the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or change their vote? on in vote, the yeas are 62, it is nays are perform -- and the nays are 38. the motion is not agreed to. the clerk will report.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: the senate is not in a quorum call. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 151 s. 1599. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 1599 a bill to provide anti-retaliation protections for antitrust whistle-blowers. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the motion.

mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to the bill as amended be read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. thursday july 23. following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. following leader remarks the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to h.r. 22, postcloture. lastly that all time during the adjournment of the senate count postcloture on the motion to proceed to h.r. 22. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: so if there's no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourninged until

>> complicated confusing. >> filmmakers talk about there documentary test of enemies of the 1968 debate between conservatives william f buckley and liberal gore the doll. >> very unlike today. today i believe there is someone saying the numbers are bundling hot salacious topic number two. and then i don't think think that was the norm in syria the time. >> them moderator. this thing with these men embarrassed by this.

five or more minutes in time. really everybody at abc just a back and let the fire burned. >> on the nightsunday night at 8:00 o'clock eastern and pacific on c-span q&a. >> a federal grand jury has indicted dylan ruth the suspect in last month's shooting. federal hate crime charges. he was accused of killing nine people during a bible study in charleston and was charged on 33 federal counts. atty. gen. loretta lynch spoke about the indictments at a briefing at the justice department.

>> good afternoon, everyone and thank you for coming. i am joined here today by the head of the department's civil rights division and mark juliano deputy director of the fbi. we are hear to announce as federal grand jury had south carolina has returned a 33 indictment against dylan storm ruth charging him with federal hate crime and firearms charges for killing and attempting to kill african-american parishioners at aa manual african methodist episcopal church in charleston, south carolina because of there race and in order to interfere with there exercise of there religion. as set forth in the indictment several months prior to the tragic events of june 17 ruth conceived of his goal of increasing racial tension throughout the nation and seeking retribution for perceived

wrongs that he believed african-americans had committed against white people. to carry out these two angles of fanning racial flames and exacting revenge ruth further decided to seek out and murder african-americans because of there race. an essential element of his plan was to find his victims inside of a church, specifically an african-american church to ensure the greatest notoriety and attention to his actions. as alleged he set out the evening of june 17, 2015 to carry out this plan and drove to the manual african methodist episcopal church in charleston, south carolina. his destination specifically because it was an historically african-american church of significance to the people of charleston, south carolina, and the nation. on that evening he found his target. african-americans engage in worship.

met with welcome he joined them in there bible study group. the parishioners had bibles. dylan ruth had his 45 caliber glock with eight magazines loaded with hollow points. engaged in religious worship and bible study dylan ruth drew his pistol and fired on them ultimately killing nine people. the state of south carolina is prosecuting ruth. we commend the south carolina state authorities for there tremendous work and quick response. it is important to note that south carolina does not have a state crime -- a hate crime statute and as a result they do not reflect the alleged hate crimes in the federal indictment returned today specifically

charging ruth with nine murders and three attempted murders. this federal hate crime law prohibits using a dangerous weapon to cause bodily injury or attempting to do so on the basis of race or color. the shepherd a bird act was enacted specifically to vindicate the unique harms caused by racially motivated violence. also charged with nine murders and three attempted murders under a 2nd federal hate crime statute that prohibits the use or threat of force to obstruct any persons free exercise of there religious beliefs. ..

>> this indictment contains allegations of the defendant's guilt. as you will recall, this federal grand jury indictment followed an announcement that i made a on june 18 to 2015 that the department of justice was conducting a hate crimes investigation into the shooting. immediately following that shooting the experience prosecutors from the u.s. attorney's office along with attorneys from the civil rights division began working with the

fbi, atf, and state and law enforcement officials, including the law-enforcement division the charleston police and the solicitor's office for the ninth circuit of courts and i would like to thank the law enforcement for their dedication and hard work to ensure that this investigation was conducted thoroughly and expeditiously. he and his office testerman's efforts on this case as well as the dedicated attorneys from the department's civil rights division. in particular i would like to extend my thanks to scarlett wilson for being a cooperative and effective partner. we have a strong relationship with her and we look forward to continued collaboration is the parallel state and federal prosecutions work their way through their respective court

systems. thank you for your attention. are there any questions? [inaudible] >> we are working with the solicitor both cases will proceed through the court system and we will both work to reduce any unnecessary burden to the family. >> there are any number of factors that we will consider how to cases are progressing and essentially how the judges arguing the case. both cases are in their early stages and have yet to have motions. so at this point in the difficult to say how that will impact the schedule. >> there is no specific statute

but hate crimes as i have stated are the original domestic terrorism and we feel that the behavior that has occurred here is the type of behavior that fits the federal hate crimes statute and has vindicates their purpose and we have a defendant that was alleged to have had of harvard discriminatory views to have sought out an african-american house of worship one that was particularly noted because of its age and he also sought out african-american parishioners as well, implemented in several statutes and we think that this is exactly the kind of case that the federal hate crimes statutes were conceived a to cover. this is the original domestic terrorism. >> 2015, if you look at the essence of the case brought forth, the fact that these people are dead today because of their race.

