Exwives and exgirlfriend. How does the fbi fit into that. We just learned some very interesting if not completely clear information from the head of the fbi director. I want to bring in chris cillizza, who is here with me to discuss this. There is a lot to unpack here from Russian Meddling in the election and how that feaffects the midterms coming up. The timeline had it comes to rob porter, you know what, pause for a moment, chris, lets return to the testimony at the Senate Intelligence committee. Theyre out in the community, and i can tell you the Community Values what they do on the island. Thank you. And an oped by a number of former intelligence analysts call the nunes memo and the release, quote, one of the worst cases of politization of intelligence in modern american history, unquote. You said you had concerns about that memo. I know you cant get into the
sure i stay on the unclassified side. We have seen intentions to have an impact on the next election cycle here. Director coats . Yes, we have. Anyone else . Admiral rogers . Yes, i think this would be a good topic to get into greater detail in this afternoon. According to news reports, there are dozens of white house staff with only interim Security Clearances still. To include Jared Kushner until last week, to include white house Staff Secretary rob porter, who i would assume would have regularly reviewed classified documents as part of his job. Director coats, if someone is flagged by the fbi with areas of concern into white house staff with interim clearances, should those staff continue to have access to classified materials . Let me first just speak in
can be in a position to receive or not receive. So i think thats something that we have to do as a part of our Security Clearance review. The process is broken. It needs to be reformed. As senator warner has previously said, it is not evolution, it is revolution, we have 700,000 backups so we have situations where we need people and places, but they dont yet have that. Your specific question, i think, i would like to take up in the classified session. Chairman, im over my time, thank you, Director Coats. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Director coats, director pompeo, admiral rogers, you all talked about evidence that the russians would intend to do things that would be active in our elections. I really it seems to me two divisions of that activity. Different from state to state. Thats a strength, not a weakness in my view. But what are some of the things we can do to be more helpful to local Election Officials and encouraging them to share information when they think their systems are being attack ed getting more information to them than we have. There is a lot of criticism in the last cycle that we knew that some Election Systems were being attacked and didnt tell them they were being attacked and so the three of you, in any order, lets just do the order i started with, Director Coats, director pompeo, admiral rogers, any thoughts you have on what we can do to protect and how quickly we need to act this year. The Intelligence Community is aware. We want to provide a collect and provide as much information
as we can so we can give the warnings and alerts so we can share information back and forth with local and state and election processes with the federal government. Department of homeland security, department of the fbi, obviously were involved, given these are domestic issues. But we do look to every piece of intelligence we can gather so we can provide warnings. It is an effort that i think the government needs to put together at the state and local level and work with those individuals engaged in the election process in terms of the security of their machines, cyberplays a major role here. I think it is clearly an area where federal government, foreign collection, potential threats and interference, warnings, and then processes in terms of how to put in place security and secure that to ensure the American People that their vote is sanctioned and
well, and not manipulated in any way whatsoever. Director pompeo. I was referring to the former, the first part of your question, not truly to the latter, the things we have seen russia doing to date are information types of warfare, the things that senator warner was speaking out most directly earlier. With the respect to the cias role, we have two missions, one is to identify the source of this information, make those here aware of it so they can do the things they need to do, whether that is fbi or dhs. So that they have that information, were working diligently along many threat factors to do that. And then the second thing is we have some capabilities offensively. To raise the cost for those who would dare challenge the United States elections. And after admiral rogers, i may want to come to you and see on the same, sharing information, any impediments to sharing that information with local officials, any reason we
