elite of the elite and they do not even know what their own rules are. after the incident, secret ciphers -- secret service issued a new rule. this new rule is even more strict than the dhs offering. is that correct? >> mr. roth: that is correct. rep. cummings: do you know if the secret service is taking steps to educate their employees and conducting training in that regard? >> mr. roth: we did not look at that in this investigation, but it is something we are certainly interested in. >> rep. cummings: there are significant problems relating to alcohol at the agency. we have seen that in past incidents as well. but also, the vague policies just make worse the problem. i hope today's hearing is part of a broader effort to reform

the agency's policies and make absolutely clear to employees what is expected of them and to revitalize the agency so it can perform its vertical mission and once again become the elite of the elite. with that, i yield back. >> mr. connelly is not related to me, nor do i like scotch. thank you. rep. chaffetz: duly noted. we will now recognize the gentleman from florida. >> thank you. in your report, you said that the findings should be considered in light of the secret service reputation for punishing or ignoring those who would further investigate or report such dilation. that interests me the cousin before your tenure, the dhs released a 2013 report which did not find evidence that the secret service had this conduct for the leadership had fostered an environment that fostered

inappropriate conduct. given your tenure giving this report, what are your thoughts about the 2013 dhs report? is that an accurate reflection of what is going on in the culture of the secret service right now >> mr. roth: right now, it is not. one of the things that you reference, there are fascinating findings within it. for example, they did a survey, and electronic survey -- an electronic survey where 86% indicated that they did not report such behavior. the report also indicated that, of the 2500-some electronic survey respondents, 44% felt

they could not report misconduct without fear of retaliation if they reported that. within that report itself, there are some very disturbing trends. i think, given the nature of what it is we have seen since then, i believe that there is a serious problem within the secret service. >> rep. desantis: the report also found that 36% of respondents did not believe that senior managers are held accountable within the agency. do you think that that is still the case today? >> mr. roth: we have not done any work on that, but it would not surprise me if it is still the case. >> rep. desantis: is there any indication that the process for discipline has improved since the 2013 report? mr. roth: it certainly has improved. the secret service has taken steps -- that is the one that imposes discipline. our 2013 inspection, we made a number of different recommendations, including policies which they now have adopted. i think the secret service is

moving in the right direction in this area. >> rep. desantis: it is safe to say, though, that the conclusions reached in the 2013 report -- there is a conflict between the conclusions reached in your report. >> mr. roth: i would agree with that. >> rep. desantis: the question is how to correct the cultural problems that your report identifies. i think underlying the 2013 report, you saw evidence of that from the people who responded to the survey. as people are given oversight, what do we need to be doing in your judgment? >> mr. roth: candidly, i think director can think -- clancy is moving in the right direction. they put together a table of

penalties. they have an office of integrity. i think they are increasing training on this. i think they have treated violations of this very seriously. for example, the auto accident in florida involving some of the uniform division that was alcohol-related. the discipline that was imposed their was -- there was appropriate. i will not expect that a problem that took years to create will be fixed overnight, but i do think they are moving in the right direction. >> rep. desantis: your experience with the other components of the dhs, do they all have similar issues with alcohol or is secret service unique in that regard? >> mr. roth: we have not taken a specific look at other law enforcement agencies to the degree that we have had with the secret service. >> rep. desantis: you have not had a lot of alcohol-related incidences brought to your attention that you have had to investigate. is that fair? >> mr. roth: that is fair. >> rep. desantis: do other organizations have the reputation were someone trying to do the right thing would be punished or marginalized? >> mr. roth: we have not looked at that, so it is difficult for me to comment on that. >> rep. desantis: but you could say that not a lot has been

brought to your attention during your tenure. >> mr. roth: that is correct. >> rep. desantis: thank you for your report. i think it was timely and had a lot of good information. some of the other incidents, we are looking forward to those results as well. >> rep. chaffetz: i will recognize ms. orton from the district of columbia. >> we appreciate your report. i suppose this committee is paid to be impatient. particularly in light of the repetitive incidents. i will try to put this in perspective, because iran an agency that was a whole lot more troubled, at the time, then the secret service. someone said to me, within a couple of months, yet it in

order -- get it in order -- i am trying to keep in mind what mr. clancy has found and what he has done. i asked when he was appointed exactly and he is actually a longtime employee of the secret service. he was acting from october -- the march 4 incident occurred -- i consider his acting time. he was official as of february 19. as of the march 4 incident, director clancy apparently had not issued the order that was issued after that incident involving the two agents. my concern is whether or not

this indicates -- in light of his having been with the agency during the time when there was no reporting of the bullets that penetrated the white house, i was concerned that the first thing he did was not to say, look, let me know before the press knows and anybody knows. it bothered me that, as short a time as that may seem, that he certainly was aware. my question goes to whether or not, in light of this order, after the march 4 incident, you believe there is sufficient clarity as to what is required. for example, i don't know and do agents know about drinking off

duty? does there need to be greater clarification beyond reporting up the chain of command? these agents have been under huge duress, according to the special panel. "years of service has taken on additional missions in both protective and investigative roles, but has not matched its request for additional resources of those expended." they reported that they had been on 12-hour days with fewer days off.

