the veto undermine the importance of guns and how else can you explain the transformation of the positioning of background checks in 1999 the nra was plowing the laws of congress pressing for an expansion of background checks. the industry provides a sizable chunk of the gun lobbies financing changed. that's a complete refusal to engage in the conversation on gun policy because we comprise the notion of th that the heartf american freedom and liberty as the unrestricted right to stockpile arms in the case of emergency against the governme

government. for the law abiding citizens rights the court still confirmed clearly and unequivocally that the amendment protects only a limited right justice scalia said nothing in our opinion should be taken. as clear as the wall is today the data is just as clear this is a tragic part of the story because it captured and is imprisoned in the conversation of the rights of revolutionary rhetoric that we missed the fact that there are some pretty minor changes in the law.

we passed a strict licensing wall in 1995 that resulted the johns hopkins survey in a 40% reduction in the firearms related homicide rate. at the same time, missouri repealed a law that was resulted in an increase on the homicidee rates.increase 46% fewer women are shot to death in states with universal background checks. 48% fewer off-duty police officers were shot and killed in states with universal background checks.rs two out of three are suicide related in the states with the gun purchase awaiting period have a gun suicide rates that is 51% lower than states without waiting periods. they are constitutional, the work and they are popular. and yet they go nowhere in congress time after time because

the two sides in the political system are living on different n planets when it comes to this issue. so what do we do or what do i do as someone who committed my career to this issue? i will lay out three things and senate then close. i remind myself all politics are local. if the political force an of anti-gun violence measuresli become strong enough, it will cannot be resisted so we keep building up the organizations and pushing more to elevate this issue on their priority list ann we work towards the day when t there will have the right tote moderate his stance on guns in order to win elections and right now it is playing out before oud eyes. they are getting stronger, the numbers are growing all over the country. for 20 years from 1994 to 2012, anti-gun violence movement was basically dormant in this country and so it is that a very

short period of time to catch up. but let's look at two competitive senate races to tell the story of how things have h changed so quickly. at in pennsylvania, incumbent senator pat toomey is running on his support for background checks. one of the first support for 2013 compromise measure. when he originally ran in 2010, there was no mentioning of this position on guns. it is now a central part of his campaign. in new hampshire with one of the nation's highest rates of gun ownership, the senator's first ad of the campaign was in the defensive. ad of thissues she could havee led with she chose guns because she knew it would be important to swing voters in new hampshire and because also one of the grassroots organizations i was talking about was strong enough

that they raised the money to the two ads on the guns early in the campaign cycle. in new hampshire on to 2010 in the first race when the opposite dynamic was in effect arace whee democratic opponent was bendinge over backwards to try to get to his right on guns chomping the rating. not this year. the times and voter times and vh changed. second we have to take the gun lobby had on. they support closing the loophole and more political leaders need to call out the gun lobby is and make their

endorsement of all that less meaningful. don't underestimate the importance of a major party presidential candidate asking for a mandate on the issue of guns and calling out the opponents of reform along the way. so the biggest car when she pledges to take on the gun lob lobby. we are also getting some unlikely allies in the party. during the debate that followed. the filibuster, senators who both voted against backgrounde checks by the way in 2013 were very critical of those thatt argued for the status quo. every race has boundaries. that's what lindsey graham said earlier this year about thee second amendment. lindsey i'm sure he wouldn't have conceded that point to four or six years ago. and last, and this is the hardest part, we need to be

assessed trying to remake the i modern right. if they are moving where everything the government touches his solid ground than we shouldn't try to think that those of us on the side of the stronger gun laws can alone stop this. we have to be ready to meet republicans on their space. they show them other than drawing the line in the sand on gun laws. it's a litmus test for how longr to become much you hate government.

there have to be other proxiesit to demonstrate ideologicalyo puberty in this respect and we should be working hard to find another path forward, not simply yelling at them for refusing to work with us. following sandy hook the former supreme court justice john paul stevens said, quote, the wall should encourage intelligent discussion of possible remedies for what every american can recognize as an ongoing nationas tragedy. that intelligent discussion isen just not happening now. rather than continuing to occupy the separate planets, but time is now for those of us leading the charge to take on gun violence, to try to force us to stop talking past each other and fix the bugs in the system that create that reality. i am mad that even in the wake of orlando coming on the back of sandy hook and san bernardino we

still couldn't get a background check past or even a bill stopping those on the terrorist watch list but the filibuster and the sedan that followed did change things and help grow the political movement that is now more powerful than ever. it did cause republicans and democrats to talk past each other a little bit less in a compromise was reached on the simple idea that if you are too dangerous to fly, you shouldn't be able to own a gun. maybe democrats are beginning to poke our heads up from the weeds of policy and republicans now are occasionally willing to dissent from that cloud and those things are truly happening. the political infrastructure, the gun violence movement and the two sides of congress finding new ways to work together then maybe it is just a matter of time before the walls in the country finally catch up to the wil level of the 90% of americans. thank you very much for having me today. [applause]

just a reminder to those watching on c-span or listening, the public is invited to lunch at the national press club so the applause you hear isn't this is really the journalists covering the event.al >> let me ask you first off aret you planning any dramatic strategies to put the gun issue on the front burner this fall like the june filibuster? for example are you going to try to top the record? >> i am very pleased in the wako of the filibuster the momentum seems to have shifted on this issue and i use pennsylvania and new hampshire as examples. but we have to be in the position the next two months ofp the basic blocking and tackling. there are some key elections out there that the pundits and political prognosticators are going to look to when they decide whether or not guns wereh on the ballot in 2016 so i'm

going to be spending much of my time between now and the election traveling to the states in which we have a clear difference between the candidates for the senate and the house spending time in the states that have referendum toto background checks i point you to nevada and maine as the swing states on this issue where we have referendums on the ballot. i don't think that we are going to need to do anythings extraordinary or noteworthy from the public relations standpoint right now we just have to go out and win some elections. >> we have a question here about pointing out those that are supporting and the race is m important. will you campaign for hisimport opponent? stanek if you are working on the issue of protecting americans from gun violence, you have a

lot of reason to think that. you know, he did something that was exceptional in reaching out and working with democrats on this issue. i don't just work on this issue. i work on lots of other issuesi. as well. i'm supporting katie and i will be supporting her from now on until election day because though i appreciate what past dead on the issue of background checks that there are other, thi deeply disagree. and so long as republicans are not charged in the united eight senate, good luck getting these votes on the floor of the senate in the absence of extraordinary measures like the filibuster. that being said, i don't think and we will make progress on this issue if all we do is try to elect democrats. i do think that we have to be honest about republicans who

have stuck their neck out and some of my friends get upset when i acknowledge he did something that was mildly heroic when he worked with democrats on the ground checks but that's the truth, he did and we should congratulate you applaud republicans when they do work with us and we would be fools to ignore the fact that ultimately we would get a quick success by finding republicans are willing to work with us. >> you are pretty good at this filibuster stuff.tty i will start asking rapidfire. what do you think is more effective than the gun violence organizations that have their own area to work or should we all worked together for one objective at the same time? >> a lot of it is that we have different anti-gun violence groups today that are all very strong. i think that's a great thing. i think it's great to have a number of anti-gun violence groups that sometimes have