wouldnt want to do that. Admiral rogers . The only other thing i would add and this is also shaped by my experience as cybercommand where i defend networks, one thing we generally find in that role, many network and System Operators do not truly understand their own structures and systems. So one thing that i think is part of this is how do we help those local, federal, State Entities truly understand their network structure, what its potential eventual nrbl tvulner. It is not an intel function, but it is part of how do we work our way through this process. Director wray . I think thats one area that has been a lot of discussion about whether were doing better and this is one of the areas we are doing better. We, together, at the fbi, together with dhs, recently, for example, scheduled meetings with various election, state Election Officials and normally the barrier there would be classification concerns. Whether somebody had clearances. We were able to put together briefings appropriately tailored and with Nondisclosure Agreements with those officials. So there are ways if people are creative and forward leaning to educate the state Election Officials which is, of course, you know, where elections are run in this country. Hopefully well be creative and forward leaning and well want to keep track of awewhat e doing there. Thank you. Senator king. Thank you, mr. Chairman. First statement i want to make is more in sorrow than in anger. Ill get to the anger part in a minute. The sorrow part is that Director Coats in response to a question from snr collins, you gave an el quantity factual statement of the activities of the russians and the fact that theyre continuing around the world and that theyre a continuing threat to this country. All of you have agreed to that. If only the president would say that. I understand the president s sensitivity about whether his campaign was in connection with the russians and thats a separate question, but there is no question we have got before us the entire Intelligence Community that the russians interfered in the election in 2016, theyre continuing to do it and there are real imminent threat to our elections in a matter of eight or nine months. My problem is i talked to people in maine who say the whole thing is a witchhunt and it is a hoax because the president told me. I just wish you all could persuade the president as a matter of National Security to separate these two issues, the Collusion Issue is over here, unresolved, well get to the bottom of that, but there is no doubt as you all have testified today, and we cannot confront this threat, which is a serious one, with a whole of government response, when the leader of the government continues to deny that it exists. Now, let me get to the anger part. The anger part involves cyberattacks. You have all testified that were subject to repeated cyberattacks, cyberattacks are occurring right now in our infrastructure, all over this country. I am sick and tired of going to these areases, which ive been going to for five years, where Everybody Talks about cyberattacks and our country still does not have a policy or doctrine or a strategy for dealing with them. This is not a criticism of the current administration. The Prior Administration didnt do it either. Admiral rogers, until we have some deterrent capacity, well continue to be attacked. Isnt that true . Yes, sir. We have to change the current dynamic. Were on the wrong end of the cost equation. Were trying to fight a global battle with our hands tied behind our back. There is a stunning statement in the report, they will work to use cyberoperations to achieve strategic objectives unless they face clear repercussions for their cyberoperations. Right now there are none is that not the case . There are no repercussions. We have no doctrine of deterrence. How are we ever going to get them to stop doing this if all we do is patch our software and try to defend ourselfs . Those are very relevant questions and i think everyone not only at this table, but in every agency of government understands the threat that we have here and the impact already being made through the cyberthreats. Our role is to provide all the information we can as to what is happening so our policymakers can take that, including the
congress. And shape policy as to how we are going to respond to this and deal with this in a whole of government way. Just never seems to happen. Director pompeo, you understand this issue, do you not . Were not going to be able to defend ourselves from cyberattacks by simply being defensive. We have to have a doctrine of deterrence if they strike us in cyber, theyre going to be struck back in some way. May not be cyber. I would agree with you. Also i would argue i cant say much in this setting, i would argue that your statement that we have done nothing is not reflect the responses that frankly some of us at this table have engaged in, in the United States government engaged in before and after this but both during and before this administration. But deterrence doesnt work unless the other side knows it. The Doomsday Machine in dr. Strange love didnt work because the russians hadnt told us about it. It is true. It is important that the adversary is not a requirement that the whole world know it. And the adversary does know it in your view . I prefer to save that for another forum. I believe that this country needs a clear doctrine, what is a cyberattack, what is an act of war, what will be the response, what will be the consequences and right now i havent senator, i agree with you, we it is a complicated problem given the nature of i take responsibility for not having been part of solving that too. There is a lot of work to do. We need a u. S. Government strategy and clear authorities to go achieve that strategy. I appreciate it. I just dont want to go home when there is a serious cyberattack and say we never really got to it, we knew it was a problem, we had four different committees of jurisdiction and we couldnt work it out. Yes, sir. Thats not going to fly. Yes, sir. Senator, i might add that we dont want to learn this lesson the hard way. 911 took place because we were