you can step back and look at it. they had been subject to the sequester and the rest of that. the panel said that they needed, at best, 200 officers and 85 agents. and said that they were down 500. essentially, you had overworked, overburdened agents. you can imagine that if those people were overworked, they might go out and drink too much. was there any clarification of if you were an officer of the secret service and you are off duty, bearing in mind that everybody is entitled to a private life, is there enough clarification about what is required on and off duty so that we can be assured that there will not be another incident

like this? >> mr. roth: i think you raise a good point and a good concern. it is certainly one that we wrestled with with regard to what does it mean to be on duty? most of these agents are subject to recall at any time. does that mean that they can never consume alcohol? it would seem to be an irrational policy if that is the case. i agree that there is room for clarification regarding that. >> rep. norton: thank you very much. i would ask that -- because i think this is a very murky area. i would ask that we ask director clancy to bring some clarification. for example, the number of hours before being required to report for duty. some clarification might be fair. >> rep. chaffetz: i wholeheartedly agree.

what you see at homeland security issued by secretary johnson is different than what the individual agencies within his department have in front of them. there should be a uniform standard across the board and there is not. that is one of the things we need to work with. >> rep. norton: maybe even a higher standard for secret service agents. >> rep. chaffetz: amen. let's recognize the gentleman from north carolina for a few moments. >> let me pick up what we were discussing when it comes to off duty and on duty and it comes to government vehicles. did you determine whether any other entities drove government vehicles after consuming the alcohol? >> mr. roth: we did not. we interviewed some of the individuals at the farewell party. some of them had alcohol and then went back to the office to continue to work. my point with regard to that is that the dhs policy, really

unknown to the secret service. no one within the secret service understood it. we did not see any attempts by the department to promote this policy. the policy was in the manual for maintenance of government cars. it is not a place in which one would nationally -- naturally look to see a policy like that. it is difficult for us to blame somebody for violating a policy that they did not know about and no one made an effort to tell them about. >> rep. walker: i understand there are certain aspects and ethics, but let me ask this. were any of the party attendees of the secret service part of the executive staff westmark if

if so, should not they be held liable to understand what the rules are? >> mr. roth: i agree with that. subsequent to this, it has been noted that the secret service put a new policy in place, a very bright line policy that says you cannot step into or operate a government vehicle if, in the last 10 hours, you have had any alcohol whatsoever. certainly, the behavior that took place at the party is now prohibited. >> rep. walker: there is no ambiguity. you proved the fact that they did know at least that part of it. if you have been drinking, probably not a good idea to get back into your vehicle. >> mr. roth: we found there was a lot of uncertainty as to what the policy was. the question of when you are impaired -- in other words, is it ok to have a drink and drive? at a previous hearing, director clancy talked about that.

if you are not able to control your actions, you may not be intoxicated by a legal limit, but some could say you do not have the proper abilities. some sort of imperative. that is such a vague standard that it is functionally unenforceable. >> rep. walker: you mentioned that some employees returned to work after consuming the alcoholic beverages. is that correct? >> mr. roth: correct. >> rep. walker: what has been done or said or recommended? >> mr. roth: our policy is that we find the facts, conduct the investigation, and then we give everything that we have to the secret service. we are not in the discipline business. >> rep. walker: i understand. are you aware of anything who has been done to those employees who were drinking and have come back to work? >> mr. roth: no. we transmitted our information last week, so we have not heard anything back. typically, we will not. >> rep. walker: we talk about

the culture of the secret service and i appreciate some words that you talked about. there has been an expectation that has raised the bar a little bit. this kind of contradicts that mindset that they are still a frat party mentality, what applies to everyone else does not apply to us. i do not want to speculate, but is that a fair statement? the wrist to work that needs to be done to get the bar raised? >> mr. roth: i show your concern with exactly that. it certainly seems like there are some issues here. >> rep. walker: on a personal note, mr. roth, i've seen you here as well as my other committee on homeland security, you always do exemplary work. i think the americans appreciate your thoroughness. with that, i yield back. >> rep chaffetz: i now recognize mr. clay.