different priorities wereat different areas of focus. i think that brings more, not less people into the ranks because they don't have to fit themselves into one policy agenda that they can take a look at the campaign and america's tn responsible solutions. and decide which one fits their model of advocacy the best. i don't think this is anything that hurts us. i think it makes us stronger. >> eluteeluted into this duringo speech with eluted into this during the speech was eating there should be an overlap between the gun violence prevention movement and black wives matter movement where they can work together since gun violence does disproportionateln affect people in communities of color? >> i struggle with what happened earlier this year that provided the psychological tipping point for the country. why are you seeing today that the disapproval rating of the nra in swing districts is twice what it was a year ago?ng

why are senate republican candidates all of a sudden running to talk about how strons they are on background checks? i think the combination in a short period time of orlando, dallas and the high-profile shooting a black man in a few american cities became a tippinn point. people just were consumed with this ongoing coverage of tragedy and there was one thing all ofd it had in common, guns. so the idea that there should be no change in the gun laws when all the bad news that you saw on tv had one thing in common,n tv firearms and became unacceptable to people suggest i think you've got to marry the black wives matter movement into the anti-gun violence movement because ultimately, this isn't just about police officers shooting unarmed black men. it's also about the country

making a decision to allow the flow of illegal weapons into the cities which results in the assassination and slaughter of young black men by others in the cities, not just law enforceme enforcement.he >> the question from the audience on that point. doesn't the breakdown on the law and order and towns in the cities of baltimore contributed to the promotion of gun sales? >> well, there's n there is no y time there's a mass shooting, there's a spike in gun sales again because as they laid out, the nra has effectively proffered this argument that the only way to protect yourself is to buy more weapons, which is why it's incumbent upon us in the wake of these mass shootings when people are thinking about going out and buying a weapon for protection to remind americans that there is one cold hard truth statistic which is if you have a weapon in your house it is much more likely to be used to kill you than it is to

kill someone trying to do harm be to you. people don't believe that. they either don't know it or don't believe it so there is no doubt that the nra capitalizes and the industry capitalizes to sell more weapons that every time you buy a weapon statistically, it is making you less safe, not more and that's something a lot of americans don't know. >> could you respond to the consequences to house democrats for their sit in on the gun violence prevention?s >> in terms of breaking the rules? >> they were threatened with some consequences for breaking the rules and sanctions. >> they did break the rules. i don't know the details of the house protocolhouse protocols as and sanctions but they did break the rules and i assume thati dok there is some sanction thatno comes with that. but everyone is engaged in civil disobedience since the founding

of the nation knows that there is often consequences that comee with it. i'm not going to make a stink if there is a distinction against sitting in. the sanctions and the consequences are in the best traditions. >> this is the most important question i can ask you. what would it get to get the gun control past if sandy hook and orlando wasn't enough what is c the impetus you think it will take the congress to actually act on this? >> this is the question that gets most asked often. it says something like america decided to current rates of gun violence are acceptable on the day we did nothing at sandy hook. i don't buy that for a couple of reasons. one, this country wasn't ready to have a thoughtful debate on policy change.

why? because the tragedy was so psychologically disruptive too wh this country that all of our energy in the week at sandy hook was spent just trying to reconcile how you square sandy t hook with a just world in which our essence we are so good and i think it took a long time for americans to figure out how to emotionally and psychologically reconcile that with their lives and so i understand why it has taken a few years to become t ready to plug into this conversation. i also know that it taken a long time to get the political movement right sized so we can change elections and policy debates. the gun lobby had 20 years to run from 1994 to 2012. we have three years to build this movement. so i don't buy the idea that so yy hook should have justt automatically flipped the political. i am on guns.

i think for a lot of really, a lot of issues connected to psychology and a lot of reasonsr connected to pure logistics of organizing it's understandable that it's taken us three years and let's be honest it might take a few more to get this done but the momentum is headed in one direction and one direction only and i think that's what you pay attention to. >> they use it a couple more years. this is almost generationals. it'll take longer to getlmost something passed. >> if you take a look at the number of republicans that voted for the background checks were willing to break on the background check in 2013 about double that number were willing to break with the nra to support the compromise on closing the gap. again, you are seeing a change s in some of these elections.

i mentioned the flipped on the gun politics that happened in a state like new hampshire. i think it isn't moving fast enough for many of us but it's moving fast enough that we are not talking about a generational change. we are talking about a change to take months or years, not decades.oi >> in some degree do you foresee any super pack willing to fund gun control with an issue like the environmental movement? spinnaker think they've made a commitment on this issue and i think bloomberg will continue t spend a lot of money here. i don't know of any other individual funders who are willing to spend that kind of money but as i mentioned above responsible solutions that made major advice in the states already. i'm not sure that we can rely on that strategy. we are better off building our

numbers across the country rather than try to go out and find one or two more white knights. stick another question from the audience why don't democrats just focus on banning military style weapons such as ak-47s and the sale of ammunition for such none of which the questioner says are needed for hunting. >> i think there's a long laundry list of policies that need to change. we went backwards for nearly two decades and so i would add to that list the liability protections the gun industry enjoys like no other and the prohibition on research and development into the causes of gun violence that are currently in effect. we have a long list of policy changes to make this country safer. i hate it when people say why aren't you focusing on banning t assault weapons?s? of course i am but you've got to

pick the battle you can win forn first and ordered them in a way that is logically sequenced. the best chance right now is to get the bills passed that increased number of background checks in this country and to stop people on the watch lists from getting guns. i'm not going to talk about the need to ban assault style weapons. you don't need to tell us what it would have meant if those weapons were not legal and on the streets. it's just we've got to put some priority on the things we fightt for. >> do you think the gop will be willing to accept reasonable guk control if donald trump loses badly against hillary clinton this november? >> yes in this respect hillary clinton is running properly on the issue of changing the nation's gun laws. there were a lot of skeptics who said she was only talking about

guns as a way of differentiating herself from bernie sanders butu this was just an issue she was using to get through the primary. that hasn't proven to be theju case. she's continued to make this part of every speech including the one of the democratic national convention. so she's the first candidate in modern times running very publicly on a promise to make change in gun laws a priority as president said there's no question that people have to take a signal from her election. i think what is more important is that in legislative races they are consequences for being on the other side of the few constituents. so i will be looking moref closely to the new hampshire senate race than the presidential race when i'm deciding whether my colleagues on the republican side have gotten the message that they sie can't oppose changes in the gun law without some political messe

consequence. >> i hear that you are an expert. if the democrats take over the senate, would you be willing to modify the rules to ease the path of gun laws?ould you >> absolutely. i have no plans nor did i ever want to do that again. so if the law made it harder for me to stamp my fee stand on my 5 hours i would gladly accept.eetf so, i am separate and aside from my decision on the filibuster a supporter of changing the rules of the senate. we have a rule now that says yoi have to get 60 senators in order to pass any bill. i think the founding fathers are turning over in their grave seeing how difficult we have made it past the pieces of legislation on top of a system that they intentionally built as being difficult to pass the legislation they debated this

they specifically told us when the super majority would bejort. necessary for constitutional amendments, treaty ratificatione and stands to reason and instead build built a bicameral justic system. it's the way of imposing the super majority. h so even as a member of the minority i thought for the end of the filibuster so i'm not going to be hypocritical about this and only advocate when i'm in the majority. >> only a few minutes left but let me switch to another subject. the 15th anniversary of september 11 is upon us to have a direct impact on a lot of connecticut families who lost loved ones. where were you at the time and what lessons did we learn since

