Id like to call the hearing to order. Id like to welcome our witness today, ms. Courtney elwood, President Trumps nominee to be the next general counsel of the Central Intelligence agency. Courtney, congratulations on your nomination. And id like to recognize your husband john john, waive your hand there. Thank you whos in attendance today, and i thank you for the support you give to courtney. Courtney, youve served the country with distinction in your Previous Post at the white house and the department of justice and we appreciate your continued willingness to serve. Our goal in conducting this hearing is to enable the committee to consider ms. Elwoods qualification and allow for thoughtful deliberation by our members. Shes provided substantive written questions answers to more than 90 questions presented by the committee and its members. Today, of course, members will be able to ask additional questions and to hear from ms. Elwood in this open session. Courtney comes in front of the committee with a distinguished legal career. After graduating Yale Law School in 1994, courtney clerked for the u. S. District court of appeals for the Fourth Circuit after which she went to clerk for chief Justice William rehnquist of the supreme court. Courtney then took a job as the associate of kellogg, hubert, hanson in the same firm where she is now a partner. Associate hanson in the same firm where she is now a partner. January, 2001, she left the firm to serve as associate counsel to the president rising through the ranks to deputy counsel to the Vice President and then department chief of staff and counsel to the attorney general. During the extremely difficult time in the days and weeks and months after 9 11, ms. Elwood provided sound Legal Counsel to our nations leaders as they considered what tools the Intelligence Community needed to combat terrorism and to secure our nation. Ms. Elwood, youve been asked to serve as the chief legal officer of the Central Intelligence agency at a time when the agency and the Intelligence Community as a whole faces complex legal questions and a host of challenging priorities. The cias general counsel must provide sound and timely legal advice to the director and must manage an office responsible for legal oversight and compliance at the worlds premiere intelligence agency. But more than that, the cia general counsel maintains a vital public trust. Part of your job will be to ensure for the American People that above all, the agency operates lawfully, ethically, and morally. Since you left Government Service, the nature and number of challenges and threats the Intelligence Community is tracking have multiplied significantly. While americans continue to engage in robust debate about which intelligence authorities are right, appropriate, and lawful, i expect you to ensure that the agency operates within the bounds of the law and to ensure that the office of general counsel is in the position to provide the best legal advice possible to director pompeo and the agency as a whole. This committee has received letters of support from your current and former colleagues. In a letter of support signed by those who served in both democrat and republican administrations, your former colleagues praised your acumen, integrity, and judgment, and i quote, deep respect for the rule of law. Jack goldsmith, the professor at the Harvard Law School who has known you since you were a law student at yale, referred to you as a superb, independentminded lawyer. A letter from the d. C. Bar association on National Security law policy and practices highlighted your deepseeded commitment to the rule of law and to our democratic principles, and your colleague ben powell, former general counsel to the dni had this to say. Shes simply one of the finest lawyers and persons ive ever worked with in my career. After meeting you, its easy to see how youve garnered such widespread consistent accolades. I know that your strong moral compass and sharp legal mind will serve you well as the general counsel of the Central Intelligence agency. As i mentioned to director of pompeo during his nomination hearing, i can assure you that this committee will continue to faithfully follow its charter and conduct vigorous and realtime oversight over the Intelligence Community, its operations and its activities. Well ask difficult questions, probing questions of you and your staff, and we expect honest, complete, and more importantly timely responses. I look forward to supporting your nomination ensuring its consideration without delay. Thank you again for being here and for your service to the country. I look forward to your testimony. I now recognize the vice chairman for any Opening Statements he might make. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome, ms. Elwood. Again congratulations on your nomination to serve as general counsel of the cia. I see john as well. Although i do have to question to a degree your legal judgment by bringing my friend tim kaine as an introducing factor, but i will overlook that. Obviously this position is a tremendous responsibility, one that requires a careful review of the qualifications and character of the individual nominated and i echo a lot of the comments that the chairmans made. If confirmed, youll be sitting at a critical intersection between intelligence and policy making. As the agencys top legal officer, the director will turn to you to make judgments on whether a contemplated activity is legal or not. This job requires a leader with unimpeachable integrity and unwavering commitment to the constitution laws of the United States. Who will apply both sound legal analysis and good judgment, the task of providing counsel to the agency. During our conversation, when we had a chance to visit you and i agreed that politics has no place in the agency general counsels office, we discussed the need to follow the law, including the Army Field Manual, to ensure that torture does not tarnish the reputation of the Intelligence Community or this country again. Ms. Elwood, during my questions i will again want your public assurance today that you will always seek to provide unbiased, unvarnished, and timely Legal Counsel to the director of the cia even when doing so might be inconvenient or uncomfortable. Obviously there will abe number challeng challeng challenges that will require that kind of legal judgment going forward. Those challenges will include making sure we continue to protect the privacy and Civil Liberties of americans. The increasing use and relevance of vast amounts of Public Information creates a significant challenge and opportunity for the whole cia and the whole ic. Weve got to always make sure that were protecting the privacy and Civil Liberties of the United States citizens as we take on these these new tools moving forward. An issue that i know has a number of us on the committee have been very concerned about and i think will come back again is encryption. Again related to privacy concerns, the Intelligence Community needs to find ways to access the communications of our adversaries while protecting privacy rights and american commercial ingenuity. I believe we cannot tie the hands of our Technology Leaders by unilaterally disarming them with possible security loopholes, an area again that this committee has looked on is information sharing. The rapid change of Information Technology enables significant sharing of classified information and we must find work to find ways to have the appropriate level of sharing. And finally, a subject that has been a lot of the attention of the committee recently. Chairman burr and i have committed to conduct a review of the intelligence supporting the Intelligence Communitys assessment that russia at the direction of president Vladimir Putin sought to influence the 2016 u. S. President ial election. Its important that all americans fully understand the extent of russias involvement. It is vital that the cia pursuant to your legal guidance support our investigation to the maximum extent possible and allow this committee to follow the facts wherever they may lead. This is a charge i know i take seriously, all the members of the committee take seriously, on behalf of the American People and we will continue to pursue this both thoroughly and expeditiously. I will again during my questions ask you to commit to me and all members of the committee that you willfully cooperate with this review and that you will do all you can to ensure that weve provide the information we, i to conduct it. With that, again, thank you for being here ms. Elwood, and i look forward to todays hearing. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Vice chairman. Id like to recognize our colleague, the distinguished senator from virginia, tim kaine, who will introduce ms. Elwood. Senator kaine. Thank you, mr. Chair, vice chair, and members of the committee. This is an honor. One of my favorite things to do is bring talented virginians who are committed to the body before the council, and ms. Elwood is such an individual. Im just going to warn you doing this in front of my senior senator and also the only alexandria native makes me feel a little bit nervous. And some of you need to know, the nonvirginians need to know, ms. Elwood lives down the street from senator warner and on that score mark, will you take your Christmas Lights down . That was a joke. Actually she has trick or treated at senator warners house in the first test of her discretion as an intel provision will be not revealing his costumes that shes seen over the years. As i said its always rewarding. I know all of us feel this way about our states that we have deep talent pools of wonderful people that are in Public Service and they dont get the thanks they deserve, the appreciation they deserve. But bringing somebody before this committee or others who is willing to serve in a really important position does give me a real sense of pride. I think that people who arrive here are the creatures of their experience and so frequently that experience begins with an upbringing in lessons learns learned through kids, teachers, grandparents, counselors, or other mentors. And with ms. Elwood thats no exception. She had a foundation in family that really laid the groundwork for her Public Service career. Her father the late general Edwin Simmons served in world war ii, korea and vietnam as a United States marine and his legacy continues. One of the buildings in quanitco is named after her dad and her mother was a dedicated Public Servant as well working and traveling the world in the Foreign Service before settling in northern virginia. Courtneys been a path breaker in her career. She was in the first class of a high school in fairfax west Potomac High School that was formed through the merger of two very competitive high schools, and this first class had to create new traditions and brings folks that had at least on the Athletic Field been rivals before. And then she went to undergrad at lee and people say she must have been a feminist because she raised her hand. So shes been willing to be a path breaker and has had encouragement from family and professors do that. When courtney finished at wl, as was mentioned, she went to Yale Law School, and she worked with our senate colleagues, the younger senators bennett and coons, who were at Yale Law School the same time she was. Shes now worked in the Legal Profession for 20 years and the chairman went through some of her experience serving as a clerk in the Fourth Circuit, serving for clerk for chief justice rehnquist, counsel in the white house, the office of Vice President , the department of justice, and also know many of courtneys law partners in private practice well, and its a private firm that is filled with people who are very public spirited, democrats and republicans, they appreciate those who are public spirited. And i know courtney has absorbed that lesson from them as well. Courtney will, i know, talk about her family. Her husband john is here, the two boys ages 15 and 12 live in alexandria, theyre in school today. But ill just conclude and say that so much of what we do depends upon the talent of the people that we bring into these very, very difficult positions. And with courtney elwood, you have somebody of a sterling professional background but more importantly for purposes of this position with a sterling reputation for integrity that is necessary in the cia general counsel position. Its my pleasure to present her to this committee. And as i said to the chairman, i have a bilk marked up in the help committee. Usually my bills go better when im not there, but i probably should at least go up to make sure that thats okay. So i hope youll excuse me so i can head upstairs. Tim, thank you. You are excused and if you would shepard my bill through. His is being marked up as well. Thank you so much. I was hoping wed have a chance to question senator kaine. I would second that. I think id prefer do that in closed session. Ms. Elwood, would you please stand and raise your right hand . Do you solemnly swear to give this committee the truth, the full truth, and nothing but the truth so help you god . I do, sir. Please be seated. Courtney, before we move to your statement, id like to ask you to answer five questions that the committee poses to each nominee who appears before us. They require just a simple yes or no answer for the record. Do you agree to appear before the committee here or in any other venue when youre invited . Yes, sir. If confirmed, do you agree to send officials from your office to appear before the committee and designated staff when invited . Yes, sir. Do you agree to provide documents or any other materials requested by the committee in order for it for us to carry out our oversight function and legislative responsibilities . Yes, consistent with the law. Will you both ensure that your office and your staff provide such materials to the committee when requested . Yes, consistent with the law. Do you agree to inform and fully brief to the fullest extent possible all members of this committee of intelligence activities and covert action rather than only the chair and the vice chair . Again, consistent with the law, yes, sir. Thank you very much. Well now proceed to your Opening Statement after which ill recognize members by seniority for up to five minutes of questions. Ms. Elwood, welcome and the floor is yours. Thank you. Chairman burr, vice chairman warner, members of the committee. It is an honor to appear before you as the nominee to be general counsel of the Central Intelligence agency. I want to thank President Trump and director pompeo for their trust and confidence in me. I also want to thank senator kaine for that nice introduction. It was a great privilege and pleasure to meet not just one but both of my home state senators as part of this process. Id like to use this opportunity to tell you a little bit more about me and what i view as essential qualifications for a cia general counsel. I come from a National Security family. As senator kaine alluded, my father devoted his life to the marine corps and to this country. He spent 36 years in uniform seeing active combat in world war ii, korea, and vietnam. There is little doubt that good intelligence kept him and his men alive during those years. He would later write about the remarkably good intelligence brought by bold foreign agents during his fight at the chosen reservoir. When dad returned home from vietnam in 1971, he formed the marine corps history division, which he led for 24 years. He was a prolific author of military histories and he supported the work of many other military historians. He did so because he believed there were lessons to be learned from the great achievements and the mistakes of u. S. Warfare, mistakes that future generations must not forget. My mother, in her own way, was no less brave and tough than her marine husband. She overcame poverty and more than her share of lifes adversities to have a career in the Foreign Service before she married and raised our family. The lessons around our Kitchen Table were about personal responsibility, honor, and valor. We were taught to adhere to our principles, even if it comes at great personal or professional sacrifice. We were taught there is a clear difference between right and wrong, and we heard stories about americas place in this world as a force for good. If my parents were alive today, they would take great pride in my being considered for this position. It is thanks to them that i believe i have some of the necessary qualifications. Chairman burr has spoken eloquently of the first prerequisite, unwavering integrity. In addressing director pompeos fitness for his position, chairman burr rightly observed that because the cia is an agency that works in the shadows, it requires a leader to be unwavering in integrity, who will ensure that the organization operates lawfully, ethically, and morally. I believe the same holds true for its general counsel. I hope and believe that people who know me well would tell you that im a person of integrity. I certainly have lived my life with that goal at the forefront of my mind. A second prerequisite for the job is independence. There have been many times in my life where it would have been easier to go along, to get along, or to be for whats going to happen, but i havent done so. When the law or circumstances have required, i have told clients and superiors things they didnt want to hear. If i were not prepared do the same in this position, i would not accept the challenge. And if confirmed for this position, i will tell the attorneys of the office that i expect the same from them. But these qualities, integrity and independence, are already imbedded in the culture of the cia. They have placed among its Core