friday the national association of secretaries that will be for the winter conference the participants are expected outline how emergency situations like bomb threats, natural disasters and ããyou can watch this live starting at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span our free mobile app and online at c-span.org.

former democratic ããtulsi gabbard testified her confirmation hearing before the senate intelligence committee, 2022 she switched from democrat to independent and last year changed party affiliation again to republican. during the course of the

hearing she was questioned about tricks she took to syria and lebanon while in congress is is just under three hours.

>> ladies and gentlemen, welcome. before we get underway today i would like to take a brief moment to recognize the terrible loss of lives that occurred a few miles away from here lastnight, our hearts and prayers are with the family and friends who lost loved ones last night as well as the brave first responders who are still on the scene. i would like to take i would like to ask everyone to join us in a moment of silent prayer and reflection for the souls

lost. thank you. next, i want to remind everyone in attendance that while you are all welcome to observe today's hearing i will not allow or tolerate disruptions from the audience. audience members may not verbally or physically distract from the hearing including by shouting, standing, raising signs or making gestures that block the view of other members of the audience are the cameras for those watching on television or online. anyone who does so will be removed immediately by the police and ban from returning. welcome everyone to this hearing on president trumps nomination of tulsi gabbard to be the director of national intelligence. welcome to the senate intelligence committee. i also want to welcome your family in attendance today including your husband abraham, your mother carol, and your

sister. i also want to acknowledge some very special friends of yours. dakota myers and pat payne. those metal of honor recipients, on behalf of a grateful nation i extend my deepest thanks to you and the heroes with whom you served. [applause] also note that our next attorney general pam bondi is joining us apparently she didn't have enough fun at her own hearing. welcome and congratulations. finally, senator joni ernst and former senator and chairman of this committee richard burr will introduce miss gabbard shortly. it's fair to say that miss

gabbard's nomination has gathered a bit more attention than most companies before this committee that i want to stress that miss gabbard has been and will be treated with the exact same respect, consideration, and professionalism that we extended to every nominee. no more, no less. no better, no worse. that's how we treated cia director john radcliffe just two weeks ago and how we treated the united nominees like apple hands and dan coats in the past. for instance, miss gabbard has conducted dozens of office meetings with senators just completed the committee standard questionnaire she has answered 247 questions in writing. this is all in keeping with the committee's customs precedents and. before address the important work i had at the dni, please

also let me make two observation about some of the accusations about miss gabbard. first, i'm dismayed by the attacks on miss gabbard's patriotism and loyalty tito our country. for instance, hillary clinton has smeared miss gabbard calling her an asset of a foreign t nation. let me remind everyone that miss gabbard has served in our army for more than two decades. she has multiple combat tours and she still wears the uniform to this day. she has undergone five fbi background checks, i spent more than two hours last week reviewing the latest putting eyes on more than 300 pages. it's clean as a whistle. it's fine that we have differences of opinions on policies and nprograms, i suspect some of my republican colleagues might mydisagree wit some of miss gabbard's vote in

the house of representatives. just as i suspect some of my democratic colleagues might criticize miss gabbard statements and actions, since she saw the light and left the democratic party. but i sincerely hope that no one today will impugn miss gabbard's patriotism and integrity. second, i can only laugh that some critics who say that miss gabbard has unconventional views, no doubt she has some unconventional views about her criticism of barack obama regime change interventions in egypt and libya. but guess what, i opposed the disastrous intervention in egypt and libya as well. ãwas a longtime american partner and egypt was linchpin of our security system in the middle east.

qaddafi had been scared straight after we toppled the delavan and had on same turnover weapons of mass destruction cooperated against terrorists in return we lifted sanctions and establish diplomatic ties. president obama intervened to topple both regimes and what came next, the muslim brotherhood in egypt and dangerous chaos and libya to this day. no one ever mistook the bark or qaddafi as little sisters of the poor but let's not kid ourselves, the world is a dangerous place, not a church picnic. gabbard understands this which is why she also saw the problem with regime change interventions in these places. vast number of governments throughout history and still today are not democratic step we may wish it were different and can work to improve it but that's the way the world is. if we only befriended nations

that shared our system of government and social and cultural asensibilities, we wouldn't have many friends. in a fallen world we have to take our friends where we find them. no question, stable democracies make the most stable friends but what matters in the end is less whether our country is democratic or nondemocratic and more swhether the country as pro-american or anti-american. i will confess that those views may be somewhat unconventional but look at where conventional thinking has got us. maybe washington could use a little more unconventional thinking.and i'm sure that the office of the director of national intelligence could use more unconventional mthinking. miss gabbard i submit that if confirmed, the measure of your success will largely depend on whether you can return the old dni to its original size, scope, animation.