9/11? >> i was in a high school in? connecticut, is the state representative and saw thecticun initial coverage on the tv screen in the library there and then went home to watch the resr of it as a state legislator one of the things w we've learned is good laws protect us. the airports were vulnerable and the terrorists have figured that out. what did we do, we hardened or defenses and we banned certain things from being brought on airplanes and constructed tsa and though they have attempted since then to penetrate our airlines to attack americans, they've not been successful.

why aren't we learning the same thing now when al qaeda operatives are stating that the lone wolf attackers should go to gun shows and take advantage in order to buy assault weapons to shoot civilians. that's what recruiters are saying and i can show you the video of one of the most prominent al qaeda recruiterseo saying here's what you do, go to the gun show, by one of these weapons and start shooting. why aren't we doing the same thing today that we did after september 11? today terrorists are using a sold weapons. they are not making improvised explosive devices were trying to board airplanes and yet, we refuse to change the law. we learned good policy is good andtection and we are not using

that when it comes to this new tactic of the groups to take advantage of the gun laws. >> before i ask the final question, the national pressse club is the world's leading professional organization for journalists and we fight for a free press worldwide. for more, please visit theni website at press.org. i'd like to remind you of upcoming programs. september 15 through the secretary ashcroft will be here and the secretary of the department of agriculture tom vilsack. a reminder please remain seated until the senator has departed. he needs to make that vote and we don't want to make them wait. would like to present the guest with the traditional national press club mug. >> if you come back and do the spelling bee i will give you another. the last question is something a

little more fun. the movie a haunting in connecticut was based on a house that you once lived in. do you believe in ghosts and what scary things might have happened when you were there. >> that is good research. [laughter] i moved into my first rental when i was 22-years-old, two friends from high school and the second day we had a plumber come to work and he walked very tentatively up the stairs and when he entered we asked him what was wrong and he told us we were living in the haunted w house.e. i won't tell you the whole story because you can find it online that it was an old funeral home into the story was that the ghosts of the deceased have come back to haunt the house but as we watched the videos of every crew from entertainment tonight inside edition we found out it

was only the first floor that fm was haunted so not the second do floor. so i never experienced anything out of the ordinary but it was a welcome and it's been a great story to tell ever since. g we thought it was odd that some of the other houses were paintee purple and pink and apparently some people took it very seriously and went to these ghost hunters for advice and were told they don't like certain colors so that's why some of the houses were painted strange colors but that is deep in my biography. so congratulations for finding that out. >> thank you to the staff at the national press club into the journalism institute. we are adjourned. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> it is my pleasure. thank you for having me. >> let me begin with the press avail itself. why after nine months did she agree to take the questions like this?

>> it seems like it started building ports the last few week's and probably even longer than that. the campaign had begun sending out e-mails every day about hiding hillary number of days and then she one the last couple of days she started traveling on a bigger airplane allowing the press to travel with her on the campaign trail and she's been taking an impromptu question on board the plane taking questions into so this is a natural extension of that and then number two, she was eager to get back on last night's commander-in-chief forum and she had to go first, donald trump

went second so she wanted to come out and say a couple of things to get her own message out there after donald trump got to close out the night. >> was this a part to make sure her message and birds were driving the discussion today and tonight? >> i think that it was an attempt as well to get back on the offensive isn't the right word but to get that on a positive note neither candidate looked as he sort of appeared to have a mastery of the subject matter being discussed but although she seemed very much on top of her facts and figures, she was defensive and uncomfortable on the stage so it seemed like this morning her

decision to come out and hold a press conference was an effort to have the shaky performance not be the most recent tape of her that was shown all over the news all day. >> let me follow up on your earlier point. this was a debate dry run. both candidates on the same stage not at the same time, the so-called commander-in-chief forum but getting a lot of questions on her e-mails and server, confidential and classified as top-secret information. did she stop the bleeding were raised more questions? >> that's a good question and i'm not really sure that she did either one. she certainly has stopped the bleeding and that's something donald trump's campaign is intent on making sure she isn't capable of. that's one of their more powerful stronger talking points they can hit her with and it

really speaks to the sort of larger point in the campaign that she's dishonest, can't be trusted, that kind of stuff. hillary clinton herself has tried to put this behind her and tried to wrap herself and put it behind her on the trail. the fbi released all of these investigative notes on the investigation and that's something the campaign said they wanted the fbi to do but even in releasing the notes there were a lot of fresh details and questions that came out that sort of reignites al reignite ae discussion about hillary clinton's e-mail server, things like using a hammer to destroy soccer blackberries and a computer program to wipe away things off the server, things like that that reignite all the concerns.

>> into some of the concerns made last night including the reference to the american generals have been reduced to rubble, something she jumped on today. have we heard more from the campaign on that statement? >> scheuer. earlier this morning the retired general, one of his closest military advisers who was a dark horse candidate and may be his running mate so he's that close came out this morning and said donald trump was absolutely right that the generals had been reduced to rubble under president barack obama and in one sentence it was seamless when one talks about the other. he said that basically there's a

disconnect between the white house, president obama and the military but the military isn't able to do some of the things that could be dointhey could bet the islamic states so that's what the trump campaign said and one of the service said in defending that remark. of course hillary clinton and the campaign manager came out this morning in a sort of impromptu press conference, they did an interview on abc this morning and said this was insulting to the military. >> loomis nelson following the clinton and trump campaign thank you for being with us. we appreciate it. >> thank you so much. it was a pleasure. >> u.s. officials are expanding their investigation into the hacking of state systems. we will hear from the heads of the cia and fbi.

then the republican congressman talks about the gop house strategy. later a discussion on the vote and a campaign.

there've been several memoirs written and i thought it might be important to add mine.

there's been a lot written and is said about me, some of it is true, some of it's not and i wanted to give my perspective as well. >> political cartoonist discussing his latest book huge 30 years about his views as a character in his comic strip. he speaks at politics and prose in washington, d.c.. they spoke about the national

committee's computercommittees e intelligence national security alliance hosted this event. [applause] here we are.. last panel i could say arguably the best that we had other good panels though i think this willl be a very good informative panen of the big six directors join me in welcoming the former president and current president and a good friend mccarthy. [applause]>> i am really i am really nervous. this is incredible.