Competencies for all senior officers, quote, the integrity, courage, moral, intellectual and physical, to seek and speak the truth, to innovate and change things for the better regardless of personal or professional risk. It would be an honor to join a community that quietly lives those values and to work side by side with the dedicated and skilled professionals who have labored in anonymity to keep this country safe. Of course an effective general counsel of the cia must also have strong legal skills. You have heard my background in this respect. I have had the privilege of many great teachers, mentors, and role models, more than i could possibly thank. But today, one stands above the rest. Chief Justice William h. Rehnquist. The chief showed us it was possible to adhere to your principles without alienating those who hold other views. A prime example is that Justice William brennan considered the chief to be his best friend on the court. The chief built warm, personal relationships with all of his colleagues through his modesty and humor by being unfailingly civil and fair, by focusing on points of agreement over disagreement, and by listening and making accommodations where possible. I have tried to follow his example in all aspects of my life. Finally, and with your indulgence, id like to take a moment again to recognize my constant and shining example of all the attributes ive mentioned today, my husband of more than 20 years, john elwood. There are also two other people whom id like to mention and who are dearest to our hearts, our two wonderful children. I hope that 50 years from now they will look back on my service to this country with pride. So that i could give you my undivided attention, they have remained in school today. So with that, i look forward to answering your questions. Ms. Elwood, thank you for that very fine statement and i hope that the school is accommodating by letting your kids possibly watch this on tv. Ms. Elwood, there have been theres been much discussion about the role of the Central Intelligence agency and how it played into the detention and e Central Intelligence agency and how it played in the detention and interrogation of terror subjects. Those detention facilities operate by the cia have long since been closed. And president obama officially ended the program seven years ago. I think the debate space on this subject has become confused. And im certain that the law is now very clear. Heres my question. Do you agree that it would require a change in law for the cia or any government to lawfully employ any interrogation techniques beyond those defined in the Army Field Manual . Yes, sir. The Intelligence Community is at its strongest when operating with the full confidence that its activities are legal, moral, and ethical and thereby in line with the publics trust. I think its also safe to say that increasing judicial and congressional oversight only increases that public trust. Do you believe that president bushs terrorist Surveillance Program was strengthened when we brought it under fisa court and congressional oversight in 2007 . Yes, mr. Chairman i agree. I believe that the time today the Legal Foundation what became known as the president s Surveillance Program was strengthened by bringing it then under the fisa provisions and the review of the fisa court. Great. Before i turn to the vicechairman, id like to make one final comment in lieu of a question. You noted in your final statement that a second prerequisite to the job is independent. My and my colleagues would agree with that statement. Being an independent voice is not always easy, and youll be asked repeatedly to speak truth to power when serving as a cia General Council. I think youve displayed in your career the ability to be independent, and im confident you will continue to do so at the cia. Thank you. Vicechairman. Thank you. And ms. Elwood again thank you for your very eloquent statement and im going to revisit some of the things we talked about. Following up on the chairmans comments about rendition and the fact the law is very clear in terms of the fact the Army Field Manual applies to cia interrogations. One of the things that during the confirmation process of director pompeo he committed to reviewing parts of the classified Committee Study on rendition interrogation that are relevant. We like wiese commit to reviewing and reading those parts of the General Council . Yes, sir. This committee is spending a lot of time as you are aware of the presses, made aware as well on the Russian Investigation. We have asked the chairman and i and received in many ways unprecedented access, that has been the subject of some fairly extensive discussion. But the chairman and i have worked through that with the director of the cia. But this is an ongoing process, so were going to need Additional Information. So my question is can you commit to ensuring this committee will be provided all the information requested pursuant to our ongoing Russian Investigation, and you dwroufrl will do everything in your power to make sure this is done including making sure all necessary intelligence reports, cia products and other materials requested as promptly as possible. And finally to ensure the cia personnel be made possible for interviews consistent with this committee . Yes, sir, consistent with the law i do make that promise. I review the work the committee is doing as vitally important. And id like to commend your leadership on that. As an american and virginiaen i was very pleased by the leadership you and which chairman have shown on the investigation. Its very serious work. There have been times that director pomp crow, and i understand he has equities as well. But its absolutely critical we follow the intelligence wherever it leads. And again, were going to need your help going forward. One other question and i know other fellow members of the committee has raised this at times. I think we may need a fresh look of kind of the whole gang of whos briefed and not briefed and the timeliness of those briefings. Will you commit to making sure that with those matters that are not involving gang under covert application and other information regarding time sensitive tactical matters that you will commit to fully briefing the whole committee and as timely a manner as possible . Senator, as ive heard in my prior conversations with you and others, the frustration that you feel or that other members of the committee feel when they dont get briefed in. And i do think this is an opportunity at this time with director pompeo and director coats having sat in the chair you sit in, to sort of revisit some of the practices of the past and make sure the full committees are briefed to the maximum extent possible consistent with obligations to protect the, in rare instances, exceptionally sensitive information. I think there have been times and other members of the committee have brought this up, where under the frame of the gang of eight, it becomes information caught within that bucket and so far has not been shared with other members. I think it is a good idea to have a fresh look at this issue . Yes, and ill note that directorcoats commented its louis leadership in the past the director has worked with the chair and vice chair on timing and extending of the the more we can get the members read in, the more the better. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ms. Elwood its good to have you here. I appreciate your desire to serve in both the public and service commit lts. When i asked you why would you take this job . This is a hard job at a hard time, and its good to have you step forward to do it. Ive got several questions about, frankly, the terrorist Surveillance Program and not very long to ask them. So if others want to further exhaust your answers, id ask you to keep these relatively brief. I noticed in a number of questions you were asked to respond to, it was about that program. Give me a sense what were the jobs you had on 9 11 and after, and the rest of your service in the Bush Administration . So leading up to 9 11 nobody obviously was anticipating at least not at my level, my role in the associates Councils Office had nothing to do with National Security, frankly. But we all became focused on National Security. We were in the white house on september 11th. And immediately therefore i and a couple of other members of my office were sent to the senate and the white house to negotiate the patriot act. And were working then for the justerse department or for the Vice President . No, september 11th was associate council to the president. So i was in the office of the president and stayed in that position until may 2002 when we had our first child. I learn returned to Government Service in january or february of 2003. I think it was january of twoun 3 to the office of Vice President where i stayed until the beginning of 20053467. And then you were