Traumatic brain injury sereno i try to mentor asbestos can. Probl but i hope people that needd help get help and they can reach out to be that way in to help the reform. The more research is done absolutely. Myself. Hello. Why did you move to bring your main. [laughter] being gore. I cant tell my normal jokes. [laughter] we could build a house it relented and rural people have the blood go to the fingers and toes line comes back warmer so onethird of my body is kept off so i overheat very fast. Rew up i am missing for ratified the u. N. Not be able to tell that. [laughter] she grew up in texas she w wanted to go to dallas but it was just six months the year crying all the time because i am a huge winner. [laughter] she is originally from maine to or michigan. That was the other choice. Share is a huge family base and i had to impress them. [laughter] through they love to be just like you do. [laughter] if she could sacrificece everything i was in a coma five days medically induced she knew i would not wake upe. And she sat there 20 hours. And refuse to come back so i thought i could fly out to see them they are retirementve age a and come visit me. Great u my wife deserves to be around her family and we want more children. No problems there. [laughter] not everydays rose is what she faces. I know she married me when i was 6foot 3 inches to the 50 pounds and a different manamas same person but she stuck with me. So we did i move for her. Now i think oh crap. [laughter]r] it is like 40 degrees belowur zero tomorrow . But i am not there. [laughter] that is like me and though he does on the beach. Figu do you find you get great support from the politicians of public figures . And defiant you can bring more support and encouragement and right now everybody says you are a veteran . But im on a platform thats his real need to be looked at dash. L that im able supply a year with the positive message. Im. Be out in fair square at the author book signing as soon as we leave here. Hes going out there and signing books. Just want to say, i am very honored and blessed to be here today, and i want to thank you for being here with us. Thank you so much, everybody. I appreciate it. Have a great day. Dont forget to be back for dana. She is phenomenal. [applause they had very good courses and then, you know, it was a bluecollar town and we have a whitecollar economy and we have this bluecollar culture. And before he was somebody, and he was traveling to the United States, visited pittsburgh, wrote an article that was pinned to a Bulletin Board at the top of the incline. And he characterizes the city masterfully in this place just goes to work. And that is what brought me up. That is what i brought to the job. I would like to leap over to a subject that you deal with more than once, which has dominated many aspects and that is metadata it used to be the case when people wrote letters in longhand and there was something called a mailbox which would let the government keep track of the address in the return address and it strikes me that both, which you deal with early in the book, its something that you dont like right at the beginning and with respect to Edward Snowden, there have been a lot of misunderstanding, people thinking that when you are keeping track or the government was keeping track of the outside of the envelope, whether that is a letter or an email, that they are also reading the message and people got very scared as well as worried about that. Could you help to clear up what is going on . There is so much to clear up about that. The public got stampeded. We have a lot of that and frankly we should embrace a little bit of that responsibility ourselves. We probably couldve been more forthcoming preEdward Snowden and we should have been agile post Edward Snowden as well. And so the metadata is literally the outside of the envelope. American Law Enforcement traditionally have looked at the outside of the envelope. The Supreme Court decided that who you called and when and how long also was essentially the outside of the envelope. The court held at 53. But then the telephonic metadata had no expectation of privacy and therefore was not constitutionally protected. It was decided that to a degree that it should stop the commanderinchief from doing that and that has stood up in court. On two occasions it was taken as a given and the president has the constitutional authority. We have gathered the data. I think constitutionally we have done a lot quicker. But out of respect with american privacy we gathered the data and we put it into one of the lockboxes where it is not just lying there, we did not try to create relationships around algorithms against it or anything, which is frankly common practice. Who so there is kind of a nervousness about their among the right left political reception and i just dont want the government having the ability. No good deed goes unpunished. To give you an anecdote. I am a panel. And we are talking about this. [inaudible] there our company is better managing data. And they know a lot more about you and what you buy. And they are really interested. My explanation is that that is a violation of the law to the United States. You cannot do that. It is impossible. Let me turn you over to another subject. Waterboarding. I have been many discussions about this. I am curious as to your view is that you have made it clear although not precisely clear in the book. The navy s. E. A. L. S and the special forces, many of them are water boarded as part of their training. Is our whole bunch of americans. My deputy was a former navy s. E. A. L. There is batman there is also the case of some journalists and authors. So the test for not torturing is simple and clear. But i dont know any other things called torture by anyone such as putting bamboo shoots under her fingernails that is done by journalists, to see what its like and there has to be something a bit different which might put it in the same category. Especially you put sleep deprivation into this. There is some difficult circumstances. You are right. I have treated this with some depth. Not because i wanted to sell justified. But to try to create this historical record, i try to do that to the best