i want to ask about an e-mail exchange that you obtained between the two who have been during thing in the bar. first, let me walk through some facts. the incident happened on the night of march force. your report found mr. connolly and mr. ogilvie should have reported this incident but neither did so. is that right? >> mr. roth: that's right. >> rep. clay: it seems like they were hoping this whole thing would just blow over. two days later on march 6, mr. connolly had his chance to come clean. he had a meeting with his superior, the special agent in charge. according to her report, he never mentioned anything involving this incident. your report says this, and i

quote, connolly met with his supervisor on march 6 and discussed the handling of the confrontation with the suspect and the suspicious package incident. connolly did not mention the incident involving him and ogilvie. with this meeting on march 6, mr. connolly decided he would just keep his mouth shut and not tell his supervisor what happened. is that correct? >> mr. roth: that's correct. >> rep. clay: he also would have learned at that meeting that no one else had reported the incident dealer. here's what i want to rescue about. the very next day on march seventh, mr. ogilvie and mr. connolly had an e-mail exchange. i would like to put it up on the screen. there we go. mr. ogilvie, this is an e-mail

exchange. "all good." "muy bueno." then at 8:50 p.m. from mr. ogilvie, "u are an angel." i don't know what was in their heads, but one interpretation of this exchange is that mr. ogilvie was asking, are we going to get in trouble for this? or are we all good? then mr. connolly who just met with his boss the day before determined that no one else had reported the incident assured him that everything would be fine. mr. ross, your investigators interviewed mr. ogilvie. according to the interview notes, mr. ogilvie admitted the context of this e-mail was to check in with mr. connolly about the march 4 incident. is that correct?

>> mr. roth: yes, sir. >> rep. clay: in contrast, mr. connolly said the e-mail had nothing to do with the march 4 incident. he claims that he had no idea what this e-mail was about, but no clue. he told investigators and i quote, he did not know with the intent was behind it. it was open-ended. he did not know if it was in reference to march 4 or the busy day that he was year -- he was having. mr. roth, i have one last question for you. do you buy that? >> mr. roth: no, i don't. i believe this was communication between the two to make sure or see whether or not the word had leaked out with regard to the incident that had happened roth two days prior. >> rep. clay: what usually happens when a witness like that is being so dishonest?

are there any follow-ups to a person's dishonesty? i guess this was a deposition or just a question? >> mr. roth: it was an interview as part of the investigation. there are penalties as a result of not telling the truth. >> rep. clay: thank you so much for your responses. i yield back. >> rep chaffetz: i now recognize mr. heights from georgia. >> you have already stated that it was a failure on the part of the ice and and simpson not to report the incident. their excuse was they felt it was being self-reported. you believe allowing individuals to self-report is acceptable? mr. roth: no, i do not. the supervisory chain, they had

an independent duty to report this either to me or the secret service office of professional responsibility or up the chain. i would note that the uniformed division chief said he did not think it was his job to report misconduct. >> rep. hice: is this a policy problem or a communication problem? what does the policy say? mr. roth: individuals have responsibility to report suspicions of violations of law or regulation either to the inspector general or, for example, to the office of professional responsibility. ...

ee

if your found to have done something you ought not to be able to walk away with the benefits you had associated with being a good public servant. there needs to be some consequences. you ought not to just be allowed to walk away and say i retire, because you can. thank you very much. thank you mr. chairman. >> are. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you for your tireless investigations in trying to make our department of homeland security petitioner. it is appreciated. there's a lot of discussion back and forth on this incident about

vague secret service service poly about alcohol and drinking and driving mitchell take is a little more simple. would driving through a marked potential crime scene be acceptable performance offduty either sober inebriated? >> neither sir. >> would entering the white house complex buzzed or inebriated be considered acceptable off-duty behavior? >> no. >> the second in command who was involved with this incident, what kind of public confidence goss -- does it instill when that occurs that we can protect the president of the united states? >> well, i share your concern particularly given the fact that he was responsible for all the operations within the white house complex. >> what kind of example do you think that sets to the agents and also the seriousness of the

duties that ought to be performed, whether on duty or off, knowing that any of them at any moment could be called upon to protect the leader of the free world. >> that's something we wrestled with with regard to the fact that special agents are in fact subject to re-call at a moment's notice. that's a reason they have government cars they can drive home at night is because at any moment they could be called out. to give you a good example is the two philadelphia agent whose at 2:00 in the morning had to respond to the home of the woman who had dropped the package. they didn't know that evening that they were going to get that and all have to drive in the pouring rain too this woman's house. so it's very, very troubling. >> given that sense of duty, and also the arduous selection process to elevate on agent to this level of duty, this is the highest performance level that secret service agents can perform. what discipline has agent conly