where . Then i wept with judge gonzalez to the attorney generals office. And your job there was that the. Louis staffer in your office would tell you it changes by the day, but by the large my portfolio felled the the associate attorney generals portfolio. So it would be those components that fall in the department of justice in the civil division. In addition, i would monitor the office of Legal Council, the office of solicitor general, the office of legal policy among others. What would you have known in that job or what did you know about the terrorist Surveillance Program . Senator, i learned my work on on i learned and my work on the terrorist Surveillance Program began in december of 2005 when the president publicly disclosed that aspect of the president s Surveillance Program. Best of your knowledge were you aware of it before that . No, sir. And did you have a reason to have a reaction at the time to the critics of the program, critics like david chris, who was a former u. S. Assistant attorney general for National Security . Well, interestingly enough david and i are old friends and have known each other forever. And once he heard about it he kind of asked me what the are the legal authorities and support this . And we had a conversation. And i was aware of the public statements about the legal authorities supporting the program. And we had a conversation on communications about it, and ultimately he did not agree with the all of the reasoning. But he recognized that, you know, as i did that these are complex issues on which reasonable people can disagree. Would it be fair to characterize him as a public critic of the program, wouldnt it . Yes, sir. And i notice hes one of the people recommending you for this job. Yes, sir. He very kindly sent a letter of support, actually organized a letter of support on my behalf. Are there other people who were critics of that program who are included on that list . Im quite confident there are people who have signed the letter of support who did not think plane of the things that occurred in the Bush Administration, would be things that they would agree with. But i dont know of any others who have publicly stated. And how do you think that experience of the terror Surveillance Program and what happened when there was a disagreement, how do you think that would impact the way you would serve in this job . Thats a very interesting question. I think that my experience with respect to that Important Program and how it was handled initially and then through the reexamination of the legality of the program in 2004, we hope we learned from how things were handled initially and the intense secrecy around the program even within the executive branch. I believe i am would be more prepared or would be able to better advise the director on how to ensure that programs that will necessarily be secret if they should be disclosed are really thought through and recognizing that, you know, in some instances youll have to publicly justify how decisions are made on the front end and on the back end. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator, finestein. Thanks, very much, mr. Chairman. I just want to begin by saying i was reallyal pleased to meet you, have an opportunity to speak with you. And i very much respect your experience and your intellect. Im going to put the question that the chairman asked you in a slightly, well, harsher view. But i think its a real view. During his campaign president elect trump publicly called for u. S. Forces to use torture in the war on terror. He said hes reinstitute waterboarding, which he called a minor form of torture and bring back, quote, a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding. Now, this brought a lot of condemnation from our allies and intelligence professionals who did not believe these particularly eits were effective in proceeding operational intelligence. Director pompeo said at one point early on that he would support the return of waterboarding. Gina hasical said thatshield. When i talked to both of them and asked hard questions, they had made strong statements against it, both in writing and before this committee. So let me ask you the same question i asked director pompeo in his confirmation hearing. If you were ordered by the president excuse me, if the cia were ordered by the president to restart the cias use of enhanced interrogation techniques that fallout std the Army Field Manual, what would you do . What would you do as General Council . I absolutely would not follow that order. But what would you do . I would inform the president that would be a violation of the law. And i would ensure i am confident the director would also impress upon the president that would be an unlawful act. So you would specifically take it as your responsibility as General Council to do so . Absolutely. Okay, thank you. In your prehearing questionnaire you were asked do you support the standards for detainee treatment specified in the manual on interrogation as required by section 1045 of the national othoergz act of fy16. Could you please here under oath reaffirm your commitment to fully comply with all governing interrogations including the legal bar not listed in the Army Field Manual . Senator, if i knowstein i commit that it not only complies with the letter but also the spirit of that law. Thank you, thats good. You informed me earlier this week that you had read the full 500 page declassified study on the cias detention and interrogation program. While some may continue to have differences of opinion, the Senate Report is factbased on documents, cables, emails. And to the best of my reading nothing in the report has been refuted. I think i mentioned to you if the cia had a problem with any of it, we looked at that. We made some changes where we felt the cia was correct. And where we felt they were wrong, we so noted it. But theyre review is in that report. The full report is more than 6,700 pages with nearly 38,000 footnotes. I believe its time to acknowledge truthfully what was done, and then move forward and strength and resolve to make sure that a program like this never happens again. Would you commit to this committee that you will read the classified version of the reports findings and conclusions if confirmed as General Council . Yes, senator finestein, id be particularly interested in the parts of the report that addressed the General Councils office. Thank you, but thats just a small part of the report. Ill commit to the whole thing. But these are where my that would not obviously be my focus. Its a long read. But if you look at things like where the agency has detailed 25 cases, where they believed it was responsible for their apprehension, the report in classified version details where the information actually came from that led to that. And i think i feel very strongly that the time is coming for this report to dee declassified, that it should not be hidden, thatal people in government ought to read it, that people in areas of responsibility ought to read it, and not to shy away from it because it is an official document now. I think it is mistake. As you know president obama did put it in his library. So at least its perpetuated there. Second question, use of contractors. This is one of the things ive been most concerned with. And not the least it wasnt lost on me that three big cases where materials disappeared and security was broken was done by contractors. And including the largest one, edward, Edward Snoweden and more recently hal martin. Previously when i chairman i worked with director penyetta and he agreed to a decrease every year in the percentage of number of contractors. And the number of contractors have gone down. Government contractors are only supposed to be used if they are performing tasks that are not an inherent government function. So intelligence collection clearly is inherently governmental as a function. And i think that we need to continue to reduce the number of contractors. Question i have for you is do you agree that intelligence work is clearly and inherently governmental function . Senator fine stain, you raise an excellent point and it does sound like a core government function to me. And i think you raised a very important question in the use of contractors. Thank you. I agree with that, and my time has expired. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ms. Elwood welcome. And congratulations to you and your family on this tremendous honor. Ive known you been asked about the Russian Investigation by senator warner and i would suggest the same challenge you and director pompeo would face and the importance of your integrity, resilience and courage of withstanding outside pressure, the same characteristics i think are going to be maintained by this committee to maintain the leadership that senator burd and others have provided. Theres going to be a lot who try to get us offtrack. So the same outside courage youll have to demonstrate, we will as well. Youve been asked about post 9 11 interrogation and other practices. It really is kind of amazing to me here we are 16 years and i think several years the chairman noted where we continue to revisit these resitions that were made i think consistent with the Legal Authority at the time. Im very troubled by the idea that you as and the General Council and the lawyers and administration are going to be telling Intelligence Officers you can do this, you cant do that. And if consistent with Legal Authority that you identify, they do something that later on theyre going to be criticized perhaps for political or other reasons for doing what is legally authorized. So can you tell us who is the final Legal Authority on the scope of activities of the Central Intelligence agency . Well, ultimately under longstanding 18th century precedent, the attorney general is the ultimate determiner of the scope of the legal authorities by any government agency. And thats because these cases dont go to court, typically, wright the. Generally, not. There are exceptions and others where there is the supreme court. But i think this is an area where people are confused. They think this is black letter law, and often its a matter of legal opinion by the office of Legal Council at the attorney generals office. Yes, sir, senator. And as i was alluding to my conversations with david chris, on many of these complex issues there is a range of reasonable interpretations. And the department of justice or the lawyers being asked to provide an opinion give their best reading of the law. But it doesnt mean that there cant be another interpretation that is reasonable but the department of justice ultimately gives it best reading of the law. And just because somebody disagrees with the legal opinion doesnt mean that the authorities that youve identified or that other lawyers in the administration identify as conifering that authority, doesnt mean thats wrong either, does it . Thats true. Yes, sir. So i think this is a real problem for the Intelligence Community because as i mentioned during director pompeos confirmation hearing, i like gener general haydens book and concept of playing to the edge. But youre going to be the one playing to that demarcation and identifying where that edge is. And if council plays to the edge in order to maintain our National Security here in the United States i dont want them to be criticized later on, or taken to court, publicly mew milliated or even force said to buy Liability Insurance as part of their job. I reviewed some of the transcripts of people who were nominated to this position. And i noted that some of the centers were stressing the importance that the lawyers go to the legal limits. So, you know, back not that many years ago the lawyers were being criticized from being too conservative. Right. Well, post 9 11 we didnt know as a nation, certainly didnt know as a government whether there would be follow on a tax. So you and our intelligence officials were under tremendous pressure by members of grz to go as far as you legally could, correct . Yes, sir, absolutely. And i guess its just human nature in the safety and security and after the passage of years when we dont feel this imminent threat, then we somehow decide well, maybe we didnt have to go as far as we did. So, i appreciate your answering the questions. And i, too, believe you are imminently qualified for this position. Thank you for your willingness to take it on, thanks to your family for their support. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and ms. El woodwood, thank you for joining ozwell. During the confirmation process i asked director pompeo about what he considered to be the boundaries that apply to it surveillance of americans. He said those boundaries are set by law. You are the nominee to be the General Council, who if confirmed would advise the director of those boundaries. Because the advice is classified and may not even be known to the committee, its critical that we get a sense of your views on the law prior to voting. So to me one of the most important legal matters facing the agency is how it should handle large amounts of information on americans who are not suspected of anything. Ive asked director pompeo about this. He said he would consult with a lawyer, and so to speak the committee gets to ask a lawyer. You have written the attorney general guidelines governing collection on 12 triple 3 would impose and i quote here, stringe want and detailed restrictions on big batches of information that include information on americans. I read the guidelines differently. The cia can conduct searches of those batches looking for americans on daeg looking for information on americans. So my question to you deals with a statement you gave us. What strangeaingent restriction specifically are you talking about . Senator, as you know the attorney general guidelines are publicly available and recently revised. And they are publicly. Theyre thought a secret. I want to know what you consider to be restrictions . There are numerous restrictions and depends upon the particular information at issue. So there are obviously less stringent use and retention requirements with respect to publicly available information. But even there, if its u. S. Person information, still the cias use of it is restrictive. And then there is its a 30 page singlespaced document just provide agframework just give me an example, because the way i read it, none of this changes the fact that the agency can conduct searches looking for information on lawabiding americans where there is no requirement that theyre suspected of anything. So id just like to hear you tell me since you stated it in writing what stringent restrictions would protect that lawabiding american . Well, for example, senator, before certain information is queried, the standard that is applied would restrict it is not simply they can go and query anything they want. It has to be given for a necessary to a authorized activity. So for the purpose of an authorized activity and no further query with respect to publicly available information cant go any further than the necessary extent to further that purpose. Now, with respect to different categories of information that are collected different authorities, 702 has a different query standard as you know than a bulk collection information collected under 12 triple three. And i dont want to be inarticlet about the standards. I want to be precise. And they are spelled out in a public document. None of this, and ill hold the record open for this. Id like to just have you give me the concrete examples. Im happy to do that. Good. But the answer weve gotten this morning is none of what you have said changes the fact the agency can conduct searches looking for information on lawabiding americans where there is no requirement that theyre suspected of anything. Senator, there has to be a link to an authorized activity of the cia at the bear minimum. Even to search publicly available information, there are far more stringent requirements depending upon collections with the type of information. So i dont agree, senator, that theres no train on it. The agency spied on the committee in 2014, searching our commuters. They turned around and filed a crimes report with the department of justice against committee staffers. The Inspector General found there was no basis for the crimes report and was based solely on inaccurate information provided by two attorneys by the cias office, General Council you, if confirmed would be supervising those attorneys. Do you think there needs to be any accountability . Senator, i understand there was a board convened that looked at issue and exonerated the lawyers involvement. But do you believe, you, do you believe there should be any accountability when those lawyers who would under your supervision would provide inaccurate information. . Senator, i believe that they already im talking about going forward. Well, going forward, certainly. I think if the lawyers had not done something proper, absolutely i would assistten on accountability. But thats going forward. Im not going to past. Thank you for joining us ms. Elwood. In reviewing your questions to questions, there was one thing that concerned me and its that you ree peatedly repeat some similar verbiage. And i want to get this right. You quote, have not previously had the opportunity to, end quote, issues raised by the committee and that you have, quote, not done the legal and Factual Research that would be required to properly answer, end quote, important questions such as the cias former enhanced interrogation techniques are consistent with the detainee treatment act. So as you know in this role you will be the principle Legal Advisor to the cia director and you will be responsible for overseeing the cias office at General