Answer is. Were here just to tell folks the example i use is the fbis not an alien force imposed upon america from mars. Right . We belong to the American People. We have the tools that the American People gave us through you. And our job when one of those tools isnt working so much anymore is to tell the American People, thats why were talking so much about encryption. You see it in the isil cases and kidnapping cases and drug cases and child abuse cases. Theres a conflict in our values that we simply must figure out how to resolve. It is obvious in the case of isil well continue doing the work. Im very grateful as my colleagues are for the high quality product that this committee did on travelers, those responding to the first part of that siren song, that come. Theres Something Interesting happening that i want to tell the committee about just in the last few months we are seeing fewer people attempt to travel to join isil in syria. We have seen six in the last 3 1 2 months. We were seeing nine a month in all the months before that. I dont know what to make of that. One possibility is were not seeing it the way we were before, theyre still going. Another possibility is all of our efforts to lock people up and punish them for going is making a difference. Another difference is help from our colleagues around the world especially the turks. Or Something Else. But were starting to notice that curve which was going up like a hockey stick flatten a little bit and well keep you posted on whether that continues but this committee has done such great work on that topic i wanted you to know that fact. Were very grateful for the opportunity for this conversation. Thank you, director. The chair recognizes himself for questioning. And let me say on the encryption issue dark space platform, this committee is, we are meeting with Technology Companies trying to find a solution to that. The foreign fighter threat, the but the threat of the internet is real, its gone viral. I think the good news is janade hussein was taken out by an air strike that was publicly reported and has had some impact i think. But its going to continue until we find a solution, a technology solution. Also want to commend you for the success both you and the secretary have had in stopping so many plots. We put out a monthly terror snapshot and the fact is every month these numbers go up in terms of terror plots. We had 17 terror plots here in the United States. Isis directed or inspired. And overall almost 70 isis related individuals arrested. You dont know what you dont know. The chattanooga case is a good example. You cant stop all this and the chatter is so high its hard to stop all of it. My first question just very simply is, you know, directed to the secretary is do you consider the threat environment to the homeland to be one of the greatest since 9 11 . [ inaudible ] . Your mike. I tend no the to rank threats or try to make an assessment a current period is more or less dangerous than before because we have to focus on a number of things. The point that i want to stress is that its different. Its different than what it was in the 9 11 period in that its more decentralized and more diffuse its more complicated because of the going dark phenomenon because of the very effective use of social media and because of the potential for the lone actor who isnt necessarily exported from overseas but who could strike here at any moment which requires more complex response. More whole of government response. We are very concerned. Im encouraged by the numbers jim cited of those we know about who have attempted to leave. But we also know that isil is still out there every day making an appeal. So, weve got to stay busy. Director comey . I think about it the way jay does. In some ways we are demonstrably safer thanks to the work of this committee and the whole of government. Our country is better organized, better deployed, smarter, tougher than we were before 9 11, so as director rasmussen said, i agree that the threat of the big thing is not gone, but it is diminished significantly. At the same time theres a me sa me tas metasis of the threat and its become mr. Diffuse and it moves faster and theres a lot of people in the United States energi energized, troubled souls, by core al qaeda. So its very different today. Mr. Rasmussen . The only thing i would add to that is that the diffusion and dispersal creates a particular problem in that it stretches our resources that much more widely. The blanket has to cover more of the bed when you look around the world at all of the locations all over the safe haven locations, all the regions of instability around the world where a terrorist threat might emanate from, the areas we have to look at to enhance our intelligence and partner with governments in those regions and thats just a resource challenge. If you think about the period dealing with core al qaeda, we were focused pretty intensively on pakistan and afghanistan. Now you can rattle off 12 or 15 countries where were very active. Its more of a global movement. The latest edition of the beat which is isisinspired magazine, they discuss the idea of moving a weapon of mass destruction into the western hemisphere and across the southwest border from mexico into the United States. Being from texas this certainly concerns me. And, of course, not getting into specifics but a plot was disr t disrupted out of moldova trying to smuggle two islamist terror organizations Nuclear Materials that could have reached our shores. Director comey, how serious do you take this threat . Deadly seriously. This is something that we have worried about for a long time. We have a division of the fbi, the weapons of mass destruction directorate, its one of the reasons that we have tried to build such good relationships with our Law Enforcement colleagues in so many of the places where there polimight be materials available including former soviet states so it is the classic extremely low probability extraordinarily high impact event and so it has our constant focus. My