or eight ogilvey received, if not what charges are penning? >> the way the process works is there's an investigation that is done which is now completed. as of last week we transmitted all of our materials to the secret service so their office of professional responsibility and their office of integrity which then manages that program. and what happens is i understand it is that there would be the deputy within the office of integrity, who would then assess the materials and basically write a charging document, if that's the right worth -- right word proposing discipline. >> when is as a hander in the military we would very recommendations of courses eye action woo what you recommend? >> there is a table of penalties -- >> have read this. >> i think the fact that is it has caused the -- me to expend

these resources, caused the director of the secret service to distract himself from his important business to have to testify before here, appropriately so. i think it is very, very detrimental to the effective functioning of the secret service, i think all of america would agree and should the american public, in light of this have more confidence or less in our government's ability to protect our president? >> well, i'm hoping this process will create a situation which people will have more confidence that we're able to acknowledge our problems and fix our problems. if it doesn't get resolved, then i would say there would be less confidence. >> so we had a similar answer after colombia, after drones, after barricadeses, after after. we're talk can about the president of the united states. at what point do you see and what is your estimation -- you

've been handling investigation as long time -- are they taking their cease your and will they make the necessary changes the american public demands. >> i've had a number of conversations with director clancy about this itch income the is committed to doing it. i will have to save they didn't get into this situation overnight and they're not going to get out overnight. but do i think he is making the right moves? i do. >> i hope so. some i think that the director can exhibit that leadership and even reach down into organizations that are going awry and my hope is that the director would do that and also we would see a shapeup rather quickly, because should we have the president harmed, all of america would not be able to forgive itself. thank you sir for your testimony today. thank you mr. chairman. i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. i'll recognize myself for five more minutes. you mentioned there were others that had been drinking that evening that went back to --

where did they go? to the white house or go to the operations center. >> i think they would have gone back to secret service headquarters but i'm not sure who that would have been but die recall in some interviews the fact that what happeneds they'd have a beer and a sandwich, say goodbye, and then go back to work. >> but this incident of the night we're talking about. some of the people in addition to ogilvie and connally, went back to work correct. >> that's my understanding. >> how many? >> i don't have nat information. >> that's the concern. this isn't just one person making a rookie mistake. you have two people here, mr. connellly, with 27 yours of experience mr. ogilvie with 19 years of experience, 46 years of experience. are you telling me they didn't know that it's wrong to drink -- >> it's not right to drink alcohol and work the french fry machine at mcdonald's and certainly not right to drink and

go into the white house with white house compound or drive a vehicle when you're there to protect the president and the first family. these people have guns. they have trust. they have people that they have to -- they can blow past and say, look, i'm your supervisor, you're letting me threw and that's what is happening here. and then when you tide have that poor officer texas you have officers trying to do the right thing, and it is your testimony that these very senior people, with badges, guns, and alcohol on their breath, told them, oh, i just came from from headquarters. they depression mention they had come from the bar. >> no. >> was that a lie? >> it would ben a at the about they. >> so it is a lie. >> yes. >> that's the problem. they've lying to themselves because they took a government vehicle. the should know after 46 years of experience the reason they're doing it on taxpayer dollars is that they're to respond at a

moment's notice. we never know when something is going to happen. and this is the senior-most -- the senior-most people in charge of protecting the white house. they're always supposed to be ready to good at a moment's notice. that is why they took government vehicles. they were taking advantage of the situation and making taxpayers pay for their little ride to the bar. that bar is so low -- the only thing that is raising on the bar is the bar tab and its has to change. i appreciate your good work in ferreting this out. how long has homeland and the secret service get your report? when did the gate the first draft. >> they received this draft may 6th. we supplied the underlying materials either in the middle or late last week. >> yet there's been no consequence yet. we get reports maybe one person

is going retire work who knows when that will be. what discretion does secretary clancy have in revoking security clearance? >> i don't have that information. >> but he could revoke their security clearance immediately. correct. >> i'm not sure what the process is for revocation of security clearances. there's a process involved but i don't know what it is. >> it could be put on nonpaid leave. correct? >> that's my understanding. >> do you think this is an aggravated situation? >> my understanding is that nonpaid leave -- unfortunately congressman, you're gifting into areas of employment law that are civil my beyond my competence and i apologize. >> i think that's a fair situation. mr. russell just pointed out even if they weren't drunk and interrupted a potential bomb scene, that's totally unacceptable. if they lied to somebody who also works for the secret service, that is unacceptable behavior. and if you look at what happened

