their kind words. I would also like to thank President Trump and cia director gena haspel for the confidence they have placed in me. Further, i appreciate and i am deeply grateful to those individuals who wrote or signed letters in support of my nomination. And last but certainly not least joining me here today are my dear wife patricia and my daughter kaelin. I wish to thank them for their patience and unwavering love and support throughout this process. Although i spent the majority of my government career in the u. S. Department of justice i have always held a deep respect and a profound admiration for the men and women of the cia and the important work they do in preempting threats to our nation. The cia has the critical responsibility of collecting, analyzing, evaluating and disseminating accurate and timely foreign intelligence to policy makers and consumers. And as you know the cia has the responsibility of conducting covert actions when necessary. I believe the officers who serve at the agency including those who serve at the office of Inspector General regardless of background, regardless of political affiliation, regardless of philosophical beliefs are united at their core by a deep love of our country and a strong desire and commitment to protect the American People. So for me it is truly a deep honor and one beyond words to be considered for such an important position within the cia. And to be given the opportunity if confirmed to lead the dedicated and patriotic officers of the office of the Inspector General. Growing up in new orleans i was blessed to have devoted and loving parents who taught me important values which are foundational requirements of an Inspector General. My mom grew up very poor, raised on a small farm on the banks of the mississippi river. She was cecilian so i grew up eating lots of italian food but also spending lots of time at the family farm which we called the country. My mom had an exceptionally strong constitution and was known to fiercely defend right in the face of wrong. She taught me the importance of family and loyalty and how to pick your friends, which had everything to do with character. And she taught me the importance of Standing Firm in ones righteous convictions. I didnt know it then but she was teaching me how to speak truth to power. And my father also grew up poor, raised by his widowed mother in new orleans. At age 21 following the attack on pearl harbor he enlisted in the u. S. Army air corpse and was train today be a heavy balm br pilot. He flew in missions, fighting the human malignant evils of his generation. After being honorably discharged he went to two lane law school with the help of a g. I. Bill. Graduated order of the coif, a high honor and became a successful attorney. My father taught and modeled the same values at my mom. My father also kindled in me an interest in law. He taught me about the rule of law and why it must be respected. And without a doubt my strong sense of patriotism derives from my fathers sacrifices during world war ii. I tell you this to offer a glimpse into my roots in order to give you and the american some insight as to how i will perform as Inspector General of the cia. If i am confirmed i feel the principles instilled in me my by parents, honesty, integrity, patriotism, speaking truth to power, the rule of law and Standing Firm in ones just convictions together with my faith will serve the cia and the intelligence oversight committees and the American Public well. It is my belief that those important principles absolutely must guide the work of the Inspector Generals office. There is another central requirement. Probably the most important requirement of Inspector Generals office. It is independence. Although the cia Inspector General reports to the cia director and reports to and is fully accountable to congress the i. G. s office must independently plan and execute all of its oversight work with regard to the agency. The cia enabling statute requires it. Independence, in my view, means that the work of the Inspector General must be performed in an unbiased and impartial manner, free of undue or inappropriate influences. By law no one can force the Inspector General to alter its work product. Should i be confirmed i can say with absolute confidence that the work that doing the work of the i. G. In an unbiased and impartial manner will be my top priority. Although independence is crucial to the proper functioning of the office and essential to its integrity the Inspector General must also strike a balance between that independence on one hand and on the other working cooperatively and productively with Agency Leadership and this committee. In my view in addition to all of the i. G. s legal reporting requirements a Collaborative Team approach within the agency and with congress, working together to make the agency better is as important to the proper functioning of the Inspector General as is the requirement of independence. Even so to be clear, the buck stops at the door of the i. G. Together with my character and values i believe my background and corresponding skill sets have prepared me for this position. During my 23year career with the u. S. Department of justice i obtained broad investigative and prosecutorial experience handling a wide variety of cases including investigations involving fraud, National Security, violent crimes, domestic and International Drug trafficking, racketeering and political corruption. I held a top secret security clearance for approximately 15 years which allowed me to work on some sensitive matters. I also coordinated many Multiagency Task force investigations. I worked with a myriad of federal, state and local agencies including offices of Inspector General and countless confidential informants and cooperating individuals rooting out crime, fraud and abuse in a wide variety of contexts. In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina i was detailed to the fbi where i worked on the Katrina Fraud Task force which targeted all kinds of katrina related fraud and corruption. 