final question is on the Syrian Refugees. Weve had testimony before this committee that we dont have intelligence on the ground in syria, we cant properly vet these individuals through databases, we dont know who they are. I visited a camp in jordan with some members on the committee and we were told the same thingething e. I know the administration is planning moving as high as 10,000 refugees into the country. Very quickly as my time is running out, how concerned are you from a security perspective on this . And do you think this will increase your counterterrorism caseload if we bring in 10,000 syrians into the United States . Secretary johnson . Chairman, we i am i am concerned that we do the proper security vetting for refugees we bring into this country. Committed to 10,000 and ive committed that each one will receive a careful security vetting. It is true that were not going to know a whole lot about a lot of the syrians that come forth in this process. Just given the matter of the situation. And so we are doing better at checking all the right databases and the Law Enforcement and intelligence communities than we used to. And so its a good process and its a thorough process. But that definitely is a challenge. Director comey. I dont think i have anything to add to jay. I think he describes it well. We see a risk there. We will work hard to mitigate it. Our challenge will be as good as weve gotten ourselves a querying our holdings to understand somebody. If the person has never crossed our radar screen, there wont be anything to query against, so we do see a risk there. For the record, were a humanitarian nation. Its a humanitarian crisis, but we also have a responsibility to protect the American People and to me thats paramount as well. The chair now recognizes Ranking Member. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Taking off from your question relative to the Syrian Refugees. Can each of you explain your agencys position on the vetting process for these refugees. A lot us concerned about whether or not you have enough Information Available to you to do an accurate vetting. And so, mr. Rasmussen, can you sure, im happy to start. As director comey suggests, we have a lot of Lessons Learned in this area from when we went through similar processes over the last several years dealing with other large refugee populations and so i think weve now worked successfully to make sure that every bit of available intelligence information that the United States government holds will be looked at with respect to a potential nexus to someone being screened as a potential refugee. I certainly feel good about that process and the degree that weve tightened that up over time. You cant account for what you dont know and that goes to the intelligence deficit that i think is embedded in your question. What we can do, though, is understand where the potential vulnerabilities are so we are asking the right kinds of questions to give our screeners and voteevetters the best proce they can. We look to manage that risk as best we can. Mr. Secretary . Each of us at the table here is acutely aware that in our world one failure is the equivalent of 10,000 successes. And there are, in fact, lessons we learned from the vetting process with regard to the iraqi refugees that we took in, the process has improved. Were better at connecting dots, checking the databases with information we have. My people in uscis to do this will be on the ground, in places to vet refugees along with the state department. But they will do so in consultation with our Law Enforcement and our Intelligence Agency partners. And we will do it carefully. Weve made this commitment, but we will commit the resources to do it, but we will do it carefully. Mr. Director . I dont think i have anything useful to add. My views are captured by what the secretary and director said. So, encapsuulating what has been said, its your feeling that our existing system are robust enough to assure this committee that, to the extent practical, no terrorist can get through that process . Well, the issue we face obviously is what jim mentioned. We may have somebody who comes to us and is simply not on our radar for nidiscernible reason and there may also be the possibility that somebody decides to do something bad after theyve been admitted through the process. But we do have a good system in place for the undertaking that weve made. Mr. Director, before this Committee Assistant director steinbeck said that the concerns in syria is that we dont have the systems in place around to collect the information to vet. That would be the concern, databases dont hold the information on these individuals. Is that still the position of the department . Yes. I think thats the challenge were all talking about is that we can only query against that which we have collected. And so if someone has never made a ripple in the pond in syria in a way that would get their identity or their interest reflected in our database we can query our database until the cows come home but there will be nothing show up because we have no record on that person. Thats what assistant director steinbach was talking about. You can only query what youve collected and with respect to iraqi refugees we had far more in our databases because of our countrys work there for a decade. This is a different situation. Chair recognizes mr. Smith from texas. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Just want to get some figures on the table. I understand the administration wants to admit about 15,000fuges many as 25,000 to 30,000 next year. Is that generally correct . The number this year is 10,000. 