not coordinating our efforts. Were now coordinating efforts. But we didnt have the right defenses in place because the right information was not there. Our job is to get that right information to the policymakers and get on with it because it is just common sense if someone is attacking you, and there is no retribution or response, it is going to incent incentivize more right now a lot of blank checks, a lot of things we need to do. Thanks. I appreciate that. Senator langford. Thank you. You and i talked last year about the same issue that senator king was just bringing up about cyberdoctrine and point person on who that would be and a person that would give options to the president and the congress to say if a response is needed, and is warranted, this is the person, this is the entity that would make the recommendations and allow the president to make decisions on what the proper response is. Has that been completed . Is there a point person to bible to give recommendations on a appropriate response to a cyberattack to the president . That has not yet been completed. Your understanding of these standup of cybercommand and the new drirector replacing admiral rogers, the decision relative to whether there would be separation between the functions that are currently now nsa and cyber has yet to be made. General mattis will is contemplating what the next best step is. And there is they have involved the Intelligence Community in terms of Making Decisions and that role. But at this particular point, we cannot point to one sort of cyber czar. But various agencies throughout the federal government taking this very, very seriously and there are individuals that we continue to meet on a regular basis. The odni has something called
ctik, a coordination effort for all the cyber that comes in so we dont stove pipe like what we did before 9 11. So things are under way. But in terms in terms of putting a finalized this is how were going to do it together still in process. With respect to responses to that, these are title ten, dod activities unless granted to another authority. There is a person responsible. Sa secretary mattis has that responsibility in all theaters of conflict with adversaries. Thank you. I want to bring up the issue of the rising threat of what is happening just south our border in mexico. Homicide rate went up 27 last year. We had 64,000 americans that died from overdose of drugs, preponderance of those came through or from mexico. We have a very rapidly rising threat it appears to me. What i would be interested from
you all is on a National Security level and what youre seeing, what are we facing, what is changing right now in mexico, versus ten years ago in mexico and our relationship and threats coming from there. I would defer to you youre watching the Senate Intel Committee there with all of the heads essentially of the Intelligence Community. We have learned a lot of new information about Russian Meddling in the election, what is planned for the upcoming Midterm Election in 2018 and also some Breaking News when it comes to how the fbi informed the white house when it came to the rob porter scandal. Were going to take a quick break. Well be right back with more after this. As you get older. But prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered. In jellyfish. In clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve shortterm memory. Prevagen. The name to remember. Tripadvisor thats because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot. By comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. Saving you up to 30 youll be bathing in savings tripadvisor. Check the latest reviews and lowest prices. Touch is how we communicate with those we love, but when your psoriasis is bad, does it ever get in the way . Embrace the chance of 100 clear skin with taltz. Taltz is proven to help people with moderate to severe psoriasis achieve completely clear skin. With taltz, up to 90 of patients
had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. In fact, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin. Dont use if youre allergic to taltz. Before starting, you should be checked for tuberculosis. Taltz may increase risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. Tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms, or if youve received a vaccine or plan to. Inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz, including worsening of symptoms. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Ready for a chance at 100 clear skin . Ask your doctor about taltz today. And go to taltz. Com to learn how to pay as little as 5 a month. At holiday inn express, we cant guarantee that youll be able to contain yourself at our breakfast bar. Morning, egg white omelet. Sup lady bacon fruit, there it is but we can guarantee that youll get the best price when you book with us. Holiday inn express. Be the readiest. We have just heard from The Heads Of Intel agencies is going to try to interfere is already under way when it comes to the 2018 Midterm Elections. We have been hearing from the director of national intelligence, the head of the fbi, the head of the dia, Defense Intelligence agency and others. I want to bring my panel back in to talk about this. We have josh campbell, former fbi special agent, now a cnn Law Enforcement analyst, dana bash with us, and chris cillizza, cnn politics reporter and editor at large. There are so many places where we could start. This has been a pretty informative hearing as we were hoping it would be that we could learn more information. I want to start with the rob porter scandal. And how the fbi, we just heard from the director, Christopher Wray, he was asked about as we really dont know the timeline coming from the white house, about what they knew about rob porter, allegations that he had physically assaulted his two