in the e-mail chain trying to protect themselves and make can sure that the word didn't get -- there is plenty of evidence. this is a pivotal moment for the seeks seeks the time we found it if secretary clancy has the guts to do what needs to be done. in my opinion these people should be fired today. they should lose and have their security clearances revoked. that should have happened a long time ago. some those that didn't report this? i've got a list here of people who, at some degree or another have at least according to your report violated policy that could lead to their potential removal. that's mark connally, george ogilvie, kevin simpson al fortunate sew dyson and perhaps and probably michael braun. at the very least those people need to be taken to the wood shed and should lose their security clearances, lose their job and if i that we president i would never want to see them again. we got thousands of people, like the gentleman who is recognized

for a his valor that should be protecting the president of the united states. but if you're going to go consume alcohol and then show up at the white house disturb a crime scene get out of here go home. go find another job. because you know what? you wouldn't be final work at my mcdonald's. you wouldn't be able to run the french fry machine because you're notes going to drink and show up to work and you're not going to do that if you work are in the secret service. that what happened. they can continue to investigate -- your report is very conclusive. independent in its nature and it's time for this director and this secretary to take some definitive conclusive action, and fix the problem and send a message to the rest of the work force, we are not going to put up with anybody who is showing up to work drunk inebriatessed lying, trying to cover up, not reporting. how many things went wrong here today? but that's my opinion itch yield to the ranking member. >> i want to thank you. for anybody who just tune in, i didn't want them to think that

he was talking to you. you've done a great job really. we really do appreciate your staff, and i know you had too pull together a lot of people in a little bit of time, but we do appreciate it. i agree with the chairman. somebody asked me just a few minutes ago how are we going to straighten this out? i said we're going to have to keep the pressure up but we cannot keep the pressure up without the kind of information you have provided us, and i'm hopeful that when mr. clan si comes before us he'll have a report letting us know what disciplinary actions he has taken. but again want to thank you weapon really do appreciate everything you have done. we also appreciate you working with us. from the very beginning you have just been great and your staff so thank you. >> totally concur. my frustration is not with you mr. roth or the inspector general's office.

without that information we would be left in the dark. what you have done, interest hard work, good investigative work and we're appreciative on both sides of the aisle. it's our responsibility to hole the as meteorologist conditionable and make -- the administration conditionable and fix the problem so we can stop having hearings like this. thank you for the work and look forward to the other reports you're still working on. committee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon.

welcome to the washington policy i am the director of the program on counterterrorism and intelligence and i am very, very pleased to have you here. some of you in person with of life's dream you are all will come for us to talk on the money flow of physis to follow the of many with ahead of the terror of finance operations end section and later deployed to iraq as a liaison officer with a tremendous amount of

expertise and inside. with a counterterrorism lecture series that you can still catch on line involved in defense with the assistant director. the state department's counterterrorism ha -- to encounter the islamic state and as one of the seven components. then the importance to combat there are things that go on. so some that our new and it is the time the opportunity

so with no further ado before i introduce jerry to the podium my last you to please turn off your cell phones when we get to that question and answer wait for the microphone said not only can we hear you but the viewers on c-span can hear you as well. jerry roberts. >> afternoon. with the fbi terrorism financing section. first of all, thank everyone the key for inviting me. with the current threats of isil and partners overseas. i had the pleasure to work

with the institute over five years on a variety of topics counter radicalization and i am honored to be here. before i a dress the financial aspect of trees -- isil how the fbi is constantly adapting to speak here last year at the time he advised how the u.s. government looks at the domestic intelligence agency is us representative focused intelligence driven organization. with the full integration as mentioned i was in the office in the baltimore field office with counterterrorism in charge of the intelligence branch

so it requires that to have that intel and to build that within the level of operations. at the macro level is through the creation of the fusion sell model to integrate the intelligence of operations to have the analyst and special agent code located addressing the threat. both national and international to provide intelligence on the current in the emerging threat to the field offices. we add the additional element as part of the model. barrasso addressing to stay ahead of the threat was state local and federal partners throughout the 56 field offices. real also work with the

intelligence community. with regards to the financial aspects of parenting the importance of partnerships with the private sector is critical for that. so with private sector partnerships but what i have continued to do to be and. with their private sector partners to have a trading at aubrey g. and trading. so the financial industry's supporting financial activity so what has then