could you speak to where we stand and what that says? >> this is obviously a tragic situation and a troubling situation as the allegations in the indictment reflect the mindset of this young man and his specific purpose purposed to target individuals for death because of their race. but also to target individuals who are engaged in religious worship as well and i think that we have to remain vigilant about these matters and certainly at this point we don't know much more about the defendant. the investigation is ongoing into a host of matters including those motivations, but i think that the message that should be clear to this is that the federal government and the state partners are committed to investigating these matters fully and thoroughly and where we have racially motivated violence committed to action. >> it seems to me they targeted

emanuel ame specifically because it is a historically african-american church. how do you know that that is why he chose that church as opposed to any african-american church. how do you know the national significance of the church remapped. >> i'm not going to comment specifically on the evidence that will come forth at a trial except to note that we believe that the evidence will support the allegation that they chose emanuel ame because it was an old historic church and historically significant as one of the oldest african-american churches not just in south carolina but the nation and that he was looking for the type of church and the type of parishioners whose deaths were the drop rate notoriety for his religious views, i should say. >> i know that you used the language because of. to what extent are all other

factors being precluded. he hates his motherhe hates others. what impact does that have? >> hopefully he would not receive information like that although we would act off it if we did. you also have the possibility of multiple chargers, the charges here alleged racially motivated violence in the murder and attempted murder and also the federal hate crimes statute that prohibits using violence to essentially prevent anyone from exercising their religion. that is not tied to race that is tied to the exercise of religion. we see here for example an activity that supports allegation of more than one intent as well. with respect to issues that you raise about the defendants state

of mind all of that will be taken into consideration in this case goes forward and i'm not able to speculate as to what impact any other factors would have on the case. >> you suggested that this was a seven month plan. can you elaborate on how detailed this plan is, whether he made trips to the church prior to that time? >> thank you for the question. it was several months prior to the june 17 incident and i'm not able to go into the evidence right now that would show the action surrounding that at this point. >> should there be federal domestic terrorism? for the average person that sees the way that people in law

enforcement talk about different types of killings with different words, what distinctions should they make when they talk about a shooting in chattanooga a hate crime. does it matter and should there be domestic terrorism? >> as to what laws should or should not come as a result of this, i'm not going to speculate at this point in time. the nature of the case but i think people may feel that because we have such a strong emphasis since 9/11 that when we talk about matters and don't use the terminology that somehow we don't see those kinds of serious and i want to be clear that nothing could be further from the truth than that. this type of crime racially motivated violence for which the federal law was specifically enacted to cover is of grave importance great importance to the federal government. we have devoted considerable resources from the beginning of

this case to make sure that this interest was explored and is the evidence that supported it and the allegations were brought because this is in fact the archetype of the original domestic terrorism and i think that sometimes people focus on the terminology. as i have mentioned since 9/11 there has been a refocus on that type of case. but it should in no way signify that this particular murder or any federal crime is a of any lesser significance. >> how will you you determine whether or not he is a candidate for the death penalty? >> the department of justice has a process by which we consider it to tenants in determining whether or not to seek death penalty. it's a detailed and thorough review process and it involves the defense counsel in consultation with the victim's family and it involves a review of the factors that we would

utilize the death penalty to determine whether or not we feel that we could prevail on this factors and ultimately after this review process, which is both at the u.s. attorney's office level, it is here and ultimately comes to my desk where i make the ultimate decision whether or not to seek the death penalty in any case. i do want to be clear that no decision has been made as to whether or not to seek death penalty, but we have an obligation to fate and translates the defendant on notice and to allow the council the time to begin to prepare to make those submissions. [inaudible question]

>> there is a review that would be there into the procedures that would allow us to miss the fact that he had applied to purchase add-on. this is a matter of grave importance and something that is very disturbing and frankly heartbreaking to all of us who are reviewing this matter and that investigation is ongoing and i look forward to receiving the results from it. >> yesterday you said you were looking at this brand. are you monitoring the investigation? >> as noted that matter is under investigation by local authorities. and we have local investigations as well. >> can you talk about what your views are as we received some letters from members of congress

and there is an applicable federal law here and is that something that you are going to open an investigation into? >> there are some inquiries that have been made, the department of justice, and at that point we are going to review what steps to take at the appropriate time. >> that is an ongoing investigation and an open matter so i'm not able to comment at this time as to what charges may or may not result. but what i will they is that the department of justice, as well as other federal agencies are actively involved in knowing everyone in person that is subject to the region providing them with the tools necessary to protect their personal data.