exwives and a girlfriend as well. And the and Christopher Wray said this when asked about the interactions between the fbi, which does that Background Check for Security Clearances, did one on rob porter. Here is what he said. The fbi submitted a partial report on the investigation in question in march. And then a completed Background Investigation in late july, soon thereafter, we received requests for pollup inquiry. And we did the followup and provided that information in november and we administratively closed the file in january and then earlier this month we received some Additional Information and we passed that on as well. When you look at that, and he also said before that, because he didnt want to get into
specific conversations, but he said the fbi followed established protocols. The fbi has not come under fire when it comes to this. It is the fbi, what did they know, did they just was Ignorance Bliss in a way in keeping rob porter in such a key role where hes privy to so many classified information, where hes so close to the president. And this makes it clear that there were multiple it does not stand to reason that the top aides at the white house were not aware of the type of allegations that were being made about rob porter. Exactly. What we just heard from the trump appointed director of the fbi is that ignorance was not bliss because there was no ignorance. The white house knew at multiple stages, at least maybe he didnt say who was informed. You have it would be very difficult to think that at least the white House Counsel didnt know. And then that white house Chief Of Staff ultimately in november
when this the full report was completed, and certainly by last month, in january, when he said the Administration Closed the case. So this completely throws the revolving, evolving white house explanations of what happened into disarray. It completely counters that. And i think at the end of the day, now the question is are we going to get answers from the white House Counsel don mcgann, are we going to get answers that we have not yet gotten from the white house Chief Of Staff, john kelly, and can they keep their jobs . And lastly this is what happens when you send a Press Secretary out to Say Something that is just flat wrong which is what Sarah Sanders did yesterday, when she said this isnt us, this is the fbi. Well, guess what, the fbi director just happens to be in a
public forum the very next day and he can completely contradict that given the facts of how the process goes, but also how this particular process goes. That seems to be a desperate process, after days this is so clearly it is so clearly an unforced error and internal error on the part of the white house to then hear Sarah Sanders say that about the fbi. Yeah, and, look, Last Thursday Rod Shah was in a similar position. He at one point said that porter had been terminated, which was patently untrue. He, to danas point, he said the fbi Background Check is ongoing. That was february 8th. If the case had been the file had been closed according to Director Wray in january, it seems unlikely. I think what you have is two three main principles there. Don mcgann, the white House Counsel, john kelly, the white house Chief Of Staff and the president of the United States, all of whom are not first two cases, the staffers not
necessarily it seems like sharing the full story at the start with the staff. And thats hugely problematic. Trump is in his way different in that no one questioned that he knew about this prior to last tuesday, i believe. The issue for him is different. It is, well, people say privately hes very upset and condemns this, but publicly he seems to be sympathizing with porter. Thats sort of over here. But mcgann and kelly are really making it difficult for the Sarah Sanders, the rod shahs and anyone else trying to plan make a cohesive story that is internally consistent. What did you think hearing Christopher Wray say that, he couldnt comment on specific conversations, but he made it clear the fbi was following up after the partial report, the completed report, they were asked for more information, the fbi was. They gave more information and
they closed that was in november. In january, they closed the investigation, got more information in early february and passed it on. It is you would expect and maybe you can speak to this, that was substantive information that the fbi was passing on about rob porter that had to do with the allegations. It is true. I think what we saw there is the classic chris wray, even keel, provide the information, they knew what they were getting when they brought him on as the fbi director. And many in the fbi have said, hes going to provide information and go along with what the facts are. So they had to have known that the facts would get out at some point. I cant understand for the life of me why they would have come out, violated the crisis Communication 101 rule, tell it all, tell it fast, and provide this narrative that they knew the fbi would come in and counter. Were going to listen in, arkansas republican senator tom cotton asking chris wray the fbi director about the steele dossier. To the threat posed by china and chinese telecom