and congress created the old dni we intended to put one office in charge to manage the different agencies of the intelligence community. congress intended the old dni to be very lean organization that would use small staffs to execute specific task congress in no way wanted her unruly bureaucracy layered on top of an ready bureaucratic intelligence community. unfortunately 20 years later that's exactly what the odni has become. incredibly the odni has is now larger than any agencies it was established to manage. and has 15 offices and centers which have many subunits within m. the odni staff is measured in the thousands when it should be measures and dozens or maybe a few hundred. i promise that is going to change. i intend to get personnel at the odni back to their home

agencies doing real intelligence work, not bureaucratic makework. i also expect to cap the size of the odni, miss gabbard, if confirmed i hope you will be a partner in these vital efforts. another example of ããwhat's come to be known in the intelligence community as dni taxes. the odni shifting and directing funds ndaway from the intelligence community's core mission to the whims and fantasies of any particular dni, that practice, which seems to have grown and run rampant under doing ohanian is also going to stop. if confirmed, you have a lot of work ahead of you. and as chairman of the committee i'm committed to ensuring that we see it all the way through. at this moment i will now

recognize senator risch for a brief statement. >> thank you very much mr. chairman i appreciate that and i want to thank miss gabbard for meeting with me and having the candid conversation we did on the issues. unfortunately i have to chair ã ãwe have our first meeting today on line influence of china here at home and abroad so i'm not going to be able to stay for the hearing. not to get a chance to ask questions, however, we are going to have a closed session immediately following the questions i have trespassed on the the security of the country and as a result of that, they need to be done in a classified setting in any event, so if i beg indulgence to be excused to preside over the other committee. good luck, i know you will do well. >> you are excused. [laughter] >> i was going to leave. >> i will now recognize the vice chairman senator warner for his opening remarks.nk>> thank you mr. chairman.

i've spent most of the morning at the national airport and i know senator moran was there last night, it's a horrible tragedy. the victims families are still being notified. for those of us who live in this region, it's always kind of complicated we've got virginia, dc, maryland, and a host of local jurisdictions but last night when this tragedy took place, and i happen to be driving by the national way home and saw all the first responders rushing to the scene. people came from as far away as baltimore, fairfax county, we had dod and federal officials and the first responders always as always they ran towards the tragedy.there will be a time to figure out how what happened and how we rectify it but today with thoughts and prayers ought to be with the families and thanking our first responders.

miss gabbard, welcome and congratulations on your nomination to be the next director of national intelligence. i would like to begin by thanking you for your decades of public service both in uniform and as a member of congress from hawaii i applaud your continuing commitment to serve, should you be tconfirme the president has nominated you to be director of national intelligence most folks probably don't understand the importance of this position if confirmed you would lead 18 agencies i see you also serve as the principal advisor to the president national security council and the homeland security council for all intelligence matters related to national security. and in this role you'll be responsible for over $100 billion between the national

intelligence program and the military intelligence, the nip as we call them here. exposition of great importance and significance to our national security, created after one of our worst national security failures, 9/11.for that reason, when congress established this position, thanks in large part to our colleagues ããit mandated in law , that any individual nominated for this position must have "extensive national security efficacy's ". i appreciate you taking the time to meet with me. as i noted in that office before and after, i continue to have significant concerns about your judgment and your qualifications to meet icthe standards. first as i noted previously, the dni was created in part to make sure we had appropriate

intelligence sharing which prior to 9/11 obviously didn't happen. the mission also is to not only share information between icu but also with our allies. there is no legal requirement that our allies share intelligence with us. it's all predicated on trust. trust that our allies will protect each other's secrets, it appears to me you have repeatedly excused our adversaries worst actions. instead, often blame them on the united states and those very allies. he blamed knadle for russia's 2022 invasion of ukraine. you rejected the conclusion that asad used chemical weapons in syria, despite it being the anonymous assessment of the ben trump administrations dod state department and i see, as well as the assessment of our european allies. instead, he blamed the united states for supporting terrorist