Council. If confirmed i hope that your lack of expoegs door the important National Security issues weve raised will not encumber your ability to provide thorough, accurate, and effective legal advice to the cia on day one. So i want to go from here since you didnt express strong opinions on some very specific questions that the committee has asked, id like to focus more broadly on the scope of authorities provided by covert authorizes and by memorandums of public notification. And as im sure you know these thoergzs spell out the goals and activity of covert actions. Is it your view that the authorized covert actions of the cia is bound by the text of those authorities, and that the cia may not read into those authorities activity that had are not explicitly approved in there . Senator, i assume that there are there is vigorous oversight by the General Councils office to ensure that the findings are written carefully and that the activities undertaken understand the findings are consistent with the findings. Im not sure i understand your question. What im saying is that it is my interpretation that those activities have to be explicitly authorized within either a covert action authorize or memorandum of notification. So is it your view that the authorized covert activities on the agency is bound by the texts of those authorities in terms of explicitly authorizing activities, or can the agency just read into those thoergzs . I would interpret it as a statute, in that it would not necessarily have be explicit, that every potential action be explicitly stated in the findings. But thad wehave to be a proper interpretation of the finding. Ill give an example that concerns me, the september 11 that it read no reference to interrogations or to coercive interrogation techniques. Yet it was repeatedly cited by the agency for that. So just putting aside the issues if the interrogation techniques themselves were in violation of any laws, do you believe that the use of those techniques was consistent with the approved authorities it was written . Senator, i have neither looked that particular nor do i know anything beyond the executive senate summary. But i believe this is fair reading nobody has raised that was not a fair reading of the notification. So im raising it. Right. So whether or not you have reviewed isnt relevant to my underlying concern. When the committee receives a covert action finding we need to be confident the agency is not so if you cant give us the proper scope of your covert action principle, its difficult to be confident that under your legal guidance the agency wont engage in activities that go beyond that legal guide. It is my common prac s in my 20 years of legal experience and also my experience as a clerk to have statute or a rule of law provided. And youre not going to have a statute describe every possible activity to fall within the scope of the statute, but there could be a fair reading of the statute that would put things within the statute or without the statute. And i would envision the same sort of legal analysis, legal analysis that ive been doing for 20 years would apply in the context of a memorandum of notification. Im going to yield back my time because ive exceeded. And i assume were going to go to senator king of maine since were the only oh, since im the only acting chairman. Thank you. Ms. Elwood, thank you very much. Welcome to the committee. You started your introductory by talking about your dads history. And im in the middle of mcmasters book of nomwith i find with important insights. Youve given me the opportunity toing mention what i think is a very important book that should be read by everyone up here. Yes, sir, i nads thats not being taught in the officer training course. And i hope general mcmasters is also rereading it himself in his new position. In your answer to, i think it was chairman burrrs one of his opening questions you said that you thought the 2007 law strengthened the legal baize for the terrorist interrogation program. Does that imp ply there was a legal basis for it . In other words, does the president have inherent article 2 power to do warrantless surveillance of u. S. Citizens . Senator, the legal authorities underpinning the terrorist Surveillance Program as described in the public white paper i reviewed and then in the much longer than classified but now declassified did not rest on the president s authorities, t but rest said first on the authorities provided by the aumf. The twoun 1 ugaumf . Yes, sirch. Lets skip over that for the minute. Do you believe that understand existing, law, absolutely not. Thank you. And that gets to more subtle question which is reverse target under fisa. A as i understand the way fisa is interpreted you can surveill foreign persons. And there is incidental there may be socalled incidental pick up collection. Collection of foreign persons. My question is does it take Additional Information from Foreign Court in order to query the data on fisa persons . Well, the fisa sets outs the parameters, the framework for that type of querying and subsequently does not revisit it in any time with other taking place, however you pick up an american person and that becomes the focus. Well, reverse targeting is prohibited expressly. And you dont believe it is a potential problem or issue because of the reverse targeting issue the. No, i dont senator. Because with reverse targeting actually picking up a u. S. Citizens or u. S. Persons communication but creating the fig leaf by targeting somebody at the side they know theyre going to be communicating with. What were talking about with respect to incidental collection is just that, incidental. Theres multiple layers of oversight, the first being the one we discussed with fisa Court Setting the parameters for those. But my understanding the government has taken the position in recent past under Prior Administration that once that data is in the database, then they can query about the u. S. Person without further approval of anyone. But, no well, without going back to the fisa code, i think it would director brennen or perhaps director clapper as well said that would be a big mistake to require going back to the court each time there needed to be a query of the and were talking here about the 702 collection. But theres multiple layers of oversight including the department of justice, the office of dni, and the executive branch. I like having an independent body called a court having a role. Right. And having a court do a warpt on every one of those would mean that far fewer of them are done, and it could seriously hamper the operational imp pact. And i look forward if confirmed in getting the opportunity to but you have to understand this is bootstrap uperation where you are in fact talking about the thoergz of a warrantless examination of a u. S. Persons correspondence. But, if i might add, sir. There is more than just there is an independent bipartisan board that also overseas this queries and has looked at it thoroughly and determined there was not a stras, that was there words, no trace of illegitimate activity with respect to queries. So it is layer upon layer upon layer already of existing oversight. The fisa court is involved in setting up the procedures from the frent end. And there are multiple layers of oversight from the back end. And while it may not seem like the fox guarding the hen house, its not. This is serious oversight by the 0dni and by the department of justice checking every single query every 60 days. Im sure well have further discussion on this. I understand your position and appreciate it. Im somewhat concerned you still end up with a trove of data that involves american citizens that can then be queried without further intervention by the court, which to me is the essence of the Fourth Amendment but we can follow up on that. Cuply. If confirmed i really look forward to that discussion. Senator lankford. Appreciate it. I hope this has been helpful in getting your information out, things youre passionate about. I always like to remind me that the folks who serve the cia, they dont wear uniforms. They serve all around the world. They dont get parades. They dont get recognition. No one sees them at a restaurant and buys their meal to sail thank you because no one knows who they are. But would you pass on as you encounter these folks, our gratitude as we try to do facetoface as well. Can anytime im at langly and walk down the halls i see people who walk down the halls thinking about tucking their kids in at night and other critical things. But theyre also counting on having a really good council because they deal with really hard issues. And they need great advice, and sometimes they need it really fast. Thank you, senator. You make a very valuable opponent about these men and women who labor in anonymity to keep this country safe. Well, great to have you engaged. Youve got a lot of