companies. Senator rubio spoke earlier and i agree with what he said about the threat of a rising china and the threat of Confucius Center and Telecom Companies and unicom and telecom pose to our country. I introduced legislation with Senator Cornyn and senator rubio to say the u. S. Government cant use ute and the u. S. Government cant use companies that use them. And im glad some Companies Like verizon, at t and others have taken this threat seriously. Could you explain what the risk is that we face from zte and waway being used in the United States, the risk that companies, state governments, local governments might face if they use waway or zte products and services. I think probably the simplest way to put it is deeply concerned about the risks of allowing any were monitoring the Senate Intelligence committee hearing,
hearing from the leaders of the senate of the Intelligence Community. Were going to take a quick break and continue to monitor it. Be right back. If you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, Little Things can be a big deal. Thats why theres otezla. Otezla is not an injection or a cream. Its a pill that treats psoriasis differently. With otezla, 75 clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months,. With reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. And the otezla Prescribing Information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. Dont use if youre allergic to otezla. Otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. Tell your doctor if these occur. Otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. Tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts,
or if these feelings develop. Some people taking otezla reported weight loss. Your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. Other side effects include Upper Respiratory Tract Infection and headache. Tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if youre pregnant or planning to be. Otezla. Show more of you. Almost 800 when we switched our auto and home insurance. With liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. Hey oh, thats my robe. Is it . When you switch to liberty mutual, you could save 782 on auto and home insurance. And still get great coverage for you and your family. Call for a free quote today. You could save 782 when liberty stands with you. Liberty mutual insurance. snap achoo snap achoo achoo snap snap achoo achoo feel a cold coming on . Zicam cold remedy nasal swabs shorten colds with a snap, and reduce symptom severity by 45 . Shorten your cold with a snap, with zicam. One more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around. Interest when the president is put if charge of Declassifying Information that could complicate an Ongoing Investigation into his own campaign. Well, senator, as we have been very clear, what our view was about the disclosure and accuracy of the memo in question, but i do think it is the president s role as Commander In Chief under the rule that was invoked to object or not to the declassification. So i think that, you know, that is the president s responsibility. Regardless of whether there is an appearance of actual conflict of interest. I leave it to others to characterize whether there is appearance or actual conflict of interest. If the president asked you tomorrow to hand over to him additional sensitive fbi information on the investigations into his
campaign, would you give it to him . Im not going to discuss the investigation in question with the president , much less provide information from that investigation to him. And if he wanted if he received that information, and wanted to declassify it, would he have the ability to do that from your perspective . Information from the however he received it, perhaps from members of the United States congress. I think illegally he would have that ability. And do you think the president should recuse himself from reviewing and kldeclassifyg fbi material i think recusal questions are something i would encourage the president to talk to the white House Counsel. Has the fbi done any legal analysis on these questions . Well, happily im no longer in the business of doing legal analysis. I now get to be a client. And blame lawyers for things instead of being the lawyer who gets blamed. Have you blamed any lawyers for their analysis whats na. Have you blamed any lawyers for their analysis . I have not yet, no. Okay. Is the fbi getting the cooperation it needs from social Media Companies to counter foreign adversaries on their influence on our elections . I think the cooperation has been improve iing. I think were continuing to work with the social Media Companies to try to see how we can raise their awareness so that they can share information with us and vice versa. I think things are moving in the right direction. But i think there is a lot of progress to be made. What more do you need from social Media Companies to improve the partnership you would like to have with them to counter these attacks in. Well, i think we always like to have more information shared more quickly from their end. I think from their perspective,
