really bad laws. well, if he hadn t. he got it somehow. it would be illegal if he didn t have appropriate clearance. do you agree with me that he didn t have appropriate clearance? if he did have appropriate clearance that would be worse. i don t believe that he had any type of agree. for him to get it should be a crime. someone should be prosecuted for letting anthony weiner have access to classified information. does that make general sense? it could be a crime. do you agree with me it should be that anybody that would let anthony weiner have classified information should be prosecuted. if our laws don t cover it there s no anthony weiner statute. maybe we need one. that s already a statute. i just wonder how he could get classified information and not have it be a crime about somebody. unmasking, are you familiar with that? i m familiar with the term? has the bureau unmasked an
community especially nsa. when we talk about things like cyber investigations so often on cable tv it becomes a shirts and skins exercise without asking you, would you see more targeting of public discourse and elections? do i. i think one of the lessons that the russians may have drawn from this is that this works and so as i said a month or so ago, i expect to see them back in 2018 especially in 2020. you regularly testify and correct me if i ve misheard you, but you ve regularly testified that you don t think the bureau is short of resources. you don t come before us and make big increased appropriations requests and yet those of us who are very concerned about cyber look at the u.s. government at large and think we are not at all prepared for the future. can you tell us what the fbi is doing to prepare for the 2018
systems we will hit on that 702 collection and the investigating agent will know holy cow, there s an american who was in touch with that terrorist in yemen. if that agent has been trained and has access to the information, they ll be able to know it. that s how our systems are designed. thank you. i should say the same review that was conducted in 2014 does point out the value of the program. i certainly think and i think most of us do here see the incredible value of 702 and the need for reauthorization there. with regard to just different topic completely, polygraph testing as you re aware any applicant for a law enforcement position with the federal government is required to undergo a polygraph. it s worth noting that cpb experiences significantly higher failure rates around 65% than any other federal law enforcement agency. the fbi does pretty well with this. has the bureau ever conducted
was the case, would those staging elements as an investigation moves forward and the internal department approvals would be appropriate to ask about? that s a hard question. i m not sure if it would be appropriate to answer it because it would give away what we were looking at potentially. would it be appropriate whether any witnesses have been interviewed or whether any documents have been obtained pursuant to the investigation. that s a hard one. i would be reluctant to answer that because it s a slippery slope to give away what we are doing. if an investigation is put on the shelf and not taken seriously, the fact that no witnesses have been called and no documents have been sought would be irrelevant and would be a lack of attention by the bureau, correct? it could, but we re careful about how to use a grand jury, for example. i understand that. this is a separate thing. yeah. so that s a harder call.
the united states and beauty of our system is a bit of a hair ball, and all different kinds of systems and old had they done this in other countries where they had tampered with the vote. my understanding is they have attempted it in other countries. no reason they won t attempt it here if they want to over time. think that s fair. thank you. thank you, chairman. welcome back, director comey, what is the policy of the department and the bureau regarding the release of derogatory investigative information about an uncharged subject? the general practice is we don t talk about completed investigations that didn t result in charges as a general matter, and what is the policy regarding release of derogatory information about charged subjects beyond the derogatory investigative information disclosed either in the charging document or in urther court