>> your reaction to how they were responded to this? >> i think from the beginning the families of the dems of the shooting have provided an example to the country of what to grace and spirit looks like and i think they are an inspiration to us all. i think we do not know how many of us would be able to find that kind of forgiveness in our hearts so soon after such a terrible heartbreaking loss. in particular i thought what was very hopeful for everyone watching that is to see that the families allege that they were angry. but they did have anger toward the person that had taken their loved ones, but they were able to still move to forgiveness. and i thought that was an incredible lesson and message for us.

>> your office began the investigation into the death of eric garner. when can we expect the resolution? >> i cannot comment on the timing except to say that it is still ongoing and we are moving ahead with that investigation and thorough and efficient manner. >> even that this is part of it do you think you're properly organizing resources to focus on the domestic terrorism threat to we are tracking a number of threads on u.s. soil and abroad. and certainly the death of any american or anyone is a matter of grave importance to us here in the federal government. without commenting on how we allocate resources, i would say that we take all threats seriously, whether they come from a foreign domestic

terrorist organization, a domestic militia organization or simply an individual that post threats online. we take all of those matters seriously and devote what we feel are the resources necessary to protect individuals who come under those threats and if we learn of it too late to vindicate their interest in bringing the killers to justice. thank you all. >> on the next "washington journal", we talked to this congressman about the recent thaw in u.s. and cuban relations and effort to pass a spending bill. also congressman brad sherman, a member of the financial services committee on the fifth anniversary of the dodd-frank ananta regulations and a recent cdc report on heroin use in heroin related deaths.

we are live with your phone calls at 7:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span. >> considered underrated by many historians caroline harrison was an accomplished artist that took up china painting and carried that interested the white house, establishing its china collection and she was interested in women's issues and helped to raise funds on the condition that they would admit women. she was the first president general of the daughters of the american revolution until she died in the white house from tuberculosis. this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's original series first lady's influence and image examining the public and private lives of those that build the image of first lady. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span3

. >> coming up next, mike mccaul talks about how the use of social media by extremists has changed counterterrorism operations in the u.s. we will also hear from former reagan administration official enemies who was a member of the 9/11 review commission. the heritage foundation hosted this event. >> thank you for coming. it's actually a nice day and i thank you for being inside on a really nice day. there couldn't be a more timely time for this event. we have breaking news yesterday about the significant terrorist figures being taken out in syria. and so evaluating this and what is going on is in light of this

deal with iran. we have a terrific panel and he is going to make some remarks and it's not that we never get to talk but we are going to have a conversation so that we can flesh out some of the issues because there are so many and then we like to bring everyone into the conversation and we will do that for about 15 15 minutes or so in and bringing panel out and continue with the panel. i ran up and i said here is the secretary. it didn't work out so well. so i actually have the biography here. so watching this is important

because what he has done in the expertise he brings is very admirable in 2013 he began the chairman of the homeland security committee which has oversight of department of homeland security and all that is protecting the american people from terrorist attacks and he recently is making sure that these forces are strong, he recently discussed a whole range of issues and he is also the cofounder and cochair of the

caucus and the cybersecurity caucus and the cochair of the commission for the 44th president see and that includes on cybersecurity. and so please give him a round of applause. [applause] [applause] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> i am going to cover a lot of territory, but we will have a very robust q&a discussion and dialogue and we just mentioned this strike yesterday where we took out the leader of the group that was hugely significant in one of the big external threats to the homeland and the united states and i commend the military efforts in doing that. and last week tears dropped in

the american heartland and this is a type of event that we have been worried about probably the most lately. not on the radar screen, launching an assault on u.s. oil. killing united states marines and sailors. and this was inspired by hateful ideology, he risked his life in the name of freedom. our hearts go out to the families and friends were killed in chattanooga. we can honor the memory of the victims by confronting the roots of the violence we saw and refusing to allow complacency to fall in the we of terrorism. and that is why i'm here to cellular radicalism is on the rise and war is being brought to our doorstep. it could happen in chattanooga

or anywhere and i agree with the british prime minister david cameron who said this week that we face the struggle of our generation and a deceitful perverted brand of islam expanding globally and we need to act decisively to defeat it. first i will talk about how this new age of terror has altered the security landscape on the homefront and spread rapidly throughout our communities. then i will address the second front in our struggle with extremists of how important it is for us to take this and challenge the ideological core. but i believe that we are losing on both fronts in this war against islamic terrorism. the enemies have the momentum

and they have thrown us off balance. the numbers don't lie. last year was a deadly year the deadliest on record for global terrorism with attacks rising and nearly doubling. the power behind this is affiliated with al qaeda's persistence. and by any measure we have failed to turn the tide against them. the global recruitment has soared in the territory held or expanded. the pace is so staggering that i directed my committee staff to begin issuing a monthly terror threat snapshot. cataloging the rise in extremist activity. since the president declared them to be the gigabyte team of terror last year, the group has inspired or directed more than 50 terrorist plots against the