10 years later i had the opportunity to work on detail at the National Security agency where as part of my duties i provided legal guidance on certain signals, intelligence and information, assurance operations of the nsa. After retiring from the Justice Department i entered private Legal Practice where i continued to handle criminal matters as well as civil matters and internal investigations involving fraud including most recently a case involving a 1 billion bank failure. My experience as a federal prosecutor has a direct impact on how i will approach the job as cia Inspector General but perhaps none more important than my extensive work through informants and cooperators throughout my career. Based on my experience i have a deep understanding of the importance of protecting cia employees and contractors who report wrongdoing i believe one of the most important if not the most Important Program of any inspectors General Office is the Whistleblower Program. As Inspector General if confirmed i will work with Agency Leadership to maintain and strengthen a culture of confidence and trust for Agency Employees and contractors who have information exposing fraud, waste abuse, violation of law or other deficiencies or problems that should be corrected within the agency. Finally, ill conclude with a solemn promise before this committee and the American Public. If confirmed i will protect the independence of the cia Inspector Generals office and approach all of its work with honestly and integrity, in fairness and impartiality. If you entrust me with this Critical Role i will look forward to working with this committee to fulfill its oversight obligations of the cia. Thank you for this opportunity and i look forward to your questions. Thank you. And for the information of the members if anyone wishes to submit questions for the record we ask after todays hearing we ask you do it by the close of business tomorrow. Mr. Thompson, i want to begin where you finished your comments and the clear role and mandate on the creation of this committee was to carry out consistent and vibrant oversight over the Intelligence Community and particularly over the Central Intelligence agency and to do that we have to timing and access to intelligence. Thats just crucial to having meaningful oversight, and if confirmed and i think youve answered this already but i wanted to reask it in a different bay. If confirmed can we be assured you and your designees are going to keep us appropriately informed of any significant complaints you receive in your office . Absolutely, senator. And let me just ask part of their question will you provide the interview subjects and methodologies in your assessment . Im sorry, would you repeat the question . If asked by the committee if you inform of such a complaint will you provide us with the interviews subjects and methodologies behind your finished assessments . Yes, sir, to the extent it meet the standards and provide this committee with everything were aloaed to provide you with. Now, weve historically viewed the role that youve been nominated for as our partner in oversight, not as an adversary because we lie on the Inspector General to bring issues to this committees attention. Do you have total commitment if this committee fully and currently informed . Absolutely, senator. How do you envision realizing that commitment youve just made . Well, first, senator i mean we start with the law and we start with the statute. And the i. G. Has a number of duties and responsibilities with regard tuesday to reporting to this committee under the statute. If confirmed i would take that very, very seriously. I would follow the statute. I would look forward to working tran transparently with this committee and any serious offenses will be brought to the attention of this committee. As i said we will provide you with all the information that were allowed to provide you with. Now, let me briefly delve into the role that youve been nominated to fill. If you could share with us how do you view your approach to a situation where, for example, your legal analysis and conclusions differ from those of the cias general counsel or Intelligence Community Inspector General. Sure, well that might happen, senator. So the Inspector General by law is required to have his or her own counsel. The Inspector General does have its own counsel presently. As Inspector General i would rely 100 on well, let me rephrase that. If there was a conflict we would certainly consult with the office, the general counsel ps office at the agency, but at the end day we take their views into account, but at the end of the day the judgment with regard to any legal matter falls squarely on the Inspector General, and we would exercise independent judgment and analysis with regard to that. How would you isolate yourself or how do you intend to isola isola isolate yourself and your office from the risk of perceived politicization . I think the best way to do that, senator, is to be as independent as humanly possible. To follow the law, to certainly cooperate with the agency and to work collaboratively with agency components. To work collaboratively with this committee, to be transparent with this committee. To report to this committee. But i dont think the Inspector Generals office needs to run around, you know, with a flag of independence, but i think, you know, we absolutely assert the independence in everything we do whether its through requesting information from the agency. We would you know, we would push back on that. For example, if we asked for information from the agency and they were hesitant to give it or refused to give it, under the statute the i. G. s entitled to. I would certainly take their views into account, but if i thought it was still important to pursue it we would exercise our independence and still pursue that information. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Thompson, im going to go over some of the points you made in your testimony. And at the outset let me just say in our meeting i was impressed by your demeanor. Its disappointing i have to kind of rehash some of these issues, but theres been such a litany of individuals in the Intelligence Community who have had i guess the adacity i would say it was their duty to speak truth to power, and that fulfilling of their duty has cost them their jobs. So youve addressed this in your opening testimony but id like you again to spend a minute or two on the importance you feel of keeping the i. G. s office independent, and specifically how will you maintain the cias i. G. s independence . Thank you very much for the question, vicechairman. I think i would start with explaining and i know the values of the Senior Leadership in the i. G. s office and push those values down throughout the Inspector Generals office particularly independence. But also that theres absolutely no room in the Inspector Generals office and i dont think there should be any room in Intelligence Agency for any form of bias, any political agendas, personal agendas are not welcome in an Inspector Generals office, would not be welcome in the cia Inspector Generals office if im confirmed because i believe very strongly drawing on my career as an assistant u. S. Attorney and have a history of this to accomplish all the work in an impartial and unbiased manner and exercise independent judgment and objectivity. And so if theres any pressure, any perceived pressure or any real pressure then were not going to succumb to that and were always going to exercise independent judgment and do what we believe is lawful and follows the facts. And as i think said in my senate questionnaire, you know, i was brought up under lady justice in the Justice Department. And with everything that ive ever been a part of ive been pressured. As an assistant u. S. Attorney received inquiries or letters from congress. I have been pushed on hard by special agents in charge of certain agencies, by judges. And ive learned that youve got to maintain your position, listen to what they have to say, weigh it but make an independent judgment, not be bullied and not be pressured. So i think pushing those values down to make sure everyones on the same page with values. And then doing our work as we need to do in an independent fashion. Mr. Thompson, we discussed this when we met. If you did receive that undue pressure, inappropriate pressure or asked to do something you felt didnt meet your moral beliefs or your belief of the independent role of the i. G. What would you do . Sure, well, it would depend on the context and the pressure. But if it was undue pressure and serious undue pressure i would do two things, senator. I would consider to be very appropriate. I would inform cia Directors Office, and i would inform this committee. Senator, let me add if i thought there was any criminality involved i would as required refer to the department of justice. Youve also in your statement im sorry, vice careman, i apologize. You also in your statement i thought made good points about the need to protect whistle blowers. Do you have a belief or a view on a whistleblowers right to remain anonymous . Well, i can answer that in two parts. My personal view, you know, having dealt with so many confidential informants who risk a lot, some risk their lives, you know, throughout investigations ive been a part of just personally i absolutely would want to protect them. Under the law the i. G. Must protect them to the fullest extent that we can. And i would follow the law, and i would follow my personal beliefs as well and draw upon my experience as a federal prosecutor in protecting informants and cooperating individuals. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Thompson. Senator burn. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Thompson, the country is indeed fortunate your nomination has come up. I think youre imminently qualified for the role of i. G. At the cia. As the chairman and the vicechairman have said we are reliant on a very close relationship between the cia i. G. In this committee and our oversight responsibilities. And i think the most important part of your testimony was at the end where you said i will protect the independence of the cia Inspector General and approach all its work with honesty, integrity, fairness and impartiality. I dont think we can ask of an individual anymore than that. So i really am limited to one question. What do you believe the scope of your responsibility is as icig . The scope of my responsibility. Well, maybe ill try to start broad and try to narrow in. The scope is so in my view to begin with i see the role of the cia i. G. Is to help make the agents of the cia better through the independent work of the i. G. But part of that is to be accountable, and certainly the i. G. Has to report directly, you know, to the director and be under the general supervision of the director. And with regard to reporting to the director there are a number of requirements in the cia i. G. Statute that lay out the