it is a dialogue. Theyre looking to get information from us about that it is we see, so that they can give responsive information. So i think were working through those issues. Do you believe the social Media Companies have enough employees that have the appropriate Security Clearance to make these partnerships real . Thats not an issue of value, but i would be happy to take a look at it. Plaez do and follow up with the committee. One thing that makes guarding against foreign intelligence threats on social media so complex is that the threat originates overseas and so that would be within the jurisdiction of the cia and the nsa and then it comes to our shores and then it passes on to the fbi and also the social Media Companies themselves. Im not aware of any Written Ic Strategy on how we would confront the threat to the social media. Does such a strategy exist . In writing . I would have to get back with you on that. I would be happy to look into it
from my perspective right now. A written strategy, specific strategy is not in place, but i want to check on that. Please do follow up and also last Year Congress passed a bipartisan russia sanctions bill. However, the administration has not imposed those sanctions. What is your assessment of how russia interprets the administrations inaction . I dont have information relative to what the russian thinking is in terms of that particular specific reaction. There are other sanctions that are being imposed on russian oligarchs and others through the United Nations and through other things that have been done. In reference to the jcpoa but specifically on your question, i dont have an answer for that. Can you may i make a comment, i think it is i think we ought to look at that in a broader
context, how the russians view all of the actions of this administration, not just a particular set of sanctions or the absence thereof. As we have watched the russians respond to this administrations decision to provide defensive weapons in ukraine, to push back against russian efforts in syria, sanctions placed on venezuela were directly in conflict with russian interests. The lists of places that the russians are feeling the pain from this administrations actions are long. But director pompeo, im sure you would agree that in order to understand the full scope of effect it also important that we analyze each discreet component, including what is the interpretation of this administrations failure to enact the sanctions as has been passed and directed by the United States congress and a bipartisan manner. Have you done that assessment . On closed session ill tell you what we know and dont know about that discreet issue. I agree with you, it is important to look at each one in its own place. I think what we most often see in terms of russian response, it is to the cumulative activities in response to russian activities. How the United States responds to those in a cumulative way. I look forward it our conversation, thank you. Yes, maam. Director coats, you alluded to the activities of Trans National criminal organizations. Im thinking particularly as regards our neighbors down south. Of our border. Recently i heard somebody refer to the cartels, the Transnational Criminal Organizations as xcommodity agnostic, theyll traffic in people, theyll traffic in drugs and other contraband all in pursuit of money. Whatever brings in the most dollars. Senator manchin and others alluded to their concern about and certainly we all
share the concern about the deaths and overdoses caused by drugs in america. Much of which comes across our southern borders youre watching the Senate Intel Committee as it questions the heads of the Intelligence Community. And specifically we just heard California Democratic senator Kamala Harris asking Christopher Wray the fbi director about perhaps conflicts with the president Declassifying Information that had to do with a member of his campaign. That was in the nunes memo that we saw the declassification of. Chris cillizza, i want to ask you about this. It seemed to me that chris wray wasnt biting. He said this is the president s job. Whether to classify or declassify, she kept she asked repeatedly even if there is a perceived conflict and he said thats for other people to decide. Hes not going to get you dont you dont get to become the fbi director by being dumb
about politics. You know, these jobs have a big element of politics in them. He is not going to get in the middle of litigating what remains a hypothetical situation. He wont say, if this happened, then this. Senator risch said to him not too long ago, well, he said to everybody, but then he singled wray out, warned them about getting enveloped in domestic politics. The criticism, theoretically, the reason the white house originally gave for the firing of jim comey was the mishandling and this sort of the going around the chain of command as it related to his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation during the 2016 campaign. Now, donald trump later said, well, the russia thing to lester holt and that clouded it. The real explanation of why comey was fired, the Rod Rosenstein memo that trump allegedly based the firing on was this idea that comey had gotten to had inserted