of my ability. And i do notice a distinction but there are some things that everyone agrees on that are always wrong. Things he cant do under any circumstances and you have some things over here that no one has any guess about. And then you have a body of steps in the middle and to be perfectly candid waterboarding is way over here. And so judging whether it is moral, legal, appropriate, you need to understand what the totality of circumstances is in which you find yourself. And even when you have digested this, i did not use waterboarding, i was part of this one we took it off the table. And that is because we have different circumstances. I had more penetrations, i had a better knowledge. And that was no judgment. When people asked me what would you have done my answer is it is in your heart. My answer is that i think that i never had to make that decision. And for those that are quick to criticize they may want to thank god as well that someone else stepped up and made that tough call. Which talks about what some of these aspects of intelligence on about. It is an infinite gray area. Let me ask you about this man because there was a dispute. He was possibly the only person water boarded a number of times. Whether or not the waterboarding of him produced information that did in fact help lead us to some of this, what is your view on that . It was easily nice to have this. But you have been in the same office that i have been in. There are hundreds if not thousands and its really good in a fabric. So just to hit a couple of data points. , it was not waterboarding but it was sleep deprivation. At the you one end of the day it was one of the other techniques. And this was totally defiant. And he was more cooperative over here. And in fact there was a large margin. Now, can i do this or that . It doesnt work that way. But i explain it again in the book. I cannot imagine any operation that did not rely on the information that we got from those 100 plus detainees. [inaudible] and now with the ease of once you find them, when you fill in the hellfire from this, something that is doable and technological. In ways that havent ever been before. We can get a good deal of inflammation from them. Poorly something that is on the tough side of the spectrum that you describe. I have characterized this as treating terrorists like trout in certain streams. We havent done quite this and this includes capturing and holding someone. If we had our successor he would not know. And john is probably speaking his heart as well. But if you just look at this since january 2009, i have forefingers appear then we have captured and held for american interrogation. You think that is in part because we are pretending the rule of criminal law and criminal justice applied to what we are supposed to do with respect to terrorists or ignoring the fact in the public debate it kind of has its default option. But if you are not treating them as you would in the criminal Justice System then youre acting in a lawless way. And dont give that up. They say that we are at war with these people. If that gives us potency we can operate under the laws of Armed Conflict and not under the laws of criminal justice. I am particularly curious about why. When we got into the habit of talking about weapons of mass destruction when talking about each weapon independently. You can have huge volumes once they are in the backseat of a volkswagen. Chemical weapons, manufactured completely differently, of course, the nuclear weapons. The government has never tried to make this clear. One of the underlying themes that i have really tried to talk about is we are the secret security service. First of all, it never worked and it really doesnt work in todays society. Apart five successors are going to continue to do what we do this is more about transparency. And that is just not tending to the change in political cultures. Because your telling the American People why. Youre exactly right. I am just giving them in the order of audibility. Wmd. And you know that we posted that much more tightly inside. And you know, the American People are pretty smart. The one thing that you have put inside the book, the first time that i have seen this and seen it work like this, it is very important. If one is enriching uranium up to a level of 20 which is what you need for medical uses, you have done about 90 of the work necessary to get it to weapons grade. It is a metric progression. And i think there is a lot of misunderstanding about that, people being relatively relaxed, some say 20 during this over the years. But it is another subject that has never really been clearly explained effectively to the public and to journalists, and if it has, people dont pick it up. So i try to bare my soul about the iranian question. So i am uncomfortable with this plan of action takes place, but we are on the lines and its not like we had a better idea either. So this has been a problem. But i understand, and tried to suggest that this is a very difficult thing. Yes, it is. One last thing. And we have a progression. One reason i am uncomfortable with the Iranian Nuclear deal is that if it works and if it does everything we wanted to do will they cheat in a way that matters . Maybe not. Because if they just wait 10 years they will have an industrialstrength, nuclear power, never more than a few weeks away material and so let me ask a set of questions that people always ask me and which are your favorite spy novels and spy movies, whether or not any of the movies really have anything to do with reality and if there is something that has to do with reality, i will offer an example that is in the espionage world. It is often hard to find. If there is a film several years ago, about germany and the 1980s. As far as i am concerned it is as good as we can get about really what happened in intelligence from the battle scenes and so forth. You let people see into the nature of security services. I never even met jack ryan. And so although there is truth in fiction, i wanted to show you a little bit of reality and now moving into the realm of fiction. The best written piece is his first article and it was actually reviewed on the website which is very