good afternoon.d i'm ellen mccarthy and i'm the president of a nonprofitpo research corporation to provide scientific research and engineering with clients in the federal, state and private sectors to include the u.s.genco intelligence committee. we are so proud to be a sponsor of this today. welcome to the final session. the best saved for last the subject is the national intelligence advances, setbacks and challenges we are fortunate to have the agency, the director and the commander of the cybertt command. joining us today is theg us tody

moderator. please join me in welcoming this group today. thank you for the introductions and arranging this event. it's difficult to get six of these directors up and i couldn't think of a better time with all the things going on in the world during the national security intelligence matters both foreign and domestic. the way we are going to work this afternoon is each of the directors will have two to three minutes to speak briefly about the challenges then we will opet up to a discussion among the

seven of us for about a halflf hour or so and then we will turn to your questions to wrap up the panel. we'll start witwe will start wi, director comey. >> it's great to be with my colleagues. they remind me i have six more of these to do, maybe seven. i'm counting on each of them. i thought i would use my two minutes to frame the challengesr and opportunities the bureau faces through the lens of the statement we wrote for the organization to make it shorter and to capture some of our challenges and opportunities. our vision statement is to be ahead of the threat through leadership, agility and integration. it's constantly asking ourselves how they were working today andd evil ring and second, asking what are the things we are not working today that are coming at us and the way in which we think we will be able to do that is exercising better leadership

outside the organization into the last two pieces which are agility and integration that are illustrated well by the challenge we as a group have had in conferencing the islamic state. that emerged as i was becoming the director in 2013 and we have had to refocus ourselves as an organization and get better working together across the boundary lines in the u.s. government but maybe even more than that, across the country lines with our counterparts. the threat is coming at us digitally and in human form worldwide. at the same time we are facing the problem we all called goingu dark. to see the threat and to understand it one of the ways we try to respond to the darkness is to get much better at using human intelligence and sources and that requires not just these

agencies to work well together but to do that with all of our counterparts and so we are trying to be much more integrated into government and across boundaries so that wewe divide up the work we don't just do the traditional did w but wee what the priorities should be and who is going to focus on which actor and share that information with each other so that we can confront the worldwi worldwide threat.be that is through integrating which is our emphasis and i will stop there. >> it's great to be back here. jim used a lot of the words i think most of us use when we talk of agility, integration being much more interoperable. we are able to respond to they challenges of today in lightning speed fashion. the world has changed significantly since i started back in 1980.

both in terms of the adversaries we face, the diversity of the threats of the world stage, how it has changed over the course of the last 36 years or so but on the technological front that's where we have seen much of the revolution take place in terms of how it's affected our day-to-day lives and the fact we now have the digital domain thad dominate the lot of our daily activities and it's changed fundamentally changed how the intelligence and law-enforcement security services were able to operate in a much more challenging environment dealing with technologies that we face and that's why a number of us are involved in the activities of the organization we can adapt to a new operating environment to make sure we are able to leverage as effectively and efficiently as possible all the capabilities and tools and expertise so that we are able to

bring them to bear very quickly and that's why what we are doing is in the case of the cia tryins to make sure the next are going to be as accomplished and making sure we are ready to do with the challenges that lie ahead of us and that requires new practices and new thinking and how we are going to be able to fulfill our responsibilities and operate abroad in a very clandestineore manner so that we are able to provide to help our national security. >> thinks libby fo love you forg time from your lives.. it's hard to believe it was aa year since we were here. i think you heard from john and jim some common things from us at the national security agency as we look at the world around us. i think the challenges we face

are very similar to my teammates on the stage. how do you continue to generate meaningful insights in the world where the ability to do that ita becomes increasingly difficultor and challenges your workforce and capability. much of the underlying technology in the digital world changes at an incredible pace and we have to be careful looking at the changes that there are some workforce optimized for the challenge you will see two years, five years from now is what has allowed us to step back and make sure we are prepared to generate success for the nation and on the information trying to generate insight. how are we going to stay ahead of the problems that we've comeo to the conclusion we need to reassess where we are, make some changes to optimize ourselves from th the futures are at the e time we have this growth with an

incredible set of challenges to, maintain, the workforce is also trying to go through change and will do this in an environment in which it is level or declining so it's all about the fo preregistration and how it became much more. the three touchstones to do about integration and innovati innovation. we've got to get an increased ability and all the capabiliti capabilities. then we just started the journey literally a week ago from today. i'm energized by the opportunity that even as i acknowledge change is never easy superboy'sr turbulence and challenges in doing that. it's been a little over threekes

years since they embarked on the intelligence center. exec how did we execute the operations during the attempt ix turkey which showed exactly how the analysts, collectors and all sources came together for what was going on. what sold it to me as we were past the discussion about integration when they started asking questions like how did we do this before we had an integrated center so that wasas the moment for us that we were past the discussion.

i will get input from all there folks on the stage. the challenge going forward if i would like to deliver content to the consumers and in a real dynamic integrated way that makes sense and helps them to make decisions and find. i am not sure that's the right h term. how do i bring all the data from the different entities, put them in one place, make sense of it, help them make good judgment because we now have it aggregated and then deliver the content at the speed of the network at the speed of the way the world is changing. and to me that is the next great leap because the way that we produce things, the hard copy production of materials that has delivered a day late.

that's built upon layers of da data. we spend a lot of time and do the research and development of the targeted for this capabili capability. making sure we have the ground capability necessary to make full use of the systems we build in march and that means the ground systems that can

interoperate at the speed of cyber and that's a big change for us in terms of the way we do our business and they are systems that can integrate across intelligence disciplines and across the domain so that's been a big change. the other is paying attention to resilience across the state. we put a lot of focus on that in the last few years and finally, the people that are the best at what they do you talk r&d

keeping up with the targets in the threats and in the space people don't think it is possible to do any place. i thought about that particularly in the strength of my team. there were folks in the audience who were probably only seven, 8-years-old when 9/11 happened and even though they were young they are focused on making sure that it doesn't happen again.

>> i had the privilege of directing a very young age and see that we are about to devel celebrate and in a very old profession so in th the challene and opportunities that we have it's because our discipline, our team, we don't show well alone. we shine when we partner with teammates. whether it is at making sure that happens couldn't be proud.

he talked about this labor into the digital domain then eventually geographic to share and contextualize. he mentioned that user defined picture. we are to have that understanding and view so we can contextualize and hopefully amplify. we are off together now jointlyw working with you all because again it was a nice cozy monopoly. life was really simple.s just explaining it send.

a couple challenges when is the resurgent russia and the concern of cyber whether it is a criminal networks, government or other entities. we heard yesterday from the defense secretary warning them not to meddle in our democratic processes. so far they haven't named russia as a prime expert even though many in the private sector pointed to strong evidence that the attack began with the russian intelligence services. so even if you are not prepared, can you tell us do you agree there is a significant risk or an operative plan.

i continued not talking about that. it's something that we as a government and i hope as a people take very seriously theel nationstate actor is messing with the process whether that's to disrupt, influence, show discord, to create doubt. .. our policymakers and the president with the information needed to decide what to do about it, and so i'm not going to comment on the work we're doing now except we're working very hard on it to try to understand if there is such a thing and what are the dimensions of it, and what are the intentions and motivations and tools they use, but for ropeses i hope you understand i'm. no going to talk about a pending matter. >> as far as you know, have the state election systems been

tested to see how they would hold up to so much an intruder or skills of a foreign state? >> i'm not an expert in general but especially with respect to those systems, my understanding is that we have in a way a wonderfully resilient, because it is incredibly disseparate and dispersed and run at the state local level, system for voter registration for voting, and i know that the fbi and the dhs have been making sheer sure we're equipping our state and local partners with the information they need to make sure that the lock is thrown and the dead bolt is thrown on their systems. don't want to say more than that >> is it a state function, the responsibility to do this? >> it's a state function. our constitution commits to the states the running of our elects even for federal office, but there is an important roll to play for the federal government, first for those who may have indicators of compromise to share those with state and locals, whether in the election