reported ever known and suspected terrorist here and abroad. said to have other intelligence that is critical turgid divide with suspected terrorists. natalie to have that nativity but abroad as well. in conjunction with the treasury department's up in it new york we just recently had one which was attended by approximately 200 of the closest partners. during those sessions we provide the key insight as the emerging threat. the private sector partners to have the most up-to-date

information to more definitively report that information such readings allow was to look at the emerging threats to enhance their operations. to discount the of pro-active work with the new and maturing financial institutions have that they provided information that has led to a new fbi cases. so with isil and will touch on it over the last five years that has disrupted over 100 counterterrorism threads dozens of americans will provide a vigil as

statistical support so even with those the threat we face has never been more complex. before al qaeda the counterterrorism efforts is challenged by the decentralization and the general instability in the middle east. isil has lessons learned it a relatively short period of time. saw how they spread ideology isil is effective with english-speaking audiences through social media sites. >> with inspired magazine gives the blueprint how to attack the critical infrastructure of our

economy. has a massive following a social media that allow them to reach tens of thousands throughout the world. to plan attacks throughout europe for the united states. as their director there hundreds of thousands of people across the country who receive a recruitment overtures from the terrorist group he said it is like a devil to sit on his shoulder to say kill kill kill. that threat is tied specifically to isil and other combat zone but it is attracting thousands of individuals. and u.s. government agencies in the efforts of information and sharing to

combat radicalization with the outreach program and policy changes. through the collaboration to make sure other nations do not enter the united states the fbi expanded within the counterterrorism division to track and analyze and neutralize the region to the united states of which they are the integral member. so with that expertise through social media the fbi remains concerned the persons will be attracted to the region. with regards to financial intelligence with the critical importance to identify hijackers and those

responsible for 9/11. even with that lesson sometimes it is overlooked in and under appreciated. with that critical role with regard to terrorist activity in is much more complex for suspected terrorists. with the other intelligence we could build a complete picture of the threat we have seen the reporting of isil financing with extortion threat -- theft and taxation. to date the outside freddie angeles support is minimal. said tracking the foreign fighters is not the border

picture by following the of money those debtor footage of the supporting dash operation but able to identify ford fighters before they depart the country of origin for where they return and in conclusion to combat terrorism intelligence driven within the fbi with close collaboration the foreign partners in the financial industry it is necessary that the work that it does is no different purpose thank you for having me and we will take some questions. [applause]

spee mcfadyen say fantastic introduction to deal with so i will kickoff of moderators prerogative so please remember to wait for the microphone and identify yourself. son of the way that we know things are different to that the way isis controls a particular category they have found some back door access of banking. as i have written recently in the financial action task force there is as sanitized

declassified example from the united states. according to sensitive freddie enjoy all information financial transfers are an areas that have been a funding logistical terrorist fighters and organizations and in some cases to except cash deposits placed into u.s. accounts then sent through wire transfers year where isis' operates ended in other cases those that we don't necessarily know who they are with the foreign cash withdrawals from the

atm machines that is under isis' control from u.s. bank deposits so drawing on your isis control so talk about what you see with the in the weeds financing nine at the macro organizational level but added is largely domestic criminal activity kidnapping for ransom. >> as i mentioned with the primary source of funding is the of criminal activity and control various.

takes a lot of money to keep the lights on the with regards to the outside funding that is where we see this self funded of the foreign fighters it doesn't require of lot of money to buy the airplane ticket to reach your way into the isil areas of the investigation that much more complex we're talking hundreds of dollars the uniqueness by which isil operates allows people to have the smaller numbers. but what really juicy is the atm withdrawal and the mention of fliers specifically that is the information we share with our banking partners. we realize that there is the

perfect legitimate reason why individuals would withdraw monday in iraq or syria for perfectly legitimate reasons to become wire transfers and that combination with other intelligence that we have pangs of picture for us so it is just one piece of the puzzle. >> i know who you are but tell everybody else. >> those things and are informative you mentioned hundreds maybe execute a -- excuse? that is more than was publicly discussed.

of course, you have been involved in the role of those domestic efforts so there is that conversation right now? how does the fbi field working with community groups to do intervention? >> we ask for to teach other for a few years now but with regards to that number from a quotation from our director last week it is the potential of the social media campaign that can reach thousands of individuals said any given time. we're not saying there are thousands of people that will conduct attacks but that is the reach in the hundreds of thousands

through social media. >> is a potential but it is the distinction between the individual's to have read the material and the radicalization that marched down that way of radicalization but you have no brief for years in diamond a big fan of the community our reach that we do it you and i have done a lot of work so with that extremism but there is only one seat at the table. let talking about five lead to extremism as state and

local and other communities with the mentality with the moneys so there is an opportunity to talk to individuals to make the walk down the wrong path we would like to do that. to see the end game. >> talking about the recruiting of isil is in the u.s..