background. Youve been around a lot of these hard conversations and been through it. I need to ask you one that your predecessor has also said is hard. So recently, in fact this week care line, who was the person youd be replacing had a speech. And in her speech otgeorgeten University Law school of all the issues she list said, she said this. I think the hardest legal questions were those that surround cyber. Trying to answer questions like what constitutes the use of force, what are the measures to cam bat the use of force. Theyre really difficult issues. Theyre issues this committee and other committees have complained about bitterly to the administration to say there seems to be no cyber doctrine with, and were well behind the curve. This is an area were going to have to write a new statute but also an area where youre going to have to interpret a lot of issues. So my question is, a general 1, will you be a part of helping craft a cyber doctrine . And will we you be willing to interact with this community and say this area is too gray . We need statute to clarify this and to be able to help us through that process so we dont put the good people at the cia at risk in the future but we also dont make everyone second guess what can and cant be done . Senator, you raise a very important issue, and i would be delighted if confirmed to work with you on that. And its an issue other members have raised with me in our conversations as well. And i certainly respect care line crafts, who is long time friend. We went to law School Together and shes been an advisor through this process. And i look forward to working with her in the future for her continual advise as we go through this law. How we work agency to agency, how we work through the whole of United States government on that, and what is needed legislatively to be able to help provide clarity on that, we look forward to that type of cooperation and the direction were going to go. Tell me as well. We talked about trecting the American People, the other side of this. The folks that work at the cia are counting on having a good council and the American People are counting on having a good lawyer in the middle of it thats able to push back and be able to say no. That is something that violates Constitutional Rights and freedomps, you are in many ways the first line of that accountability. The first line of that would be you. So there are a couple of things that we need that i need to just be able to hear quickly from you. One is that you need to understand that you are not only the cias lawyer but the first line of defense in the peoples Constitutional Rights and worldwide that are essentially for their security and National Security as well. Yes, senator. You know, the client of the General Council, the cia is the agency as an institution and ultimately the United States. And it is important for the agency to use the intelligence gathering tools that congress has provided. But they must do so lawfully, protecting the privacy rights and Civil Liberties of all americans. Thats great. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator harris. So following up on senator langfords question, when the cia is considering doing something of dubious Legal Authority and the director and the men and women of the cia look to you for guy guidance i know and youve actually stated the American People have a right to make sure this agency is following the law. But the American People generally will have no ability or visibility into the process by which you can council your client, the agency. And so the question that i have for you and how will you engage this commit ate to ensure there is oversight of the significant but often secret legal guidance that you will give the agency the. Two points that id like to make in response to that, senator, harris. The first is i will obviously provide the director and men and women of the agency with my sound legalads vice. But ill also provide them with my judgments. So sometimes things are legal as you know, but im wise. And then with respect to make sure this committee is aware, i have a legal obligation as you know understand the National Security act, to make sure this committee is informed of the legal basis that underpin any of the cias intelligence activities. And i will fully and timely provide that legal advice. I have legal basis to do that. And how would you propose to do that . Like for example, would this be through a congressional notification wrosh or how can be as a committee eninsure youll reach out to us and notify us of those decisions . Theres a couple of things. One with the committee requests, i have an obligation to respond. And secondly, theres a new precision within the National Security act that requires a notification to the committee of any sort of novel or significant new legal interpretations under the law. And i would obviously comply with that as well. And so lets talk a bit about what we id like to hear about your interpretation of what becomes significant. So in your questions for the record you mentioned that and indicated that you would give a timely and complete information about the agencies significant intelligence activities and failures as subject to the limitations around protecting trades craft and other sensitive information. Based on your experience what circumstances would be considered significant, and who would make the determination of significance . Senator, thats an excellent question. And i actually have not had firsthand experience what is significant and what falls under significance. I obviously would look to past practice and some common sense on whether something falls into the rising of notification. Also from Congressional Affairs and also reading about the history of it the about of notification this committee gets is extraordinary, multiple a day. And so i assume from that the threshold is fairly loy on what is significant, but i dont have any Additional Information to provide with respect to how i would define that. What character for example, lets talk about the russia investigation. Would you agree any information or developments as it relates to russias role in the 2016 election would be considered significant . If something was new in that the cia had information, i would imagine that would rise to the level of significant. Well, theyve already done it. The election has passed, so it would not be new new information. So youre saying if there was information, if it was not new you would not consider that in terms of sharing that with the committee . Well, if had already been shared, if it was redundant. I would do that on a case by case basis on how the office has done it for many years and be consistent with that. Are you willing to commit to this committee if you come across information that relates to that incident of russia tampering with that 2016 election and if you become aware that information has not become shared with this committee, will you share it with the committee as it becomes significant . It sounds like something that would be significant givethen work the committee is doing on that investigation. Okay. And that means, yes . Sounds like it. Okay. Im going to hold you to that. Im interpreting to that as a yes. The committee is as well, so thank you for that. The role of the General Council is to provide legal advice to the cia and the director. Do you believe that it pertains to the cia free from Political Considerations . Absolutely. And even if it ran counter to the agencies policy and statements during the amcane or afterwards . Absolutely, senator. Senator collins. Thank you, mr. Chairman. First, let me say ms. Elwood that i very much appreciated the Office Meeting that we had in which we went over many of the issues that have been raised here today. And i abelieved that you peered to have an extraordinary background for this very important post. I do want to get on the record a couple of issues that we discussed in my office. One is i referred to the fact that john rizo, cias General Council, during the agencies enhanced interrogation program, wrote in his autobiography that it was a big mistake that all members of the Intelligence Committees were not briefed on the program until 2006, which was four years after the program began. And indeed the existence of the program for a time was concealed even from the secretary of defense and the secretary of state. Do you agree with his view that it was a mistake for congress not to have been briefed on this program . The Intelligence Committee i should say the full they should have been briefed in a timely way of the full committee. I want to follow up on a issue several have mentioned but in a more director way. And that is in the private sector when you are council to corporate entity, for example, its very clear where your loyalties lie and who your client is. So i want to talk to you just a little bit more to flesh out what youve