10,000. And next year would be how many . I dont believe that a Firm Decision has been made with respect to fy17, but this year weve said we want to take in 10,000. Its been reported there would be two to three times that many next year. Much more of a significant increase. Youve all used the word risk to describe admitting these refugees. And i assume that what weve heard and read is accurate, and that is that terrorist organizations are going to be tempted to try to infiltrate these refugees and try to sneak individuals into this country who might commit terrorist acts. I guess the question i have for you is how likely is it that terrorist organizations are going to try to take advantage of the admission of these refugees to get people in this country who might commit terrorist acts . Is it likely . Not likely . Intelligence question. Weve certainly seen terrorist groups talk about, think about exactly what youre describing, mr. Smith, trying to use available programs to get people not only into the United States but into western European Countries as well, so we know that they aspire to do that. I dont know that i would go so far as to say they are likely to succeed because, again is it possible to conduct background checks on these individuals or is it only if theyre already in the database that they would be flagged . In other words, terrorist organization isnt going to try to get someone in as a refugee if they already have a public background that you would be able to uncover. Theyre going to get people in the country who have not yet committed a terrorist act. Dont you think its likely that theyre going to try to do that . There is a pretty thorough vetting process of each individual which encompasses a personal assessment of each individual which includes an interview. Its not just simply whats in a public record. Does the person have a rap sheet of any kind, so there is that a little bit of my concern, relying upon them and what they say or what they write out in an application and you cant go beyond that so youre sort of having to take their word for it. Another red flag to me is that i in past years historically traditionally refugees have been members of families. And yet the typical profile of a syrian refugee i am told that most are young single males as opposed to family members and if so to me that would raise a red flag as well. Do you have any information, any comments, about that . Coming from me, sir, the one observation i have of resettled Syrian Refugees in this country so far is that they tend to settle into communities that are very that embrace them, that syrianamerican communities around the country. Ive seen that personally myself. It tends to be a pretty tightknit, supportive community. Okay. Well, as i say, both the profile and the motives of terrorist organizations and your admission that theres some risk involved to me would persuade the administration to go slow rather than fast when it comes to admitting individuals who might not or who might do us harm. Secretary johnson, let me move to another subject. The administration this is more domestic concern. The administration has announced that next month is going to release a number of thousands of individuals from federal prison. How many individuals is the projection that who will be released next month . These are criminal aliens. Well, the total number that the department of justice plans to release pursuant to their guidelines adjustment next month im told is about 2,000. 2,000. Yes. And how many of those individuals will be put into process to be removed . A fair number. This is something let me stress this is something weve been working on now for about a year. And the thing that im focused on, that i have been focused on, of those who are released, who are undocumented, that they come directly into our custody, that theyre not released to the streets. So i believe that process, because ive checked numerous times, is in place and thats exactly what is going to occur. Good. Last time you appeared before this committee i brought up the figure that the administration is releasing close to 30,000 people every year who have been in prison, been arrested, mostly convicted, and released them back out into our communities and neighborhoods. You said that figure was going to go down dramatically, it needed to stop. I heard that for a couple years now. Is the Administration Still releasing individuals back into our communities who were in the country illegally who have been convicted of crimes or are those individuals being put into removal procedures now . Well, mr. Smith, as im sure youre aware if someone is in immigration detention with a final order of removal, the law says that we have to do a sixmonth assessment. Right. And if repatriation is n notne notnenot imminent there are only limited number of circumstances that we can hold them. We dont have the final numbers yet for fy15 but i believe the number of those who had been released who have been convicted of crimes has gone down from 30,000. To what number do you predict . I dont have the number yet, but im told it gone down from 30,000. Fy13 it was 34 as you recall and 14 was about 30 and i believe the number is south of 30 for fy15. I hope its very far south of 30 for the sake of innocent american citizens. Thank you. Thank you. I just want to state for the record that, you know, isis has been on record through a smuggler stating they want to exploit the refugee process to infiltrate the west and i take them at their word. So, i would caution the administration to procedure very carefully in this program. Chair recognizes mr. Lofgren. I want to thank the chairman and the witnesses for being here today and your testimony. Im going to turn to another and thats going back to the issue of cybersecurity which we referenced a couple of times today. I thank the chairman for his leadership on this issue and the Ranking Member. Mr. Secretary, you referenced and you spoke about this before a recent breech of opm networks and the role dhs has in protecting agency networks. I understand that the leadership at opm at the time was asleep at the switch and they certainly ignored warnings from their own inspector general. And i know that dhs can provide tools, einstein, cdm to assist agencies so i have to ask you at this point for an update. Can you tell me with confidence that other agencies under your care will not suffer breach like opms . We are making rapid and si