reporting requirements. Beyond that i think of great importance, senator, is the oversight role of this committee and the house intelligence committee. So the cia is a secret organization as you know. The activities, the programs and operations of the agency are entirely hidden from public view. And you you know, the senators and the representatives i mean, you all represent the people of the United States. And the only way that the people of the United States can see into the agency and provide oversight of the agency is through the intelligence committees. So the scope of my role part of the scope of my role is to work with the committees and in a sense although still maintaining independence of the i. G. And the importance of the independence the i. G. Can serve, you know, through the lens of independence as the eyes and ears of this committee. You know, so the American People through its representatives can provide oversight to the i. G. You believe your responsibilities include the review of covert action . Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. Our responsibilities is to conduct i wasnt going to quote the statute but were going to perform audits and inspections and investigations and weed out waste fra, fraud, e and mismanagement. Part of our duties is to make policy recommendations to the director to bring any Serious Problems that we see to the attention of the director and this committee. If urgent concerns are raised to assess those under the law, provide that to the director for submission to the congress. So all of that is part of the duties. Thank you, mr. Thompson. Senator widen. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Thompson, your nomination comes when donald trump is attacking the entire Inspector General and whistleblower system. With a jaw dropping theory that he can dump an Inspector General whenever he wants to without stating any reasons why so in my view whether you will ignore that threat is at the heart of the confirmation process. So the first question i want to ask involves legal determinations that you may have to make in your capacity if confirmed. If your Inspector General attorney determines that laws have been broken and bill barr disagrees what would you do . So to make sure i understand the question, if the i. G. s counsel believes that a law has been broken. Correct. And thats at odds with the department of justice bill barr. Okay. Can you give me the context of has the law been broken by who . It has happened recently but i think the question is pretty straightforward. Your counsel believes a law has been broken. Bill barr disagrees. What would you do . So if its the jurisdiction of the agency or the i. G. And we are investigating something and we investigate law has been broken, and its a criminal law, we would refer that to the department of justice. It would be brought to the attention of this committee, and it would be brought to the attention of the director of the cia. Now maybe were making some headway. I just want to make sure were clear. Yes. In the example that i gave, your lawyer thinks that laws have been broken. Bill barr disagrees. You would, if confirmed, bring it to this committee . You would inform senator that one is a yes or no. Under the statute, if we determine that in the course of our investigation of something we have a right to investigate within our jurisdiction, even actually outside, i think theres other reporting requirements even outside being an i. G. If a criminal law is broken, the cant sit on our desk. We have to see its attended to in an appropriate fashion. But if its within the context of the i. G. s role, it is a criminal violation, thats reported to the department of justice and we would report that to the director. And we would report that to the committee. Okay. I think that was the answer i wanted to have. And im glad that we agree that you have an obligation to report it to the committee. Let me ask a question about whistleblowers. The law states when the Inspector General determines a whistleblower complaint is an urgent concern and transmits it to the director of the cia, the director shall send the complaint to congress within seven days. How are you going to make sure if confirmed that the cia respects that law and what would you do if she didnt do it . So to begin with, if confirmed, the cia i. G. s office will absolutely respect that law. It is the cia i. G. Enabling statute and their provisions of urgent concern address matters of urgent concern. We would respect it. And we would by law we would follow the law and submit it to the director. The director has the option, i think, of disagreeing. If the director were to disagree and not want to forward the urgent concern, and we had determined it was an urgent concern and we found it to be credible, then i think at that point we would still forward that complaint to this committee with an explanation of why we made that determination. The cia director would, i am sure, also be able to provide comments and an explanation as to why or she felt that it was not an urgent concern. So you would, and my time is up, you would send it to the committee, though . In the example i gave, because these are if we determine something was an urgent concern and was reportable to this committee as an urgent concern, but the director of the cia disagreed, it is my understanding under the law that we then are obliged or should provide that to this committee. And, you know, with comments, with an explanation. All right. Sorry. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chair. Senator risch. Thank you. May i add to, whatever were going to do, i would have counsel, and however we proceed, we would absolutely follow the law. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Thomson, havent been on this committee for as many years as i have, i have always been struck by the fact that the Community Gets bogged down sometimes in its collection efforts and loses sight of the fact that the purpose of collection is to get information to policymakers. Intelligence information in and of itself is worthless unless its in the hands of people who can act on it and make policy judgments on it. Senator rubio and i serve on the Foreign Relations committee and i can tell you theres no more important consumer of the information that the Intelligence Community develops than the Foreign Relations committee. I want to remind you, and i remind everyone who comes here, the importance of seeing that that information gets in the appropriate hands as opposed to just collecting it and then report being written or being put in a file or Something Like that. So i hope you will keep that in mind, as you do your job. And remind those that you do deal with in the community what the real purpose of collection of information is. And with that, mr. Chairman, i have some other matters im going to take up in a classified setting with the nominee. Thank you very much. Senator heinrich. Thank you, chairman. Mr. Thomson, in my view, the best way to drain a swamp is to insure that Inspector Generals can just do their job. I. G. S are charged with rooting out waste, fraud, abuse, and protecting the rule of law. Yet we have seen this president attack the unless of i. G. Offices repeatedly. Given the president s treatment of i. G. S in this administration, including the acting i. G. Michael atkinson, who dni mcguire said had, quote, done everything by the book, end quote, why do you believe its possible to hold an i. G. Position in this administration and simultaneously speak truth to power . Senator, thank you for that question. So you know, under the law as its written, the president no matter who the president is, has the right to fire Inspector Generals. He also has, you know, theres a requirement that he must provide reasons to the intelligence, to this committee, 30 days out from the termination of that Inspector General. So, you know, thats the law. What i can tell you is that theres nothing that has happened or could happen with regard to anything that could be perceived as an influence or potential influence or threat on the independence of the i. G. I am going to do the work of the i. G. As i performed as an assistant u. S. Attorney for 23 years. And im going to follow the facts no matter where they lead. Im going to follow the law. And you know, however things turn out is how they will turn out. I would not i am not dissuaded or will not be dissuaded at all by any perceived undue influence from any source, senator. Were running out of time here, so ill take your answer and move on to a related question, which is, you mentioned in your Opening Statement, you wrote about how your parents taught you how to speak truth to power. And we hear that phrase a lot on this committee. Sometimes we hear it too much in confirmation hearings without seeing it in action as much as we would like. But nonetheless, i want to ask you specifically from your professional experience, what are some examples, some specific examples that you can share with the committee about when you have had to speak truth to power in your professional life . Yes, senator. Well, i mean, as a prosecutor, you know, we were phased or i was faced on a number of occasions with special agents in charge, for example, that we disagree on how i may have evaluated a case. And you know, they would come talk to me on some occasions they would go to the United States attorney. But i had to maintain my position, and i did. I wasnt going to sacrifice the integrity or my judgment, not that they were challenging the integrity, they werent doing that, but my judgment on a case for any kind of pressure from an agent in charge. Or agents. Or within my office. Maybe managers might disagree. But i stood my ground and explained my position. Also, i mean, i have been before many federal judges. You know, dozens. Not sure how many, maybe over 100, hundreds of times before federal judges. And i had to speak truth to power to federal judges countless occasions. Okay. Mr. Thomson, the president has suggested numerous times in numerous tweets and other statements that there is a deep state in our government. Do you share those concerns that there is a deep state, either at the cia or within the Intelligence Community more broadly . So senator, you know, i honestly dont exactly know what is meant by deep state or the president s comments on deep state. Im not really sure how to define that, so i dont really i cant answer that question. I really dont know how to answer that. I can say this, that whatever is whatever obstacles we would come across, whatever attempts to influence, whatever pushback we get, were going to stand our ground. Were going to exercise independent judgment. Were going to act impartially, unbiased. And just, you know, pull from my career and how we handle or how i handled cases as a prosecutor. Regardless of any influence of any deep state that may or may not exist. Thank you, mr. Chair. Senator collins. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome, mr. Thomson. The firing of the inspectors general and the threats to expose the identities of whistleblowers may have had a Chilling Effect on the willingness of whistleblowers to come forward with allegations. What specific actions will you take to reassure cia employees that they will be protected from reprisal, both within the agency and outside of it, if they do expose wrongdoing . Thank you, senator. Very important. Very important question. I appreciate the question. So in my view, one of the most important aspects about the Whistleblower Program is for the whistleblowers to have absolute trust and confidence in the system. When they dont have trust and confidence in the system, then it breaks down. Right . It breaks down from our perspective, it breaks down from congressional oversight perspective. And then it also increases the possibility of things we dont want to have happen, like leaks. So strong Whistleblower Program actually helps prevent leaks, senator, but beyond that, to protect the whistleblowers, you know, we want to vigorously follow the law. Number one. Protect them to the fullest extent of the law. When whistleblowers come in or we engage people with bringing in information, you know, i would want to have staff, myself and the staff, speak with them. And talk about whether they want anonymity. Some may want anonymity, some may not. But the ones that do, we do everything we could to protect them. Other thing i would do would be, well, i think training and outreach is very important. So when new employees are onboard at the cia, they go through lengthy training. And so i think its very important to have a solid Training Program with whistleblowers, to explain their rights and how they communicate, how they provide information. Also, training to cia managers with regard to the law. Also to work with cia leadership to, and i dont know the culture right now, senator, but whatever that culture is, i think i would want to work with cia leadership to try to strengthen the culture within the cia with the way they look at cia whistleblowers so theyre not looking at the process as a way to get somebody in trouble or a gotcha moment. But as a way that its something that you should do, that you have an obligation to do, and its to make the agency better. Not to try to destroy the agency or harm the agency or create a lack of confidence in the American Public, but to make the agency better. Thank you. Let me ask you a specific question. Do you believe that Michael Atkinson as the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community should have notified this committee about the whistleblower allegations regarding the president s interactions with ukraine . So, with regard to that matter, if you bear with me on my answer. I dont know Michael Atkinson. I have never spoken with Michael Atkinson. I never served in the odni. Im aware of his career. Very respectful career. And i know he grew up or i believe, my understanding is he grew up at the department of justice. So i dont you know, unfortunately, i dont know all the facts. I have read a few things but i really dont know all the facts. I believe theres some facts that are classified. And what he was addressing was a completely different statute. So he was addressing the enabling statute. You know, for the ic i. G. , and their language in the urgent concern part of the statute, there is a little bit of difference with regard to the i. G. To the cia i. G. Statute. So not knowing those facts, i find it difficult to weigh in on that, but what i can say, senator, is that if we did receive information purportedly to be an urgent concern from a cia employee or contractor, we would look at that very seriously. We would determine if it is a very serious or flagrant problem or abuse or violation of law. You know, we would weigh the prerequisites in the statute, whether, you know, it involves illegal activity and is involving intelligence information. So if we determine that it does fall within or meet those prerequisites, and then as a completely separate matter, we would have to determine if the information is credible, and if we did, then we would then forward that to the cia director for reporting to this committee. Senator king. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Thomson, i have been following this. I have been impressed. I have been impressed. I read your references. But you lost me in the answer to senator heinrichs question. Are you telling this committee that you have lived in the United States for the last three years, read newspapers, participated in the practice of law, and you dont know the meaning of the term deep state . The more Accurate Answer than that long rambling nonanswer you gave was no. Tell us what you think we. Youre not helping yourself from obfusk a obfuscating and avoiding the questions. You also answered senator collins question which is exactly the right question, and Everybody Knows what happened in that question. Should that complaint have been forwarded to congress, yes or no . The complaint by Michael Atkinson . Hahp hc whistleblower complaint that was the basis of the impeachment hearing. Right. Dont tell me you dont know all the facts. We know the essential facts, you know what the complaint was. Should that have been forwarded to congress, yes or no . Senator, you know, i fully understand your concern. Okay. You dont appear to want to answer. Let me move on. Were you interviewed by the president for this position . The president of the United States . Yes. No, sir. You said no . Correct. Were you interviewed by personnel at the white house . The white house counsel, yes, sir. Was there ever any question that suggested to you any issue of loyalty or reminding you of your subserveiance to the president who is appointing you . So senator, im going to answer that question. I will preface it, you know, generally conversations that i would have with the white house counsel, i think, are confidential. However, i can tell you whats the basis of the statement of the questions you were asked in terms