west. they also went from a single terrorist sanctuary to having a direct presence or affiliates in 18 countries. the rapid rise has inspired more than 25000 citizens from at least 100 countries to flock to syria as foreign fighters have tripled since last july. and officials now estimate more than 250 americans in syria. terrorist groups have succeeded in spreading influence because they have evolved. gone are the days when they plotted through caves. we are seeing a new generation of terrorists radicalizing and recruiting online and we are

losing on the homefront were groups like this have started to permeate our society there are people intent on striking from within. captivated by an evil and twisted ideology that drives vulnerable minds into conscionable acts of violence. we have seen more than a dozen ices terror plots in the united states including recent plots to set off hide bombs on capitol hill they had law-enforcement officers, conduct mass shootings, detonate bombs at new york city landmarks and white stream this was a college campus

and in fact more than 50 ices supporters have been arrested or indicted in the united states. [inaudible] and now the fbi director says that he has that he has opened the isis investigations in all 50 states. the majority have never set foot in a faraway safe haven and were recruited by isis online or distributed the group social media propaganda. and with over 200000 isis tweets per day, a there are over 200,000 per day how can we possibly get a handle on this. the chatter is so high and the volume is so loud that it's difficult to get a handle.

this is not terror as usual this is terror gone viral. and i commend the fbi on homeland security and state and locals for their disrupting others many plots and as we saw in chattanooga we cannot stop all of them and authorities are searching for suspects to use secure applications to communicate and to outsource the calls for attacks, inspiring operatives who have never crossed into the borders of syria, the crossover through the internet to combat acts of terror. the cybercommanders now regularly send out internet directives and missives to their followers as we saw in sometimes that includes an internet hash

tag. we need to have a frank conversation about the challenges posed by violent extremists using social media and dark space to further violent plots. extremists have migrated away from telephones and onto new platforms that the laws and policies have not kept pace, making it difficult to uncover terrorist plots. they communicate in darkness and we cannot shine a light to see what the communications are to attack in the united states. i do not claim to have all the answers to this, but i have started a working group with the fbi and the high-tech community to get some answers. and what i know is that we all share some common ground from silken ballet to the halls of congress that we want to see terrorists brought to justice. this has to be the starting point in an urgent dialogue in the high-tech sector and policymakers to ein solutions

for the lawful monitoring of violent extremists while at the same time protecting civil liberties. we also need to do more to stop the spread of fanaticism. before it leads to violent things. we spend billions of dollars to detect and disrupt terror plots and we have dedicated few resources toward combating and preventing the radicalization at the root of terror. this is called the crucial prevention aspect of terrorism. sadly while they are moving at broadband speeds we are moving at bureaucratic speeds. the administration has not appointed elite agency in charge of combating domestic resources and few are even allocated to it. when asked by our committee of the top department and agency can only identify around

$50 million within a million being spent in around two dozen people working full-time on this issue. and that is basically it. and that means that we have arrested twice as many isis recruits in the united states this year than there are full-time officials working to prevent isis from radicalizing americans in the first place. in a high threat environment i believe that this is unacceptable. every day we wait we see more ground going to the average adversaries. i will not stand on the sidelines asking for more reports and studies while terrorists murder our people and our military. killing our u.s. marines and servicemen and seek to divide our nation.

that includes raising the priority and focus of the department of homeland security's efforts to combat the viral speed of violent extremism and our bill would give them the tools to combat propaganda here at home that shows islamist terrorism for what it really is and it would also help dhs empower local communities to spot signs of violent radicalization and help them develop off ramps to discourage individuals from being lured overseas to fight with terror groups or be convinced to commend acts of violence at home. ultimately we must recognize the best homeland defense is a good offense and to win this war against islamic terrorism, we have to take the enemy overseas. i spent the last weekend meeting with our general leaders and

talk into operations officers at the u.s. central command and special operations command at the air force base and i'm proud of the work that they have done to dismantle terror groups and their focus on defeating isis in the recent victory of taking up the leader of the khorasan group. but the white house strategy under which they operate it only gives them the authorities to contain it rather than to hold back and defeat it. they said we needed to drain this so that we don't have to swap the mosquitoemosquitoe s. we all know that isis will replenish the ranks and that is a fact and the numbers we have killed over there they have replenish to an equal amount. we all know that they will expand globally until we have eliminated at the source at iraq

and syria. right now we are fighting with one. under the current strategy and the rules of engagement than too high to strike important targets and the number of military trainers is too low. the force is being tapped from assisting with the fight by ground troops, telegraphing weakness or enemies. as a result, isis has been able to hold an extended key territories in syria and iraq despite our airstrikes and the iraqi government is beginning to rely on shiite militias to fight back. the development that empowers them and could prolong the struggle by inflaming sectarian issues. i spoke to them several weeks ago when i was in baghdad. but it's clear that what that