young people without much then shows up with $59 to buy the round-trip ticket to turkey. have using -- you see that that comes back or where it comes from? the fbi put its resources to fight for isis and i heard people in minneapolis raise the question the caches to carry out the attacks at home. with the selfie identified pool of playlists.

so with regards to the first question it is self funded. so with regards to isil steve c. them have taken this money. so without them knowing. so with that common crime barley money from family and friends they disguise the purpose is another way that they obtained that cash to allow them to travel. said they are a threat here or abroad so the goal is to disrupt that threat.

but going over to train and fight would increase the risk by preventing them to get that additional training whether a threat to u.s. interest your partners abroad. it is a decision point to do something now or later. >> if you are interested more information in. so with the problems and opportunities.

>> it my world if i was based then required they did i percent of my investment time in the effort may be have a bucket that one person educationally by wooded never talk about it or discuss it. is this political correctness when you mention muslim and other terrorist? why manchin in the both as the same threat? >> if i a understand correctly, of with the comments i made in general?

>> if we are concerned about the counter terrorism division with a homegrown violent extremism from international terrorist groups so i went not begin to give you the fraction but that is just within the counterterrorism world. with all whole different set of priorities. on lot of focus is inspired by that. to have 100 disruptions i would've been church teargas

when is the breakdown. >> i will challenge your contention a of the of growing importance of the counter terrorist threats to by the king at the financing. and to with isil that has resources in almost every way from al qaeda. with the rules and regulations. do we need to revisit them?

if they can challenge those organizations based on financing? >> said with the a smaller options and in those cases with that medical level approach so working with treasury and state it is a completely different animal. in a completely different way to new operate. but basically to look at the financial aspects has a two-pronged approach with the firefighters and a

facilitator newshawk so not just with counterterrorism but we need to continue. >> with a representative did the united states and i remember follow the money to get organized crime. and to settle the caliphate in to be allowed access it with the social welfare

system in bin you could strangle the economy effectively as it can with military intervention. budget to fight the save and and be here. and anything you can suggest free are working with treasury but in the macro sense it is important to have a coordinated policy to add even allow a terrorist state to form. but i would welcome your views have to increase of collaboration.

>> unfortunately we don't have anyone from treasury or state department here but our partnership and other multinational organizations with the save collaboration is presented in the interesting challenge so i a creative soul of government approach the line of the for. to use every tool. so it is so whole approach.

and eight other avenues of fund-raising as wall. is the tactical is strategic side. in to be cochaired by italy. attwood of the best reports that was ever done slow the in the effort to bring it did examples from committee partners as possible. not just the u.s.. this time it was information from the arab states so from the netherlands or denmark or finland.

and then it turns to the transatlantic already civic the ku very much. i am understand at the same time with this state sponsor of terrorism in the world today is the rand. there is a great likelihood that it is the results of the nuclear agreement iran will kente a signing bonus -- will get a signing bonus. so with the counterterrorism of finance do you see this as a potential issue? >> here we speak

specifically about isil but as a gentleman asks one of the many threats obviously we track all state-sponsored terrorism as well and the financial aspects and the role is critical to zaph as wall but that just because it appears to be the greatest threat at this moment that we can take our eye off the ball. >> as the fbi agent responsible for terror finance investigations it is much more unlikely to see the terrorist groups to move the state's a broad there happens but it is less likely.

>> so what a pressure to put on the country's. >> into snuggle up to the airport or the organization. one was arrested last time and now to people are supporting isis and to sponsor the terror throughout the country is. >> with regards to the example that you gave with one player at the table if it is thus spared during as mentioned with the state department june treasury

than to to discuss it at the moment we could research to get back to but if a fbi or dear other law-enforcement agencies to partner up. >> but talk about isil with regards to the money flow but hezbollah as well we track the money there as well. >>. >> from the feeling of

whale? so does that stop the value with isil? also of course, they by no weapons to strengthen the opposition. so with that supply of the weapon, what effort does that stop the supplier? they accuse. >> i will not go into years detail but it isn't just the fbi.