sector, the financial sector or some another path our country, and an important role for dhs to play in using their expertise to equip folk's how to make sure the door looks are on and the dead pot is thrown. >> you have dressed this as the sessions in as spend do you agree with secretary carter in terms of the danger posed by some foreign entity, perhaps russia in medsling in the democratic process. >> i think i said at as spend the fbi has investigative responsibility for this and has jim comey mentioned, that is ongoing. we as an intelligence agency are trying to make sure we understand what the capables are, what the potential is, in terms of any foreign actors that might try to exploit and manipulate our systems here at home so this is one of the things we are continuing to work with our partners, making sure

that fbi and homeland security and others learn what it is that we learn so it will help them as they fulfill their responsibilities. >> are you surprised by the breadth of some of these measures we're seeing, some of the apparent hacking attempts. >> i think all of us on the stage have talk about the concerns we have about that digital environment, that cyber environment, being summited by adversaries, hackers, individuals who are going to try to get into systems and networks, some you who are going after usth it because they wore fork nation states and others because they're trying to steal copy rights, individuals trying to get in to disable for destroy just to see whether or not they can do and it this is one of the thing wes all have to emphasize, the important of working as a nation to make sure that we have the ability to protect our systems, our networks, from these types of intrusions and efforts to destroy.

>> i should probably add as we're talking about thicks often times people lump together our internet connected voter registration systems around the country and our voting systems. the beauty of the american voting system is that it is dispersed among the 50 states and clunky as heck. it's not exactly a swift part of the internet so it's hard an actor to reach our voting processes and i'm sure there's curses in that, but there's a blessing in terms of reduce thing risk of a hostile actor being able to touch the voting process in the. >> be tampering with voter registration lists to influencing -- >> the actual vote counting in this country tends to be kind of clunky, and in way, that's a blessing because it makes is more resilient and farther away from an actor who might be looking to contractual down a

fiberoptic cable, and it's some woman nailed sally and joe and the pull out the punch cards and that's hard to reach. >> the chads hanging there. >> right, right. there's a lot of pain there but there's a lot of beauty. >> people often said that the most important thing is to establish a high cost for anyone who launches cyber attacks against the u.s. has china, for instance, paid a high price for the op espionage? has russia paid a price for the theft of white house and e-mails and have they paid a price, might we not be talk about the dnc hack. >> guest: if your look at china we have been able to conclude a dialogue between the two nations which led to an agreement which came out since the two presidents met here in was in which an grandma on a broad cyber framework, things that would do not be done. that's positive develop. still continues to be a lot of ongoing dialogue at a nation state level how to get to a

place where the concepts of deterrence and idea of behavior, what is acceptable and not acceptable are better snood and readily adopted. the reason i texas i don't think any of us are comfortable with the current situation and the thing -- >> the current situation? >> in terms of the level of cyber activity, the kinds of activity we're seeing in our nation, the kinds of activity we're witnessing elsewhere. the thing i keep trying to ask myself is so what is it that could helpmentally chang the dynamic -- change the dynamic and shape where we are now. many have come to the conclusion there is not a significant price to pay for aggressive actions and i don't think that is in our best long-term. >> help us inside why that's a continuey towing around the russia effort. clapper quoted the presidenting

a says, the experts have attributed this dnc hack to russians and add the rescue hack our systems all the time, not just government but corporate and personal systems. the "new york times" reported intelligence community has concluded with high confidence that the russians are behind this. would you dispute that -- >> i dispute "the new york times"? >> it's not just been reported in "the new york times." it's been reported in many media outlets. this is the view of the ic. the president seems to be signaling this through, saying this is what the private experts are saying. >> i would remind people this is a much broader policy dialogue. we're intelligence professionals would nor policy professionals. we attempt to generate insight to characterize activity that helps inform the policymaking process so our political leaders can make -- and our military commanders can make smarter decisions. what you have seen is there's not a one-size-fits all.

where we are today, there's no one sites all approach to this. so we look at every situation on the basis of the particular merits, the objectives and the actors involved and we make a case-by-case decision. which is one reason why you saw what we did in response to the sony hack is very differently than others since then. >> and we want to make sure that as we're trying to figure another what is going on that a nation state doesn't know what we know. they may not believe "the new york times." they may not know whether united states you've got is right or not and we are not willing to confirm that. >> i'll pitch to another area. counterterrorism. and general stewart, want it to talk to you. this is an area where ate least own ground there have been some very tangible¢s in the fight against -- tangible successes in the fight against the islamic

city, the shrinking of territory they control in iraq and syria has been drama. even affiliates in like bra and nigeria and afghanistan -- liberia and nigeria and naves taking hits put you said that taking mosul is an extensive operation and not something i see in the next year or so. do you stand with the timeline now and if so why not. >> we're cooking up to about that year when if made that statement. the conditions were not set to take mosul. the forces that were necessary to take mosul were not able to do that. i think we're getting close. we pushed isil out of a good bit of the territory and now starting to isolate mosul. i would imagine that the operation will unfold sometime in the next two or three months. but it is not an easy operation. urban war fighting is not easy dismiss -- and this is a large

city that has had two years to prepare to defend its position. so, it is not going to be an easy fight. going to be a multidimensional fight and fought at various levels and if ans a very stare is willing to stand and fight in an urban environment and you're at least limited to fighting -- the casualties you can impose it is going to be a long and difficult battle as it unfolds. >> some are saying we might even see the main offensive against mosul start by the end of this year. is there in kind of a counter-intough tut naught da jane in succeeding too quickly on the ground before, say, the next follow-on element 0 government of governor of governance and humanitarian effort. >> absolutely. it is always -- let me rephrase. we have done fairly well in winning the battles. not always done well in winning

the wars because we have not had the things in place to rebuild and create conditions for success after the fighting has end. so, yes, we could in fact execute operations, be successful, and not win the --y, are you worried that iraqis and other partners helping. the will not be prepared once there is success in mosul in the coming months? >> yes. >> director brennan, in an interview in the most current issue of the west point's combating terrorism center's publication, you said of the remaining foreterrorist fighter in iraq and syria that, quote,ing to the not killed in the fighting will present a challenge for our governments for years to come. what did you mean by that? and what does isil minus its caliphate? if it's shorn of its state, as what form does it take and how dangerous does it remain, for how long? >> i think it will remain a

presence in iraq for quite a while to come, even with the battlefield reverses it has suffered, and i agree that we are going to continue to see this momentum and most of the territory will be taken away from isil. but we still have al qaeda in iraq, which is where isil came from. was able to be reduced significantly down to several hundreds and they were able on the re-eemerging. so i do think this phenomenon of isil, whether we're talking about in syria and iraq or the other countries where the franchises have cropped up are going continue to be a problem for the local governments because they're going to go into a number of areas where the government doesn't have control or is able to project force. but you also have foreign fighters that have come into the theater that will either stay and fight and die trying, or they will try to return to their home countries.