expanded american leadership they are running out of options to win this fight. the bottom line is that right now i believe that we are losing the war against isis and the wider war against islamist terrorists. the present strategy has failed and the evidence of failure mounds with every terror plot in america and every attack against our allies and every one of those that are willing to die in the name of the deprived and depraved ideology. the time has come to overhaul these strategies and it's time for the president to level with the american people about what the threat truly is and about what is needed to win this generation long war with radical

islamists. and today i want to outline the basic frame work starting with a campaign against isis. we must take the ability to increase the number of trainers and expanding participation by bolstering the air campaign with close air support and easing the rules of engagement beyond zero collateral damage authorizing american military personnel to a company and assist the iraqis in combat including ramping up the number of special operations forces and accelerating the delivery to peshmerga forces. but even with these improvements, more is going to be needed to win this campaign. the president's first strategy has left us with a credible

ground force to fight them without a credible ground force to fight isis in its main stronghold in syria and recently secretary carter announced that we have only trained 60 serial troubleshooting combat this group, which can range between 30 to 50000 strong, depending on who you talk to. the reasons we have one of the reasons we have with recruits is that reportedly we make them pledge not to bite the bashar al-assad regime especially when their hometowns are being attacked. we like a serious ground force in syria while isis boasts a 30,000 man army.

i'm calling upon the president to stand up a coalition to build the force needed to clear the sanctuary in syria. and we need a can mind one now that include special operation forces and most importantly regional military partners including other partners. the coalitions media mandates should be to strengthen the opposition so that they can take the lead in taking back their country. not just from isis but from all sunni extremist terrorist groups. and that includes the current

regime, the brutal oppression is one of the main drivers behind the growth and the rapid growth of isis in syria in the first place. he continues to decimate the moderate syrian opposition including with chemical weapons that we need. and we need them to fight these extremists. but them out of the way the syrian rebels dead and better chance of rolling back terror groups and regional partners who want him gone and would be are willing to have that assurance. before taking action the coalition would need to develop a post bashar al-assad transition. syria and libya are falling apart and as a result coalition action in syria must be paired with a viable plan to stabilize

the country and prevent it from becoming a vacuum. in our regional partners will play a role on the ground in this coalition. i have spoken with syria's neighbors on many things both in turkey and saudi arabia and other allies who are willing to put forth these resources and combat troops on the ground and it's hard to articulate that we have a strategy because we don't. and they want the assurance that they will be out of the equation because they will not do anything that will empower and embolden the regime. they cannot live with this next

door and the spillover effects are part of this. some are prepared to help fight isis by committing their own ground troops and this is after all their backyard. it is their mass and i think it is part of them to bring it up under american leadership and for us not to have to carry this water. but there is no substitute for american leadership. [inaudible] i was pleased earlier this year to see arab leaders propose the creation of a regional military force but such an organization is years away from reality. and we cannot afford to wait for

this to play out, the strategy that he admits would take years to putting the coalitions of nations and we also cannot forget core principles needed to win this war against terror. the reach of this extends far beyond the territories. yet the counterterrorism approach can be best described as a whack-a-mole by drones. and make no mistake, we have eliminated terror leaders through targeted air strikes including the head of al qaeda in the arabian peninsula yesterday and earlier this month.

and that includes the leaders to blow up airplanes using ied's. but these terror groups are getting better and quickly replacing fallen leaders and we chase these fanatics. but in order to win we must destroy sanctuaries with serious ideology and we need to identify and confront threats early wherever they emerge in places like libya and yemen, we need to work with partners to develop full-fledged stabilization plans and we must counter the ideology because we have seen it spread to all corners of the globe in the same way that communism and

fascism led to decades of destruction and in the short run this means exposing the brutality and naked journey of life of the role of islamist terrorists and so recruits will realize that they are headed to this. this is not happening right now the state department, the dod is trying and it's not happening at dhs. in the long run we need the president to outline the whole of government for this fight the strategy should draw on all elements to promote liberty and dignity to oppression fear and terror. authoritarian systems are the wellspring of fanaticism political and economic development are the only

reliable long-term antidote to terror. which is why american foreign policy must be geared to shaping a balance of power in the international system that favors the expansion of free states. as churchill talked about. and leads us to face more enemies on our city streets rather than on the battlefield overseas. and as the prime minister talked about. the ideas prevail, every time we witness a weed out not to be intimidated and we send a clear message to fanatics.

and we will bring justice and that is resolve of the american people and the resolve that will take us to a victory in this war against islamic terror. thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you for the opportunity to follow up with the speech a little bit. the first question i want to ask you is by putting yourself into contact. we never really understood what was going to be and what kind of joked that they were doing these many similar things. and you really saw the administration put its interest on how it identifies the war on

terror some and there are more terrorist attacks more than there ever were. realistically the odds of him saying that i got it all wrong and doing something different are pretty slim, what we are really doing is that we need to have a vigorous year and a half debate about what the next president is going to do. >> unlike what we did in world war ii in germany, japan, after korea, it left a dangerous

hotspot because i think that that coupled with this the prime minister, secretary clinton traveled one time for three hours. that was a creation. [inaudible] and that created the threat today and so that wasn't supposed to happen. this narrative. it defines the campaign narrative and i think the strategy for him is running the clock out as they enter the home town. and i think that that is a huge mistake of foreign policy, it makes it dangerous to the homeland. one of the driving issues here i'm not seeing it right now.

and i have to tell you that i'm not saying a lot of experience in national security and the. usually it is about the economy and this issue will be the driving debate. and i think that every american i would ask the question if you feel safer today than he did before and i think most americans would answer that question as no. >> spring in a related issue which i think is fair fair to do they go together because ron is the other great destabilizing force and we have to live with the aftermath. so i would like your assessment.