himself in the political process which makes chris wray more mindful not to. He might have said im not going to get involved in the politics. But he did in a re clever, very direct way by saying more than once that he had grave concerns. Which we know that he had because the fbi put out a very unusual statement before the president ended up declassifying the republican memo. But as you were saying, when we were watching, one thing to see it on pap, another thing to hear him say it repeatedly. He might not be getting involved in politics, but hes making his stance very, very clear, which is political. And choosing, josh, his moments. He walks a fine line between his boss, the president of the United States and the rank and file who want to know that someone is out there defending them. One other thing i think is really important. Remember, donald trump ignored the statement from the fbi, grave concerns, what chris wray has reiterated today, ignored the recommendation of the fbi
and Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney general, to not release the nunes memo for fear it presented an incomplete picture factually. Donald trump cited chris wray, the fbi, Rod Rosenstein, the justice department, for their concerns about the democratic adam schiff memo. In one week span. So on one hand, he ignored it. On the other hand, he cited it. If you work for the fbi, that has to be youre clearly being used when it is advantageous to donald trump. Theyre trying to Take The High Road and say even though one memo was released which they disagree with, they dont look at it, well, we have to release the other one because the first one was released. They care about the protection of the information and thats going to be their theme. I want to see what you thought about something that senator Susan Collins, republican from maine, talked to the fbi director about, who really i was surprised has been
somewhat the star of the show when it comes to this hearing. Heres what she was asking him about when it came to what a really unprecedented in recent decades, clearly politically motivated attacks on the fbi, on the doj, by President Trump. The president has repeatedly raised concerns about current and former fbi leaders and has alleged corruption and political bias in the performance of the fbis Law Enforcement and National Security missions. I want to give you the opportunity today to respond to those criticisms. What is your reaction . Well, senator, i would say that my experience now six months in with the fbi has validated all my prior
experiences with the fbi, which is that it is the finest group of professionals and Public Servants i could hope to work for. And every day, many, many, many times a day, im confronted with unbelievable examples of integrity and professionalism and grit. There are 37,000 people in the fbi who do unbelievable things All Around The World and though you would never know it, from watching the news, we actually have more than two investigations. And most of them do a lot to keep that part was actually kind of funny, dana, theres more than two investigations . They are doing a lot of work, but he seemed to seize this moment to speak to his rank and file who may be feeling bruised by these attacks. No question. And look, this was a toss over the plate, a softball from Susan Collins so that he could get that kind of comment out about
the fbi rank and file in a way that, frankly, some people have wondered and have criticized him for not doing in a more robust way when the president has criticized the fbi. I thought that was really noteworthy. Then if you kind of take a step back, bri, on the whole crux of this hearing which is supposed to be worldwide threats, her colleague from maine, angus king, reminded everybody about what this is all about, which is russia interfering in the 2016 election. And he pleaded with all of the intel heads, please convince the president of the United States that this is a real threat. I mean, can you imagine that thats where we still are, that he doesnt really take it seriously and that a United States senator on the Intel Committee has to plead with the whole ic to try to convince the president . He wanted them to impress the National Security importance of that on the president. You wonder, of course, theyve probably already tried to do some of that, but it was so interesting to hear senator king reem fa si reemphasizing that. I do want to go to kaitlyn. Kaitlyn, you talked to your sources about the rob porter allegation. What was going on at the time the scandal of his exwives broke . Tell us what you learned. Reporter this comes out of a shift of the narrative coming from the white house about who knew what when about rob porter when these allegations of abuse first surfaced and he bankrupab resigned last week. Were learning not only did he take an Important Role in the white house, not only that, rob porter was in serious discussions to be promoted when he abruptly resigned last week from the white house. Now, he was the Staff Secretary, a very crucial role in this