now, some of them may be rehabilitated and some of them may see they were on the wrong path, but i do think a number of them are going to remain a challenge for the united states as well as for other governments, for a number of years to come. >> what's the ability of governments whether in europe or north frequent to track returnees? >> i think the european countries are doing a better job of the past year or so, and in light of the tragic attacks in paris and belgium and other areas, it's tough for the european union of 28 countries, with 28 different legal systems and over 50 or so security law enforcement and intelligence agencies to interability and to have an architecture both from an it perfect and from a mission perspective but i must say they have demonstratessed a strong willingness to do that and increasing ability to do it. i think the key is going to be having a an international

architecture and as jim was eludeesing, to in in the united statesey node to heather stayed and local arctic tour and international architecture responsible for tracking individuals, either intelligence or security 0 responsible for borders to share the information and be able to act upon intelligence, and that's the key, intelligence is not an end in itself. itself is an enabler. i do see that there is increasing capability among these different governmentsed we're working with but it is very mixed in tomorrows of the capables as well as the progress that they're able to make. >> director comey, the last one on terrorism. wanted to did what you believe the impact of this military success in lands far away, iraq and syria, will have here in the homeland? should we expect to see more isil inspired domestic strikes like in san bernardino or orlando and that's the fbi doing along with domestic partners to prevent that? >> i agree very much with john

the threat i believe will dominate the next five years for the fbi will be the impact of the crushing of the caliphate, which will happen, but through the fingers fingers of that crue going to come hundreds of hardened killers who are not going to die on the battlefield and will flow out maybe to other places of met metastasizes sis a fuming number will flow to eastern europe and being quid for those, the paris, brussels type attackers, flooding into western europe and trying to take the fight their maintain isil's cred in the local jihad world with dominate our lives and helping our european parter ins share information better among. thes and with us is critical. at the same time i think isil will start to lose its ability to attract travelers because the caliphate will be crushed and i think to produce the slick kind

of propaganda that allows them to motivate screwed up people to engage in acts of violence but that's going to stay with is. at the same time we're facing this going dark fem you we can -- phenomenon where we cannot see these people and the way they're communicating. so working very hard to get our people, whether sources or undercovers in places where they can see the communications of either those radicalizing in place or those talking about looking to bring the fight here. >> why 0 into the slick propaganda efforts by reduces. >> it require facilities and people and some oater of bureaucracy and at your geography shrink, their media machine will gradually be degrades of the next few years. >> director snap and car dill low i didn't mean to leave you out. your agencies don't get as much

attention that's should i want to pivot the -- as we have a new argues, what you're organizations are doing, thinking about the challenge, where you have a formal transition team in place. telephone us about, in more detail than in our opening summaries how your organizations are adapting to these shifting threats we have just talked a little bit about here in the first few minuteses and what if any types of changes, reorganizations that your organizations are going through now as we have said we're right on the eve of the 15th 15th anniversary of 9/11 and kind of to assess what is working and what is not working in your real. >> i'll start. we have always responsibility lot of time trying to kind pace with targeted and threats the big change is what we see in space threats and we have meat a lot of progress over the last several years with that focus on

space resilience and we would certainly hope that focus -- it's ban focus of the white house -- is a focus for the next administration as well. we're performing our responsibilities quite well. we're doing very well in r & d and in acquisition. we're not re-organizing like some of my colleagues are. i think we're well structured an an organization to move forward in the area wes need move forward in. >> as one of the agency directors who doesn't have a tv show or movie or something like that, you're right, we do spend more time either reintroducing -- can be a good thing, the. we spend more time either introducer reintroducing our capability and if i can build whan what life was like in our closed environment and what it need to be in the demanding,

agile jeremy that has been discussed here today, i see the opportunity of transition being just that. so, where you could redefine, i'll say, the value proposition in a way that might be hindered by the past, and i mean that in a good way. this success of the past can sometimes keep you from making the next innovation. i'll go back to the audience and say that sometimes perhaps -- this is why betty and i are working close toward -- we may not have been as open the commercial application as we had been in the past or the commercial solution or the academic engage independent a way i know we are now. so i see those opportunities coming. quite frankly issue think it's the necessity of the mission that's going to drive us forward. there's demand signal and, let's face it, adversary signal that commands we make these changes. so i see the transition as

nothing but an opportunity. >> this is an important topic so i want to go down the road here starting with general stewart, if you can touch on this for your organizations as well. people who are watching, listening to this today, are think can about what the leadership of your agencies are thinking about no just in the next 12 months, transition into a inside administration but the come can decades. >> i talk about the great challenges. we all know the great challenges. can talk about the shrinking budget. we all know about that ump if i could give maybe two things i would love to know from the next administration, first thing is, a bit of advice. be ready nor world as it,-not the way you's like it to be. it is -- while you may be aspirational in what you's like the world and how we enter act

as powers -- interact as powers we're in a state now, and you have to be ready to deal with that state. >> so putin says you're a good guy you have to be wary of that? >> he said i'm a good guy. but suppose you said that about others but i try not to follow it. but be ready for the world as it is. and then help me understand what most important for the next administration. if it's all about daesh, that's fine. we can re-organize for daesh, but there oar threats and challenges in the the world. and help me understand what the most important parts-and then stick with those priorities. make the big things the main things the main things things tt distracted and i can organize our agency to immediate the requirements so a long as i understand the needs and where our interests lies and ready to

deal the world as it is, not the way i'd like to it be. >> general rogers, as you talk about your agency could you also address the issue of the proposal separate the nsa job from cybercome? that will be a decision before you leave or this administration leaves. >> as we look to hurt for me, what i want to understand from the incoming team is tell me what your expectations are, what your priorities are, what you value ex-insayings you're countering on to generate and help inform your policies and priorities. >> what i would want to attempt to convey to them is, the rate of change for all of us is so high these days, is new people come back in the government with a new team you can't assume because it was this way when is was last in government, it's the same way it is now. so one of my desires would be let me walk you through what our strengths and capables are and where you can have strong expectations and where you need

to be more realistic, give you a sense for the challenges see in coming in terms of ability to generate insights you're look path and you feel you need to meet the priorities, in terms of the basic struck fewer for us right now. i'm both the commander of the cyber command, and i'm also the director of the nsa, the intelligence leader, running a large intelligence organization, and i've been very public about things. believe in the long run the right thing is to keep these two aligned but to separate them. as cyber chant obtain more capacity and ability, the demand on signber command's time and resources and capability just continues to grow. you've need two people full-time folk cussed but need t >> will that happen before this administration runs rickshaw? >> i don't know. >> you have been through this transition, what isg

going on? political the cia nocturnalre a quack. >> we're watching the presidential election. [laughter]lligence. that is the plan. admin but with those administration changes so briefinghave the material where we can tell them where they are with clandestine collection and covert action.stration to know what that is but what i am concerned about it is that the helm is the

epitome of what it should be it is the icon unintelligent community and that concerns us all. with that orchestration of the community but at the same time allow us with our responsibilities. some of that departure it is concerning for me. doing that to the director of national intelligence.p >> will you stay on quick. >> i have a contract with this president and the next president and my wife. >> in that order? [laughter]

my wife and a president and the next president. [laughter] >> i have the best job in the world. why not?ul it is a tremendous offer to have the honor i cannot think of a better job is my last job in government is a good feeling and waiting senate confirmation. [laughter]job for a while. >> i am stuck in a dead end job laugh laugh. [applause]portions of my i would like to give my job to a co-director by wouldt not get so lucky but with uh transition briefing project since march because given the scope and the new people

whether u.s. attorney's four presidential appointees or the defense department we want to make sure they endorsed the and the threats as they see them. most people who come to understand just how broad the national security responsibilities all are and what that can bring to the intelligence gathering and threat mitigation is extraordinary we need to communicate that in a good way. >> i'm going to init up to questions now. we have a little bit extra time. want to start the q & a with director sapp and cardillo. pouf biggs is the gap between information technology personal specialists and that you have and how many you need. maybe you can each take a crack at that. >> i'd rather follow you. okay.