>> secretary of state kerry, we sent letters to them going to congress first before dropping this at the u.n. security council, samantha powers called me after hearing and within days they submitted this to the u.n. security council and they have circumvented this with the congress. and so i think that this is flagrant, it defies the spirit and we know that china and russia and venezuela they will vote to lift u.n. sanctions. so what can be done, the only thing that we have left is to override the president's veto and that is the last several days to try to appeal to

democrats and that is the only way that this whole process can stop. >> we can pass the sanctions to dismantle a nuclear capability. and the capability can still continue to go forward. there is only one reason and that is to deliver a nuclear warhead starting a middle east arms race. they say that our allies are confused. and we are strongly opposed to this. now we are going to see a nuclear arms race in pakistan, egypt is going to look at it,

turkey. lastly the hundreds of billions of dollars that will be lifted and given to the largest state sponsor of terrorism with hamas and hezbollah in the western hemisphere and other countries we saw the saudi ambassador plot this and they conduct cyberattacks routinely on our financial sector. and i think it's one of the biggest foreign policies that i have seen is a mistake in my lifetime. >> your assessment is what this deal actually does protect the nuclear infrastructure and

allows them a stronger breakout and that includes more freedom in terms of trying to contain this. >> i think that chuck schumer is a key player in this in the senate and we are working very hard to make this a bipartisan opposition in the more the american people hear about this deal. they are celebrating in the streets of tehran. i'm not saying a celebration in the streets of america and if we cannot accomplish that and i

think the only thing left. >> dealing with the issue of terrorism from the offenses and defensive points, stopping the front to drive this and counterterrorism. some of the legislation that you propose, part of that is how we do it as well.

and what is to prevent this administration from using that go into political opponents maybe conservative groups and much in the way that the administration has been accused of. how can you prevent that. >> it's not anyone's political place. if that ever occurred with pretty good response. [inaudible] he was kicked out and it would have been nice to have known that. most of these guys with the exception of chattanooga would

have a lot that were up before they kill people. if we can identify that beforehand and de- radicalized, that would be very helpful. it's a two-pronged deal. one of their biggest priorities is homeland security. mine is protecting the homeland from within and also protecting the homeland by limiting the threat outside. for instance, what i call cybercommanders and the idea that we cannot do this and pressing them to identify, i cannot name the names or identify who they are and take them out. not to say it's double ended. there will be those that will follow.

at the end of the day it is a war of ideology and that is why this is so important to provide the counter narrative to radical ideology that we are in a long-term struggle. and i hope it is in my children's lifetime. >> when it is done right i was in st. louis recently were two individuals were providing material support and the community was completely and utterly outraged and they actually were extremely cooperative and wanted to engage with state and local and fbi officials.

>> i want to get one more point before we do that which is something that we have dealt with which is the role of homeland security and the importance of consolidating authorities enters action are part of this. >> unlike the house armed services and the department of defense or the department of justice our committee was built upon a compromise after 9/11. and i think the 9/11 commission

came back and said this is one of the biggest threats to the united states in congress and the jurisdiction is the whole part of it in the congress and i think that it's something that needs to be fixed and i think that the argument needs to be made and needs to be done. >> if you can state your name and affiliation, we will try to squeeze that in and maybe one other question as well. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you for speaking today. i am a subject matter expert and terrorist radicalization and de- radicalization among russian is for doing a lot of research and

if you complain about a twitter candle, it takes weeks, not months, for those that are definitely radicalizing for different groups and it comes up with this as well and so my question is will you be addressing how to perhaps influence this comparable to counterparts and not be used as a platform for terrorism and recruitment and radicalization. >> first help support this legislation in groups like heritage to support it. i think that it's common sense

and this is a high-tech challenge. and there are these cybercommunities, serious isis. they change their handles and twitter accounts instead of trying to stay in front of them knowing that we could argue that to include this and it's just kind of dicey in the privacy side. we are looking forward to the technology the first meaning is friday morning with the high-tech sector and the leaders like google and twitter and

homeland security and doj to see what kind of solution we can provide and we see these communications from syria into the united states. we sought in new york, we sought in boston, for all i know this guy and chattanooga could have and i'm not saying that he did could have been communicating this. and what is that we met they will go to another platform knowing that it is secured even with a court order. you can't see it. and so there's a lot of different communication going on

between cybercommanders and syria and americans -com,-com ma those with thousands of followers in the united states and we can't shine a light on the communication. and this all has to be part of the equation, but we need to find a technologies lucian to this so that we can better stop it, otherwise we can't seek medications and we can't stop it. if the guy with there was operating in this way they would make a pretty big case. we talked to the director and the secretary of homeland security, this is one of the biggest concerns but they cannot lawfully monitor these communications. >> let's take one last question here.