white house because he handled all the paper flow that came to the president s desk, Executive Orders and whatnot. But not only that, he was being considered for several other positions, elevated policy roles across the nation, as well as the deputy Chief Of Staff role, a position that the person who had been serving in that role for less than three months stepped down last week, as cnn reported. We now learned that not only that, rob porter was considered being elevated, considered being promoted in this west wing which just shows these white house officials who were aware of the allegations against porter were able to overlook these potential indications of trouble in his past they had been alerted to by the fbi in order to have someone who is seen as a professional, seen as someone really competent in this very chaotic west wing. And that really just goes even further with what we just saw from the fbi director, Christopher Wray, right there,
brianna. Kaitlan collins, thank you for that detail that there were discussions of a promotion for rob porter when all of this broke. Now were going back to the hearing and listen to senator jack reed ask a question here. Lets listen. We essentially are relying on the investigations that are underway. So the answer both with this committee and the Hpsy Committee as well as the special counsel. Youre not taking any specific steps based on the intelligence to disrupt russian activities that are occurring at this moment . We take all kinds of steps to disrupt russian activities in terms of what theyre trying to do. I think ill turn it over to director let me finish with this. Are you finished, mr. Coats . Yes. Thank you, sir. Senator, we have a
significant effort im happy to tell you about in closed session, and it is not just our effort, it is an all of ic effort. There may be others participating as well to do our best to push back against this threat. Its not just a russian threat, its the iranians and chinese. I understand, director, we have mutual threats. But one threat that has been central to our and youve testified this publicly the last election there was a russian influence. This election they seemed to be more prepared. Theyve learned their lessons. The simple question i pose, has the president directed the Intelligence Community in a coordinated effort to not merely report but actively stop this activity . And the answer seems to be, im hearing, the reporting is going on as were reporting about every threat coming into the United States. Let me get back to, quickly do the other panelists have anything on this point . I cant say ive been explicitly directed to, quote, blunt or actively stop. On the other hand, its generally clear to generate knowledge and insight, help us understand that so we can generate better policy. That directive has been fairly explicit, in fairness. Again, you may agree or disagree, collecting intelligence and acting on it in a coordinated fashion are two different things. Yes. I also acknowledge our role as intelligence officials. Weve talked a lot about china, fifias, their involvement in trying to buy companies in the United States. What i think has to be pointed out, too, they are undertaking a Significant National investment in Artificial Intelligence and Quantum Computing. That is dwarfing anything the
administration is proposing or suggesting. If Artificial Intelligence has even half of the benefits its promoters claim, it is going to be short of disruptive. Quantum computing has the capacity to undercut cryptology as we know it. The experts can correct me if im wrong. Some of the negativisms that Quantum Computing can generate based on infinite amounts of water which people have to be wondering. What is our program for ai and Quantum Computing that will match the chinese . Burt decoates, you seem anxious
to answer that. Were treading a very narrow line here relative to discussing this in an open meeting. I dont want to tread that line, but we do have to recognize that, again, the chinese activity to appropriate or Intellectual Property is obvious. Theyre generating theyre own Intellectual Property at a rate that could be disruptive, and we are not matching them. Again, this manhattan analogy may be a little out of date, but when we saw the potential effects of a Scientific Development back in the 40s, we spared no expense so that we would get it first before our opponents. The chinese seem to be making that type of commitment very publicly. Billions of dollars that they
said publicly they have a plan and will implement. And we will provide that information to the extent we can collect that information. But just like the manhattan project, We Dont Share steps taken to address it. I understand. Thank you, senator. Thank you, mr. Reed. I hope youll come back to the closed session this afternoon. I think youll get some fidelity in that closed session. Were about to wrap up. Everybody can look up. There are no more questions so you dont have to lose eye contact with us hoping youre not the guy theyre going to ask to answer. You can tell who the newbies are youre watching all the intel chiefs testify before the Senate Intel Committee. We have heard a number of interesting things about u. S. Preparedness for Russian Meddling in the upcoming election. It is expected to be fierce. That is very clear from what we have heard from all of these heads of different agencies. Also, when it comes to the rob
porter scandal, that top aide to President Trump who resigned or was pushed out after allegations by his exwives that he abused them made very clear by the fbi director that they kept the white house in the loop. Not looking good there for the white house as we head into the rest of the day looking for more information from the white house. Well continue to monitor this. Well be right back. Get money back hilarious. With claimfree rewards. Switching to allstate is worth it