how large is it? too large. let me tell you what we're doing about it. one thing we have evolved is we have come to understand that the way we've built systems in the past, developed applications, the we way have brought -- not agile, not responsive enough and not tombly. so we're short. -- shortening the cycle by creating the ability with our operational capability. we call them rapid feedback teams. small groups of dedicated analysts. i.t. specialist, dat scientists, computer programmers that work on a problem set. so an intelligence outcome. and as they're working on that technical capability they're getting the immediate feedback from the analysts about what is working and what is not. so that's become a quick turn back into the application. we're doing that at the

unclassified level, and we're more and more being fouled because some of the demand signals. like the president's -- the work in arctic we releasessed but doing at the classified level, too the question is how quickly can we scale that from the small attempts the large teams and some it a components of the budget but we're doing it as quickly as we can. >> we don't do data science. we do scientists, but when you talk i.t., the -- lots of data from space so the ground problem is tough. we have to do a lot of ground processing to make that data make sense to analysts. ey used to halve our oregon i.t. and processing capable because it wasn't out there. now it is. the commercial has caught up with and surpasses what we need. so we're doing more from

building our own and developing our own to actually buying commercially available service so we other would rather but our money into the payload capabilities. and the e the specific algorithms. the computer power is there for us to buy and that is a commercial service we can take full at advantage of and will take advantage of in the future. >> general surety there have been serious allegations that they're delivering plately skewed also. what is the i. t. leadership doing to assure leaders are not signaling what analysis is to be produced? >> okay. this is my first questioning last year.

i'm not going to comment -- suppliesingly, -- so many folks about either comment on the investigation or take action against the individuals that if the allegation is brought against them, before the investigation has been done. and working my tail off to not do that. having said that, we have put in place a number of things to look at analytic integrity across the enterprise. we have revised our training effort to do the basic analytic training for the entire work force. it will take us a while to get there.

we are doing product line reviews and revamping our training so we are doing the thing thatwith will strengthen our analytic trade craft over the next several years, then the third thing i'll comment on is how --ing it has been for know watch the entire intelligence community, the defense intelligence enterprise, subjected to the idea that across the enterprise we're not able to render judgments without being influenced by policy or politics. so even if the allegation proves to be true, in this one case, it is not universally so. we've got great young men andwoman who are working theirtails off today to deliver the best insight is from the data they receive and absolutely

ininfluenced by politics and or policy and those who have an inclination they know the answer before the question has even been asked. we got -- [applause] -- we'll continue to work on tradecraft, continue to provide opportunities for our analysts s and in the field their judgments are not valued. to ombudsmen and we'll get better as a result thereof this process. >> director brennan, can you expand on how the intelligence sharing relationships with both traditional and nontraditional foreign partners will need to progress to counter future threats, whether they be isis or some foreign state actor. >> well, think we have seen over the last several decade an expansion of the intelligence relationships. liaison partnerships around the globe. in some respects with the threat frommed a kyle -- al qaeda and

isil there are even broader attempts to bring in other country services, intelligence security services because the isil, daesh, phenomenon, does affect a much broader swath of the globe than al qaeda did. so there's keen interest in the part of a lot of countries and so when you look at our interaction with russia, even though we have lot of differences in terms of policy and discussions that are ongoing, there is a -- an interest on the part of the united states and russia to work together closely on the counterterrorism front. same thing with china and other countries. so whether or not it's tourism, proliferation, organized crime, instability, there are a lot of reasons for governments to be able to work closely together and the more interaction there is among intelligence and security services i think there's better opportunity and more potential for governments

to have a shared appreciation of what the landscape looks like as well as what the options are that we can collectively pursue. so, i do see the growth of the liaison front being something that is part of our profession and that's why i include our liaison relationships among our five core mission areas. >> just picking up off the broader theme, several questions from the audience on sir syria. you have described this as perhaps the most difficult challenge you faced personally in your career. one of the questions here is, what is the biggest intelligence challenge in trying to deal with syria? is there a plan to stablize the problems? >> well, syria is the most complicatessed issue i have faced because there's so many internal actors and external

actors involved as well as inherent tensions among the goals and with our partners. so, what i see happening in syria, obviously, is almost systemic of the challenges we face in the region where their at lo's animosityies between groups and weaknesses in terms of governments abilities to address security challenges domestically. a lot of very weak institutions of governance through the middle east, south asia, africa, that allow these terrorist organizations, extremist grews to grow and develop because of the disenfranchisement of so many parts of society. so, even though we are able to reverse some of the battlefield excesses of icele and syria and iraq, i think that the challenges that a lot of those

government ins in the region will be facing in terms of political rear forms, economic reforms, social, religious tensions, second sectarian conflict. this is much nor sim county of the landscape overall. >> director comey, a number of questions on this front, too. do you thing islamic leaders and organizations -- what responsibility too you think islamic leaders and organizations have in stemming radicalization inside the united states and what is the fbi doing to help facilitate that? >> the same responsibility as leaders, as parents, as teachers, as any other group might 1/2 trying to keep young people, troubled people, from moving in a direction that's going lead to death destruction, and the good news is they feel there's no muslim way feel about your children or christian way to feel about your children or jew wish way to feel about your children. we all feel the same way and our interests are aligned which

leads to very productive relationships. people do not want young people in communities of any sort going in a direction that's going lead their death or the death of innocent people, and so it's one of the reasons we have been so keen not to let public discourse, which is often messy in a democracy, and wonderful, chill those relationships because we need each other. we need the help from those communities and they need our help. they need information from us. things to look for from us. the good news is, it's in a pretty darn good place. >> this is an audience participation as well as the panel participation. races your hand if you have had personal information stolen over the internet. all six of you. nobody? okay. now, briefly explain their position on ending encryption. >> want to take a shot?

>> i love strong encryption. i love end to end encryption. joest, if have instagram constant with nine followers, all immediate relatives and one serious boyfriends of my daughter itch don't want anybody looking at my stuff. don't want anybody looking at my banking information, my health care information. it's a huge part of the bureau's amt ability to protection the american people i love encryption. i also care deeply about public safety and those are crashing into each other, and what i mean when i say we need to have an adult conversation is we need stop demon nicing each other, stop saying it's impossible, you want to destroy this or that. and sit down and say, our values are in conflict that we all share. what could we do? what could be do? and is there a piece of this problem we can start with and see if there isn't a way to accommodate those two values? my great frustration is people don't realize that absolute privacy has never been a feature

of the american life. the bar gab our found issues struck was your stuff is private unless the people of the united states need to see and if oversight, demonstrations of probable cause and warrant, they can see it. we're moving to a place where we are going to a place -- a lot of places we are already there --y huge swaths or of lives are private but there's significant cost for that phenomenon a public safety perspective. want the american people to either say that's a great idea-want to be absolutely private, or not. we need figure out what to do about that to reconcile to opt nice the two values but can't be about bumper stickers or twitter, tweets, demonizing. we have to recognize we share values and figure out what we want to do about it. >> i would echo jim's comments here ump i've always been struck by -- at its heart america is a state of can do, and you can't