>> thank you. >> you know we can agree that monitoring this lawfully or unlawfully, given this is a war of ideology is there anything for policy to try to sway that ideology that the recruits will be replenished as long as they can be reached out to. do we have a way to counter this ideology and ended? >> that is a great question and again, when you go to this in terms of proposing the ground force, there has to be the arab nations providing the ground force and they told me that they will and they met with world leaders, they will do that if there was a strategy and part of the equation.

and we try to do this only do 100,000 u.s. combat troops. that is kind of the choices that we have. that is an option that should be on the table. but when you do that you inflame them because the infidel is on their land. so this is a smart approach and smart way to do it with sunnis, sunni moderates and extremists that seems to me under american leadership that that is a purpose for the bill the counter violent extremism, the state department doesn't have the counter narrative abroad and the dod has a lot of this technology and capability to do

it in the ambassador was there at the meeting and i am urging them to start this counter narrative and you're going to get put on the front lines. the frontline had a great special. it's terrific what they do. and that is the counter narrative that i think needs to be out there more. at the end of the day it is providing stability when they fall and it breeds terrorism. we have seen libya yemen we

have no intelligence we have had to pull out of many places completely out of iraq and syria and without a counter narrative and a strategy it is going to continue to breed and thrive. and the problem is it is metastasizing so greatly globally and that is what worries me. >> i'm going to ask you to join with me in a small round of jujitsu. i'm going ask you to join me in thanking senator mike mccaul. for his conversation and as soon as the exit the stage i would ask our panel to jump up and i will introduce them and we will jump right into it and thank you for joining me. >> we appreciate it.

[inaudible] [inaudible conversations] >> remember i told her the story that i lost this and i couldn't introduce him. so maybe it is a pattern. but fortunately i know all of these guys and they are pretty awesome.

[inaudible] >> when you're working in the homeland security, you see this than those advising every day and those at the highest level. the general was not just the attorney general of the united states but was the most distinguished scholars here at the heritage foundation and i told him beforehand that they work harder now than when on active duty here. but among the things is he recently served on an important commission that reviewed the counterterrorism function of the fbi and so here is someone with knowledge and experience and

we've had an opportunity to do a key component of this. the key component is david and sarah who are policy analysts on homeland security work this stuff every day and not just the entire department that really the entire homeland security enterprise and i will ask each of you to make some remarks and then we will get as much q&a at the end as we possibly can. sometimes we start late but we always end up on time. so should we start with you? >> yes go ahead. thank you, everyone, for coming today. i want to use this time to lay out the statistics and trends and we are going to get some general recommendations echoing what the chairman said about

what we can do to better counter this threat. they have been tracking this against the united states homeland since 9/11. the data tells me that the u.s. has faced more terrorist plots and attacks in 2015 and we have seen in any prior year and we are only in july of this year. and so just to echo chairman mike mccaul this is the most dynamic period that the u.s. has seen since 9/11 and it's all according to publicly available information that we do not have access to and do not know about. they are tracking hundreds of individuals across this and it's clear that we do have a serious problem. i want to describe what it is that we do and how to categorize the criteria. first, it has to be a concrete block with actual action taken

to further that plot. and if someone wants to do applaud that we can consider that. that includes being motivated by islamist ideology to achieve that goal. generally we also look for an official statement by the government and law enforcement to indicate that this was an act of terror usually indicated by criminal charges but that's not always the case take the fort hood shooting and with this in mind we have been watching this since 9/11 and this includes

international law enforcement and we got lucky and honestly there's some of these in total. at least 27 of these individuals were trained in terrorist camps abroad. xt one of the 72 were homegrown terrorist plots here in the when they were radicalized and they didn't get their ideology while they were staying abroad. and what exactly were they targeting and the number one has been the u.s. military and the personnel were actual basis. nineteen attacks obama after our military.

and the mass transit systems and in washington dc and in law enforcement not unless you want to be on. recent plots have been unique. they have been directed by isis. by most were conducted by some other ideology come to have all 10 plots in the past six months all be connected to one group, shows the influence that they have and it's not a coincidence that we have seen a spike in terrorism and we have also seen a spike in the plot against law enforcement, which makes sense given the fact that they have talked about law-enforcement and officials. the question is what we do about

this. we will have an opportunity to dive into some details and i want to touch on two broad ideas which the chairman has arnie touched on. it's critical that the united states take a combative approach. when we treat terrorism as a crime, we can deter it punish it after the fact we misunderstand the nature of the threat and terrorist are happy to and sometimes even want to die in pursuit of their goals. the bigger bang they make the more likely they are to look for changes and opportunities and they are looking to hurt us and. [inaudible] furthermore they are looking for soft targets that are very easily attacked.