of your suitability for this position . I will answer your question. Thank you. No one from the white house ever gave me any kind of a litmus test or loyalty test to the president at all. Did they suggest that was a significant concern or a question . Did the word loyalty ever arise in your conversations . I will tell you, senator, no one at the white house ever gave me any, to my knowledge i never perceived any kind of loyalty test at all with regard to the president. Senator, let me answer this. I would absolutely i would absolutely, if confirmed, do my job in an independent way. If any pressure was brought on me by the white house, i would consider that to be absolutely inappropriate. Would you notify this committee of that fact . If i had pressure from the white house or any outside external source like that, i would notify the committee. Thank you. You understand that one of the critical importance i think the i. G. Is one of the most important in our government, generally. But in this particular case, its especially important because were dealing with a secret agency which is an anomaly in a democracy. Its not it doesnt have the usual watchdogs of the press or of Interest Groups or of outside people who know whats happening. Therefore, the position is especially doubly important than it would be in the department of agriculture or another, not to denigrate that, but thats a special role here. And the other piece is, the obligation, as you have acknowledged, of reporting information to this committee, because were the only committee that follows whats going on in those agencies. So i hope you appreciate that this is an extremely important position. And this president has made plain his desire to politicize the intelligence agencies. And he doesnt like the intelligence agencies, and the vice chair read off the list of all the people that have been removed. I guess all you can do is tell me that youll stand up to that, but i certainly hope that you will, because its important for the country. Whether its this president , you may well be the i. G. Of another president. If any president who is trying to influence the preparation of intelligence is harming themselves and harming the country. Will you commit unequivocally before this committee to notify us of any such pressure and to resist any such pressure . Senator, if any such pressure was brought on the i. G. s office to alter its product or how it evaluates something or from any other source, i would consider it very serious. I would report that to the cia director, im sure, and this committee. And i will say, senator, you know, are you referring to you hope i would be independent and resist, we really dont know one another, but if im confirmed, i think within a short period of time after working with me and working with my office, i think you would be absolutely convinced that im not going to give in to any kind of undue, inappropriate pressure, that i will always, always stand firm to my convictions. I can absolutely assure you of that. And i know anyone can tell you that. The possibility of being fired . Im sorry, i didnt hear . Up to and including the likelihood of being fired . Look, if i was fired for doing my job, in a lawful way, in an appropriate way, then i would be fired. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator cotton. Ill answer senator kings question very simply, that report from the socalled whistleblower should not have been forwarded to congress because the law plainly says that the Inspector General for the director of National Intelligence deals with intelligence activities, and a phone call between the president and head of state is not an intelligence activity. I raise that point not just to rebut what senator king said, but to make the important point that hes making is that the Inspector General needs to stand with the rule of law. Whether the rule of law comports with what a president wants or the rule of law comports with what the Opposition Party and the media wants. So mr. Thomson, i will ask you this basic question. As the Inspector General, will you follow the law and uphold the rule of law . Absolutely. Thank you. Lets turn to your experience. In the u. S. Attorneys office, which is long and extensive. You mentioned in your statement for the record and your papers that you had experience working with the nsa, the fbi, the cia. Could you talk to us a little bit about how those experiences might prepare you for working as the Inspector General for the cia, given the somewhat technical and often classified nature of the material youll be working with there . Sure. I do have some intelligence experience working at the nsa. And i think thats very transferrable to the agency. Excuse me. At the risk of repeating myself, which i try not to do, but i think my experience as an ausa is, you know, one of the most important qualifications that i think i bring to the job. In dealing with confidential informants, in knowing how to handle Sensitive Information being brought in, so i would draw heavily on my experience as an assistant u. S. Attorney. I would also draw on my experience as an attorney in private practice, in analyzing matters. Not sure what else youre asking. Let me ask you one more general question, this not so much about being an Inspector General for an Intelligence Agency but something i noticed with Inspector Generals across all departments especially when they come in with your experiences. As an assistant u. S. Attorney, you had tools like subpoenas and grand juries. The Inspector Generals lack those. Can you talk to us about how you will approach the job without those powerful Law Enforcement tools to get the information you need to