bet to can do and can't innovate if you can't even have a conversation. and the real estate environment we found offers for a variety of rope wes find ourselves in today, this has become such a charged emotional issue that we're not really having the die explosion -- dialogue of what is possible. do -- gee don't have to be constantly yelling at each. my first comment. lots of things we can do teaming with each other at a much lower level, smart people can sit down and say, what's in the realm of the possible. think in the end we'll have two conversations. one conversation is what could we do? that's a very technical, engineering, what's in the realm of a legal framework? the second question that its important part of the conversation is what should we do? and those are two related but very different conversations,

and we need to have both of them here. ask yourselves what could be do? and perhaps also, as a nation, we need to sit down and talk about what should we do? because there is this conflict and we have to knowledge there's tension, this tension between two fundamental imperatives for us as a nation and we as citizens need to decide what is that right balance. >> thank you. i'm not sure who might want to answer this. how do you see the addition of big data and artificial intelligence augmentation of analysis as opposed to trying to replace analysis? the i cri needs intelligence -- how do you see your agencies being able to create fundamental change together to better the i.c. as a whole? >> if i could -- this is for us, big data is for us.

it's the heart for us. so as we look at the problem, this it not a binary solution. it's either human analysis or artificial intelligence. the thing i'm interested in, in artificial intelligence, and machine learning, is that helps you get to steal to address global problems. at the same time you have to ask yourself, how does that fit and where is the human dynamic in this? i see that in our foreign intelligence mission that this is particularly significant for news the area of cyber defense. because if you can't get to some level of everyone or machine learning just were the volume of activity you're trying to understand win you're trying to defend networks from activity of concern, if you can't get to scale your always behind the power curve and you can throw all the manpower you want against the challenges of information assurance and cyber defense you're not going to

humanize your work force. it's got to be some combination of the two. >> we have joined -- we're joining the club that might just described because we come from an era in which our access was quite limited and you could arguably attempt the human centered approach to answer questions. we're long past that now. and every day our data is larger and larger. i think most of our solutions down the road -- not that we won't continue to rely on betty and scienceties to create wizardry in pace, will be on the ground he we use the data, model it, print, connect it, bit the way, this -- thank you for bring upping the dni and jim clapper. we're all now part of the eyesight team, and through his and stephanie's strong

encouragement, of course, but quite frankly we're already seeing the benefits of it because our data is now being exposed in ways it never could before, and if we just had humans going after it, it would just be confusing. so it's the algorithms that betty was talking about that will solve it. >> i'll just pile on. we built something called sent sentient which is a learning ground machine that we set up initially in a lab environment and is now operation, and that got more visit for more v.i.p.es across the intel and the dod community that any system we have ever built. that is the only way, again, a ground system that learns based on input from the analysts and keeps pace at machine speed.

the only way he'll get after fleeting targets to have that machine work for us and not have people have to do somethings that again people just don't move at those kinds of speeds. so that's crate control. >> clapper said the nro is building 27 of -- -- he said most of them are in the green but there are exceptions. how many are not in at the green and are the primary problems cost, schedule or both? ...

this is a question for both general stewart and brennan, do we have sufficient military analyst an int as well as trade craft opposed by russia and china specifically on russia with a very close range intercept over the black sea on wednesday this is a uh series of potentially dangerous incenses. how should a more generalcent pt proceed through the russian armed forces quick. >> the. [laughter] know we don't have enough. that was the only game in town. idea other challenges where at the threshold and now we're faced with a russian threats i ran and north

korea and a whole host of channels. so now we have that analytic effort. so we have not grown that analytic work force we have just grown the problems against the analytic workforce so it probably will never be enough so that is why the expansion of the big data analytics. but there is still that human dimension. i'm not sure the machines can never truly tell us what we n all means. but with regards to russian activity lately, soviet russia, russia 21st century we are always going to view them as a great power and and and a great

power will compete with other great powers sometimes they will plug into each other where interest collidenorr and that will be probably more normal than the exception now she can clean up everything i just said laugh laugh. >> the answer is not always more. more people or money we need to make sure we are workingto as effectively and efficiently as possible. that is what a lot of us are doing to make them more efficient but how the analytic engine will help on parts of the mission as well and with those tools we have to bring to bear to see that evolution in my career when

we started we did not have a personal computer we had a typewriter and i had to show correlations we are heading inevitably to a world where artificial intelligence is in our midst. there are challenges and issues there as he think ofes the framework to be put to a in place with the tools and the expertise for gaya seen the great impact of the data science because we are overwhelmed that is collected by intelligence capabilities that it is just overwhelming and how do make sense of that? that is the challenge. >> with a couple of related questions, to what extent is that analysis and collection

aligned with threats of global warming? and specifically concerned about how u.s. intelligence community has a strategic issue as it becomes open to navigation explication and if we are working together with our partners to mitigate the possibility of future russian aggression. >> closer than we ever have been before in this particular case we don't do any analysis of the zero why that of the effects of the rising temperatures or the additional access to the arctic region. so beyond the arctic circle to direct us to work with the national science foundation with the data

center that did not exist before for both alaska and the arctic of course, we did not deliver that to a secure facility but pleaded of the world wide web so that is ready office of science and technology academic institutions and commercial partners but that is a new area but you get to the point it is now in all of our interest because that access creates more than the environmental issue. obviously human terrain issue and opportunity for some of those bombs in the road where the interest can overlap whether a natural resource like in the south china sea you can see that scaling in the arctic or if it is an ownership issue. so it is the role to frame

the pitcher to warn the policy makers what their options are. >> we will end with one last question. it has been said you need members to go into the private sector for experiences in cyberto bring that back into the icy however some of that has done this the risk no dedicated pathway back into the community for those intelligence officers. wed to suggest somebody with experience and no private sector do to get back into continue serving greg. >> i want to go first.button ths go to the website and click, engage it is an avenue of what you just described.prescrit

we have positions available where we will take on industry partners as a government or as a complete if you have government experience and likewise we have talent available we will send out to industry because we want the same experiences has been available for about four months ended has spiderwebs. so either we are advertising incorrectly but give us the chance.. we're trying to do exactly what you just said. >> on the and this a side one of the tenets it is people and that people peace we have to create a constructs people can work with us and then come back and then those in the

private sector don't have training but insights or knowledge. so particularly for that scenario you just highlighted, you are seeing more and more of that structure. >> we hire from everywhere. we have folks who work for industry that people could then for a while to get that government experience then they go back to industry so i think that happens all the time. >> i went out and then i saw was invaluable to learn about the private sector to understand the challenges that we have for not all that dissimilar from the

private sector whether a charterhouse or it was very educational and in my ending for me. we have internship programs and as we get to issues we try to resolve security and privacy civil liberties there will be an unprecedented need for partnership between the public and private sector to help to secure and ensure prosperity of that digital environment that is privately owned and operated so that needs to be the wave of the future. hearing that we can set the path. >> thanks to all the up analyst and your interest and we will wrap it up. [applause]

>> there have been several memoirs written a people's perspective i thought might be important to add mine but as my son says there is a lot written and said about

me some of it is true some of it is not true in the wanted them to get my perspective of the events that shaped me and affected their lives as well. of studying abroad. go to book tv for the complete schedule. >> congressman greg walden spoke . .