or look at tunisia and the attack there, these are softhearted, not guarded by security very often. and so the point is that it's not enough come you cannot have security officers everywhere. we have we can't do that. sometimes it can help us in preventing from getting out of hand, but that was too close for comfort, i think we can all agree. so we need to be doing is look at how we can be more proactive and this means that law enforcement needs to have the tools, the lawful intelligence tools to find terrorists and to make sure that the public is never put in danger. not a lot secondly the u.s. does

need to do more and to defeat isis abroad. the reality is that they are attracting followers and a lot has been made of them and their use of social media and there's no doubt that they are very effective at using social media and other online tools. but it's not just social media which is causing individuals to take up around the world. social media is just a tool that they are using to display the message that it is a caliphate in possession of real territory that they can do and and expand. it's a compelling message to many in the world and this means that the allies need to take more effective steps to isolate and undermine the islamist terrorist groups. honestly this is needed to

uncover these from abroad to the united states i will read some of these topics were michael panna . most of the time anytime since 9/11 the u.s. cannot be complacent. this is not about fear mongering but about accurately grasp ring this. >> the fbi has been involved in

counterterrorism and intelligence activities for a long time. at the time i was in the department i recognize suddenly it's almost 30 years ago, but at that time the terrorist groups were mostly overseas like the red army faction of groups and so on and most of the attacks were on u.s. citizens and happen to be abroad. and of course 9/11 was the big change the start of a whole new era of terrorism, obviously, for the united states. so the 9/11 commission was formed and they did an extensive review of the united states as a government and the country had to do and almost for a couple of years and then continued to monitor the situation after that. and one of the major decisions they had to make was shall we follow britain and canada and

some other countries that established a different organization from the law enforcement agencies to deal with terrorism and i think wisely they decided no, it was to give the charge to the fbi but they change the fbi and actually what they said was that and that includes the national security workforce established in the fbi consisting of analysts and surveillance specialists who are recruited and trained and rewarded to ensure the development of an institutional culture imbued with a deep expertise and this required a great many changes in

the idea of criminal investigation is primarily to find out who did it and then gather the evidence so that they can be successfully prosecuted. this is a new rule and that is to find out what is going on to prevent something from happening as david has properly talked about and secondly this meant an organizational change instead of having the criminal investigation division is the primary focus on intelligence to carry out this role of situations. this broad cultural change

because we not only had special agents, the people that carry guns and badges and handcuffs and they had to be given a status comparable to and equal to the special agents themselves. in our commissioner looked at what was happening in terms of all of this when they got off to a good start, they made extensive progress and particularly is something that the congressman has mentioned

them to keep his with the accelerating threats we face throughout the world which were discussed by the congressman at this point. in the division is that the future of the fbi was to be an organization that might be described in these terms. an fbi in which criminal investigation and counterintelligence and intelligence collection and science and technology are all complementarity of a global intelligence and investigative organization rather than the prior incarnation as primarily a domestic organization.

the idea that they had the global aspects with the fbi at its hub would be a collaborative enterprise and that includes a considerable amount of activity in which the private sector would be involved. and this involved, as i mentioned, intelligence analysts at a very high level. but it was necessary to develop a recruiting program because we have to go into colleges and universities to find the kinds of people who have the skills, the analytical skills and also the background in international relations and the like. in involved in training and

education programs and one of the major changes was at the fbi academy to have special agents and intelligence analysts training in the same classes that were relevant to what they were doing in terms of intelligence and training together and working together at the start of their careers this includes the first time working side-by-side that pertain to this with a special agents. and that includes a new form of leadership in the field office. and every one of these divisions

and it meant also a change in status of the acceptance by special agents of them as full professionals and that includes the opportunities that they have, opportunities to go overseas, opportunities to have inner agency responsibilities and to go to other agencies like the defense intelligence he at other places where they can expand their professional capabilities by fieldwork with other agencies so that they would become truly a part of the intelligence community as a whole. today we have 16 or 17 depending on how you count them,

different intelligence agencies and the federal government. it was a matter of increasing the scope and the understanding of the special agents and analysts and what the other agencies were doing so they could work together with the people in those particular agencies. and it also created a new career path and promotional opportunities and so on so we can retain the intelligence along with the special agents. in another change was to expand the role of the legal attaches. this is a phrase that depicts the fbi people working overseas in the various embassies and they have a unique role. ..

they themselves are collecting so that we have a picture of what's going on. the importance of the legal authorities. we had a great debate. but the importance of the patriot act and the importance of the nsa activity legally intercepting communi