with us a disruption of the transports the government is tracking not just the government but those routes do disrupt to keep the of little refineries that they have created a long felt way to move the real. >>. >> so to break down for us to be one of the top players but it could you go into other means of the illegal trafficking and how can the u.s. intervene as iraq's as

cutting off the funds that day travel? >> so with regards such as a bribe extortion so it is new and with the al the taking of the bank's that isil it is also fairly well above that they tax the local businesses by which they could derive that funding. so with regards the fbi doesn't play a major role. but we would reduce the oh as it relates to the targets

so with those investigations in that aspect. so with other neighboring countries the fbi has partnerships through the attache program and we do so with the engagement of treasury to have a whole government approach whether the movement of items. so so with the multi nation approach to identify the path and then to disrupt them. >> from sputnik

international you brought up the partnership with the financial sector and forgive me for being skeptical but it a lot of large players soon the financial sector credit that hsbc are key players to launder billions of dollars of drug money of illegal funds with of blockbuster report with the finance committee i am not sure what exactly happened with that but have you address the fact, i and just zooming -- assuming that they are partnering with you so have you redress of very poor track record?

>> so we don't necessarily have a rule tuesday of compliance or lack thereof that you mentioned. the point of contact ira the financial intelligence units were if they don't have that set up yet from my perspective it is a way to better inform them so they can improve. we realize not everybody is that this same level some are very proactive some have their own targeting with their pro-active analysis and our way ahead of the game.

so to bring everybody up to that level they learn best practices in the environment similar to this it is great for us. it is not just about terrorism financing with the last meeting at the federal reserve we brought in from the fbi from the counter intelligence division and the criminal and cyber division to better informed the banks to play a little piece to make the banks that much better with compliance. it is a lot of that. not just terrorism there is a lot of criminal activity

and sometimes they need to be better but it comes as a result. >> there are a lot of investigations with improved compliance since then but talk to the federal reserve and others in the very courage environment there is a venture of people from data to help them establish more effective filters for that illicit activity but there is is a challenge to how isil financing is happening in the west how do we improve the bank filters? they tried to increase their business whenever there

using current a to come up with that. it is is just the private industry but we don't want to rely on historical information that as you mentioned charities before but the example you gave before to provide that key point helps the business rules perhaps they don't do 800 but maybe 250 but those are much higher quality not just them but us as well. >> i am confuse despite all

you have said so far about remaining optimistic that there is a lot of self financing that the flow of money is quite small it is not large enough to be reported the matter how carefully so how do you intervene to prevent people from traveling to get the training? i don't see the connection between the not reach that seems like though wise thing to do and this circumstance with small amount of money that selfie identify them get money from relatives and their families have you make an impact? >> of great question.

i am talking specifically about the financial intelligence but that is just one piece of the pie. we talked about the issue of intelligence if you have individuals from a the public that discuss in a small group their desires a financial intelligence is just one sliver to think of it as a water color or paint by numbers. but the other information to campaign throughout the united states but we have the public not just the financial sector advise us to raise suspicion so in

collaboration with the foreign partners but to clarify, specifically talking about the financial aspect of the more knowledgeable and make our financial partners could be a huge component that we are missing. and i am also optimistic. >> eckhardt to have that trend analysis it is that a certain level to have a footprint where you see a certain type of trend just tough follow-up to we need to lower the threshold of what is considered suspicious they always neil

b. with 100 percent in sight for every transfer in and out of australia do we need to lower significantly? id kudu that reporting threshold. >> also taking a look at the standards not just the financial rules but the electronic communications and constantly looking at the existing rules to assess if they satisfy the growing need if you talk about to

$10,000 for leaving the united states or a third methodologies by which people could easily move money to look at that and try to adapt. >> my name is ron taylor from the george washington center i have a couple of thoughts with the financial enterprise for reusing that amount of monday as a filter is a disconnect i want to know what the money is doing and don't necessarily want to know how much money but talk about your mission in slightly different terms it

saves to identify and disrupt the sources of money to eliminate that behavior to find the resources and disrupt them and eliminate them. what about russia of zero or putin or those sources that come out of there directly or the criminal elements were the umbrella of countries who is tracking that? >> great question. but just do clarify it is one aspect not just a wire

transfer but the financial intelligence with what may have not just focusing on the dollar amount but time and distance looking overlaid with travel that could provide us with travel so not necessarily to focus on those dollar amounts but they tell the story that helps to paint the picture of what may have. with russia and/or those elements again, as our sole focus as the gentleman

talked about with the european foreign fighters. but we need to take of large look at every potential threat he made a great point with regard to the organization not to say it is of funding terrorism or it is not that the avenue by which say overlap to allow for that collaboration in to happen. >> fate you for your time. with that sophistication

have you considered the increase did currencies? >> yes. [laughter] absolutely. but just like to talk about the prepaid cards we as the united states government are looking at those crypto currencies. so any sorts of funding whether isil or they're criminal organization to see how they are funding with any avenues whether cash career as well as the crypto currencies th