insure that the officers and employees of the cia are following the law and doing the right thing . Right, so that is something will be missed, the subpoenas and grand jury subpoenas and requiring testimony. I think its very important to work with cia leadership and to gain their full support. I feel that that support is there with director haspel, and i believe that we would work very well together. I think the i. G. s office and Directors Office would work well together. I think, you know, getting information no matter which i. G. Office youre in, which agency, which department, just my experience in the government, all shops can be a little protective about what they have. Its a little deeper, not referencing deep state, but a little deeper in the agency where you have a lot of compartmented programs. Some even more deeply compartmented than others, so its always not always, but there could be some pushback on that, so that is something that we will work diligently, you know, through that, to obtain the snieinformation that we need we would ask the support from the Directors Office if we need to. We also work with this committee, so if theres any issues obtaining information, and it got to be serious or actually if we were refused, i mean, i would come to this committee and ask for Committee Help as well. Thank you. The final thing i want to say is, its not really a question because i dont expect you have to thought through this issue very carefully yet, but i want to flag it for you. With the pace of technological change and the evolution of cuttingedge offtheshelf commercial technologies, there could be attention to balance between Contracting Officers who are trying to move quickly to adopt suitable commercial offtheshelf solutions to technological challenges on the one hand and somewhat antiquated or rigid bureaucratic contracting rules on the other hand. I think thats a tension that all agencies need to manage, but this one in particular. And one that i would just ask you to be mindful of, too, whenever youre looking at contracting matters. And what cia can do to improve contracting in these situations. Thank you. Mr. Thomson, were about to close here, so i had three very quick questions. The first is sort of to touch on whats been asked already before and leave it abundantly clear in this report. At any time in the process, from the moment it became a possibility up to today, has anyone told you or implied or made you understand in any way youre being nominated for this position to protect the president from embarrassment or to use it as a way to target people who somebody may view as hostile . Absolutely senator, let me just say, if that had been part of the process, you wouldnt see me here today, senator. That was my followup question. I take it from your testimony today and the review of your record and everything you have done that it sounds to me like you are you would never, it appears, and i think logically, endanger your over 37year career of Public Service and private practice for any reason. I think thats a fair assessment. Is that correct . Absolutely. I have actually thought of the same thing, chairman rubio. You know, ive got a 35year career, and you know, i think built up a reputation. I have been a straight shooter and fair in following the law and not giving in to pressure and doing anything wrong or inappropriate. Im not going to at all give that up at this stage, you know, of my life or for this position. I would never risk to me, reputation is very important. Its one of the only things, you know, that we carry with us. It means everything to me. And you know, as does the rule of law. So no, i would never do anything to risk that. Well, i want to thank you for the time you have given us here today. This is important. As you know, well move quickly to get a vote here from this committee so we can process this important nomination. I appreciate your familys time as well being here today, and your willingness to serve, as i said. You have a very successful private practice and it sounds like one you were looking forward to continuing but the opportunity to serve your country became available and you took it up once again, so we thank you. Ill remind members what i said at the outset. If anyone has written questions, you can submit it for the record, get an answer for you, to do so by the close of business tomorrow. And again, thank you for being here, and with that, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. President trump welcomes the polis president to the white house today. The two leaders will hold a joint press conference from the white house rose garden at 3 30 p. M. Eastern. Watch that live on cspan3. First ladies, influence and image, on American History tv, examines the private lives and the public roles of the nations first ladies through interviews with top historians, wednesday night, we look at Caroline Harrison and ida mckinley. In 1889, Caroline Harrison was the first sitting first lady to deliver a speech. Ida mckinley was a very strong supporter of womens suffrage. 8 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv on cspan3. Next, lawmakers look into legal justifications to sue china for its role in the coronavirus pandemic. They hear from witnesses on the foreign sovereign immunities act. A u. S. Law that determines the conditions for bringing a lawsuit against a foreign state. The Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing is chaired by senator Lindsey Graham of south carolina. Good afternoon, everyone. Well go ahead and get started if thats okay with everyone. To our witnesses, thank you. Ill

© 2024 Vimarsana

comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.