unusual. [inaudible] it was based on this. And no relationship to the others either. And when he was killed, this was not exactly a biography, but it was close. And it really does give you a feel for what it is like. I signed the book. And then we just talked about it as well. In the more visual medium one is homeland. And everything in the foreground, you know, that is never going to happen. But the background, obsession, focus, mission. It rings really true. And there are many things in their that are artistically correct but they are not factually correct. And i actually touch upon this in the book. And they say for example that there is a Straight Line in the movie between this. And they realized that we were connected. But it wasnt likely. And so the first 20 minutes of the movie are an alleged thing. We were not nice to a couple dozen people. Artistically correct but not factually accurate. And it was a team effort, it was not an individual effort. But factually correct, i will tell you that it was a band of sisters. It was comprised of women who have been working on that before chasing Osama Bin Laden was cool. On the interrogation, at least in terms of literature, my favorites in this case. Let me ask you this. As do you and i know a lot of other people do as well, the cia grew out of a military organization and as a result of that heritage, it is a fulltime employees of the cia who operate particularly overseas. And there are officers to recruit agents inside of this. Fbi agents recruit informants. So why cant hollywood get this right. You really dont know what youre talking about. I had a guy that did that wrong. And what about the issue of whether and what we do in the intelligence business. It can be characterized by something very different than what one might say they have in the military and special forces. But they do not lose track of their reality by killing their comrades and colleagues. He virtually never happened. I have had difficulty getting people to depart from political correctness. And it is what we really do with the officers and the intelligence area. In the Clandestine Service is part of this and that is why one reason why those things are distorted from time to time. But some of us know a little bit what it might be like as well. So if we know that, that is why it is so intriguing. Its often about the misapplication and doing something that youre not supposed to do it in espionage. So right in the middle of book we take this head on and i began with a quote in the 60s. And you really have to be honest. And then i go on. And so i actually give several anecdotes in the book that the whale responsibility, the moral weight that you place on someone is part of this. You talk about graduation after a training course, and im actually telling you about this moral responsibility. And people cooperate with you. They are placing the fate of this in their hands. We may be the only face that they ever see. Never forget more responsibility you have embraced by recruiting this person or that person. So again, i stress this. We can stand the stakes because we are all always operating on this and we do not get any of the easy burdens. We can stand mistakes but not dishonesty. So if you have an officer that is not totally candid, you have no use for them. Let me turn to a ron. You paint a vivid picture of about 80 of your focus at one point. I have actually asked this question and what i am describing is living in chicago. There is that and then the formulation of using the initials of the three things you focus on what counterterrorism. And people used to ask what are your priorities and i respond and its kind of like alphabet soup. Counterterrorism, the rest of the world and that is not a happy description. There is a lot of happy stuff and the rest of the world. But it is so demanding. And that is my honest assessment of where we were. And iran has distinguished itself by being the number one terrorist sponsoring state in the world. And also by lining a great deal and i think that is part of it as well. Which as i understand it from their point of view that is part of it. So i think that it is important for people to understand what happened with respect to the issue of whether a ron was a ron was or was not in the process of reacting to iraq war was that in the process of trying to build up itself in such a way as to dominate that part of the world. So he clearly was completely worried about iran as a result of the iranian iraq war. One of the new reports suggest that the interrogation of him by the fbi agent is very effective in interrogation and he indicated that he no longer had this for a period of time, weapons of mass destruction, but he did everything to convince the world that he did have them in order to deter the iranians and that, of course, had reverberation. So could you talk about some of that . There is so much to look at. One of the things that i said is that i w secondmost discussed topic. You talk about other stuff than president bush used as the two kinds of questions. One was kind of a strahtforward thing. How much have they got there. And then the other question he gave me is regarding an incident in the chapter there. The other question is how do these guys make decision. Because this is an incredibly opaque society and its very difficult for us to penetrate. And he was a little bit impatient. We had a Good Relationship and i think he had some regard for him and he showed some anger a couple of times and at one point he said look, i get it. For god sake gods sake we have tens of thousands of americans going back and forth tween los angeles every summer. How come we do not know more than the answer is that it is just a tough nut to crack and we have good security services. And i dont think that many of them understand how they make the different policies that are there. Turning to the new York Police Department. You had a fascinating effective relationship with them and for most americans they operate over this and yes, they have offices in the United States but youre going to places that americans dont normally go, and you want to talk about this and chat with someone who works here. But it is everything overseas where fbi, crime, other