already been asked by asking you what is your understanding of who would be your primary client as General Council of the cia . Its a very good question and an important one for all of Us Government lawyers, if i become one again, to remember client of the General Council of the cia is the agency as an institution and ultimately the United States. You know, casually we think of the director or the men and women at an agency as being the cias client. That is only true in their official capacities. If their interest diverge with that of the agency, that cia lawyer could no longer represent them. And i remember very well when i was in the Councils Office thinking often and being reminded often that we did not represent the president. We represented the office of the president. Thank you, very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator cotton. Thank you. Ms. Elwood congratulations on your well deserved nomination. I want to speak briefly about the policy directorf of 208. Of nonu. S. Persons located outside the can United States matter of principle do you agree Constitutional Rights to do not exend to persons located outside the United States . It is true our institution, and of course were talking here about the bill of rights, protects the rights of United States citizens and in the United States by and large. And im also not aof any statutory law that extends broad foreign protections to foreigniers abroad . Is it constitutional law that i dont think people would find that controversial. I would agree. No, sir. I agree. Section 7 of the foreign intelligence show. Director pompeo stated in a speech a couple of weeks ago the cia steals secrets from and consistent with our american ideals, end quote. Part of that tool kit is section 702 director of national intelligence. He recently called it has top lejs slative priority to have it expire at the end of the year. Will act in general and sfoen 2 in particular to the cias mission. Yes. I obviously have not had the benefits of the classified information on 7 e 702 sbri spoken to and raetd statements of those who have, and they have with broad consensus all concluded that it is a highly effective and valuable tool and it has disrupted it has played a key role in disrupting specific terrorist threats that were aimed at the United States and abroad. Could you please describe some of the various layers of oversight and compliance that occur at the cia general counsels office as well as the department of justice and odni and here at this committee . Well, there are many, many layers, as i was discussing with senator king. With respect to inside the general counsels office at the cia, cia lawyers provide inperson training and they sit with the officers who are doing the kwar rig. The cia does not did the collection under the 702 all they they do have the authority to do querying. Outside agency and the agencys querying is then audited by the office of the dni as well as the doj on regular basis and the general counsels office is involved in those audits. That same level of oversight occurs at the nsa with respect to odni and doj audits every 60 days and, indeed, every single select selector that is used under 702 is audited, not a single one is missed. In addition to the executive Branch Oversight theres the Inspector Generals of the agencies have Oversight Authority as well outside of the executive branch. Theres congressional oversielgt through the committees, and also the fis being provides oversight by setting the standards and reviewing getting reports on any mistakes that are made. And then theres the fourth layer of oversight which is you alluded to, the privacy and civil liblts liberties oversite board which did a thorough review of the use of 702 established that it had been a highly effective tool disrupteding specific terrorist plots and they also found as i mentioned to senator king, no trace of illegitimate activity or intentional misuse of the tool. Thank you for the answer and thank you for your willingness to come serve our country once again and thanks to all the many men and women you will be leading in the office of general counsel. Snaer cotton, thank you. Senator king. Two very quick followups. Onesy think its important to noelt that weve done a lot of talk about the mclob, theres only one member confirmed and i hope that you will use your good offices to try to move that process along because this is an important part of the overall scheme here and right now we we dont have a full compliment of board members. Number 2, i couldnt help but notice when you answered the chairman sort of five routine questions at the beginning that you qualified them when he said will you keep the committee fully and currently informed you sid will according to the law. Id never heard a witness use that. Are you whats your mental reservation here . Consistent with the law. Im just holding out, as you know, the statute provides that there are limits with respect to protection of sources and methods. So in the the agency is obligated to provide information subject only to withholding specific operational details about sources and methods, thats what i mean. Thats what you were referring to . Yes, sir. I understand that. That is fine, i was i was hoping there wasnt a broader expectation. Theres no broader principle i was alluding to. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator king. Let me note for the record there have been some other witnesses that have qualified for i think the same reason. Senator warner. I would simply say i know this will go beyond kind of the focus of your job, but this whole revisiting of how were all briefed, what falls into which bucket, i candidly do not appreciate and understand, although i do think it would be very timely to revisit some of those principles because i do feel like there are at times when gang of eight information which, in my mind, should normally be things in advance of a president ial action that Congress Needs to be notified but not necessarily information that is simply sequestered into this very Discrete Group without having the full benefit of the committeess understanding would be worthwhile of understanding. I would be very interested in digging into that and discussing it with you further. I think all of my colleagues for the thorough questioning of our witness. Ms. Elwood, thank you very much for, one, your willingness to serve, two, the expertise you bring to this nomination, ill work with the advice chairman as quickly as we can to have any post hearing questions presented to you. If youd expedite those back to us, well very quickly set up a confirmation hearing and hopefully get your nomination to the floor. We need you at the cia yesterday. Thank you very much. Thank you for your time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. [ int indistinct conversatio[indisti this weekend on American History tv on cspan 3, saturday night at 8 00 eastern on lectures in history, tal son University Professor rinehardt on victorian culture in the u. S. In the last half of the 19th century. These are the values that the victor ians are promoting. Restrain yourself, dont give into your urges and your glutny and the desires all the time. Be modest. Dont brag and make yourself the center of attention. And worked hard, do not be lazy. And. 10 00 on real america, the 1984 film soviet active measures about the soviet unions efforts to use forgery, bribery, and the spreading of fake news to further their cold war agenda. Time and again diplomatic arifles and secret packages will be brought into my office and almost each time there would be some forthly it like in spy movies. Sunday at 6 30 p. M. Eastern, hor historians talk about their roles. As i see it, history is start of an add on. Its a source of evidence or context to which most judges and lawyers turn to to the extent that its useful in a particular case. And then at 8 00 on the presidency, president ial historians on the most influential first ladies. Dolly madison who really shaped informal politics in washington. She really understood that at social gatherings you could get men to agree to what the president wanted to do or get two warring factions together over ice cream. For our complete schedule go to cspan. Org. Cspan, where history unfolds daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies. And is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. Coming up a Senate Hearing on government waste and fraud. Then a discussion on who benefits from globalization. After that, a panel examines the role of the United States in the world today. And later, a Senate Hearing on u. S. Foreign policy concerning libya. Now a Senate Hearing on duplication, waste, and fraud in areas of the federal government. Witnesses include the comptroller general of the General Accountability Office and the treasury Inspector General for tax administration. This is an hour and