things. How did the cia did together with the new York Police Department and what was going on. So this is part of the legal ambiguity that permeates things. What we dont know what is lawful or what is not lawful. And so for well over a century we have decided to protect our security and liberty by putting stuff in separate boxes. Intelligence over here, Law Enforcement over here and the attacks of 9 11 were right down the line. It right between foreign and domestic Law Enforcement and intelligence and so out of moral responsibility we had to close that. So its interesting. So Congress Actually legislates them to be a Domestic Intelligence service. And in addition we obviously need this to be a special case. And this is a Truly International city. One third. We would not realize that that would be the case back in the 19th century. It is twice as large as the next Largest Force in america. And the Chicago Police force is even larger. We are talking about this at a great deal. So we talked about this as having a very aggressive intelligence program, about how it was our responsibility to try to support this. So we set up a tight liaison relationship with the nypd. And i would never recommend what the nypd did here in the walkie. This is different. This is a special case and we work very hard knowing that they would have a special relationship with the nypd. And so we owe a lot to people like him. We have people who have told run into this. We caught this on my watch and several members of the congress and senate are particularly upset because no one was fired over it and you cant fire someone who was already retired but i could not get that message across. And so you had to deal with issues that came up before you became director and some of these did not manifest themselves until after. I was particularly intrigued by the woman who had wrongly identified you. Can you tell us about what happened there because it spoke greatly to your credit. Thank you for saying that. And when it was happening i thought it was an easy decision. But now i think it is an easy decision and it appears to have been part of this. It appears to be controversial. Because it suggests a moral dilemma and conflicting pressures and we get to the point. The macedonians picked up someone. They said that we thought he was someone we were chasing. An analyst with data to the best of her ability and decided yes, this is someone that we needed to talk to. He was taken to a site and was interrogated. They realized us is not what we were looking for. It took several months but he finally released them and they sent him on his way. That part of the story airs this. But the Inspector General asked me to focus on this with what actually made the decision, we need to talk to this person. And so we had kind of and accountability board and i thought, absolutely not. As a director you are responsible for the Overall Health of the agencies and the success of the mission. So if i have created a false positive, i will be teaching every analyst in the agency that the one thing that you have to really make sure that you avoid is any false positive which would then mean that they would be part of their analytical judgment to be safe and we would probably have more to positives because bad things could really happen to me if i get a false positive. So incontinence, how can we possibly do this and i said no, this is not going to happen. Who would i put on the jury of peers. [laughter] and again, it was easy for me. Because you had this urban legend of accountability and again, this permeates in the book until you walk into the concourse, you go up the stairs and you look to the left and there is a mural ofs lady liberty. That we work in a very in narrow state that no one else is allowed to work in. We work in a space they were talking about global situations. Heres what is going on in the world. Finally these people would know. So how would you rate this . And its like, the first thing you have to keep in mind is that we dont do eight or nine or 10. Theyre asking the department of commerce the question. [laughter] and that is what i try to display. Remember pulling the barrel back and letting people see what actually happens inside the security services. Real people, extraordinary in only that they are asked to do extraordinary things. Thats very good. I would like to ask you who do you work with really stands out to you as somebody that would go the extra mile to help get the right thing done to mine is charlie wilson, the congressman. On the House Appropriations committee. We never wouldve gotten it done without charlie. He would move some money around here. Being on the appropriations subcommittee, he had a lot of flexibility. And together the real flexibility that he had. The Committee Members made it possible and he and i would sit there and move 500,000 from one account to another account. Because we were not talking about big money here. And he was just terrific. In my example, what are some of those examples . I havent thought about this in the wild. And i dont mean to be selfserving to the administration. But i can have a straightforward conversation. One is that i have a decision to make and its mine. And in essence i dont even know that i was inviting him to be a sounding ward. And he was forever covering that. I got invited to meet the press. Mark mansfield, i know you know him, and he says he the press here. And i said that i had been invited to be on meet the press this sunday. And he said good luck. No political guidance, no left and right hand, just it was good. So he had this kind of confidence in the agency for me that actually allowed us to stabilize things in 2008. And so then i got selected to be the director and the process that i lay out here. Kind of that phone call and yes, sir. And he was like i will probably want to talk to you tomorrow night. I had a pretty good understanding of what it was. So i walked out to my other office and i said fine steve. He was retired in the bit of an unhappy incident. And i said would you ever consider to be the Deputy Director of the cia and he says well, that would really depend on this. And i said im not at liberty to discuss that but im the one