groups in syria. i don't know if your intent in making those statements was to defend those dictators or if you are simply unaware of the intelligence and how your statements would be perceived, in either case, it raises serious questions about your judgment. it also leads me to question whether you could develop a trust necessary to give our allies confidence that they could share the most sensitive intelligence with us make no mistake about it, if they stop sharing that intelligence united states would be less safe we've seen it as recently as this past year because of the strong intelligence sharing between united states and austria countless lives were saved by disrupting the terrorist attack i ngwas going take waste. second, you been publicly

outspoken in your praise and defense of edward snowden. someone who betrayed the trust of our nation and jeopardize the security of our country. the truth is, the vast majority of the information he stole and leapt before running off to china and russia had nothing to do with americans privacy. and compromise our most important sources and methods in many ways we are still paying a price for that and i believe that edward snowden's action put our men and women in uniform in places like iraq and afghanistan at recipes that you celebrated his quote, brave whistleblower and actually put forward legislation asking for his part in. furthermore, given the opportunity to clarify your position in prehearing questions you declined. instead you express them "the dni has no role in determining whether or not edward snowden

is old lawful supporter. that is troubling to me in so many ways. not only do you think that someone who divulge secrets and then ran off to russia should be celebrated as brave but you don't seem to understand the dni's role in determining whistleblowers. determinations. in fact, the dni has a significant role in transmitting lawful whistleblower complaints for the committee. i would have serious concerns about confirming someone who cannot distinguish between complaints that are made lawfully and those that are made not. in the statute it says the job of the dni is to protect intelligence sources and methods from unauthorized

disclosures. what message what it sent to have a dni but celebrates the work of a member of oic or contractor that was on their own mission to decide what's appropriate to leak. i don't understand. third, until recently you had clear and consistent record of opposing fisa 702 members on the committee already understand how important this is but for folks who don't, this law is critical to our national security cstop literally, 60% on average what goes into the president's daily brief, what he will read each day and assessing what's going on in the world, comes from this important piece of law that allows us to seek out those foreigners abroad for coverage. it help prevent terrorist attacks helps prevent foreign

cyber attacks help on a topic that a lot of folks are looking at, retinal trafficking. many in this congress and many of the committee have tried to reform this legislation to better balance security and civil liberties. however, you have consistently gone further and not only did you go against reauthorizing 702 you actually introduce legislation to fully repeal the whole thing. calling it "a blatant disregard for our fourth amendment constitutional rights. i understand that since you been nominated dni youth had expressed a change of heart i think that's well what i have to tell you is i try to make in my job interviews i try to make my judgment on whether you should be confirmed i think i don't find your change of heart

credible. because the world today is more complex and dangerous athan ev before. we need serious people with sufficient experience to be able to navigate that complexity. i hope you use this opportunity to address my concerns and all the members of this committee i your service and i'm looking forward to a thorough discussion thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. vice chairman. we welcome back senator richard farrar the former chairman of this committee who has emerged from retirement to introduce miss gabbard, he still seems unable to find a pair of socks. [laughter] nonetheless, we say thank you and welcome you back. >> some things are very predictable. i want to thank you for allowing me to join you today to provide my thoughts and support on behalf of tulsi gabbard's nomination to be

director of national intelligence stop this is my first visit back to the senate slightly over two years. permit me to say, from this side of the desk you're not as intimidating as i thought when i was on your side of the dice. when i was chairman of this committee senator warren and i stuck to a single refrain with our staff. follow the facts wherever they lead. today an anonymous person or group launching a campaign using rumors as sources and accusations as fact can drive the outcome of the election and public opinion. i know it to be true, remember i sat in your chair for the russia investigation where we found much of influence to be the result of fictitious narratives driven by russia. some of you might be wondering why do i support tulsi gabbard

and why am i here to introduce her as a nominee, i've experienced firsthand a coordinated attempt to influence this nominees support in the united states senate and with the american people. i was contacted by several national journalists shortly after the president nominated tulsi asking me to confirm one of the many rumors circulating about this company. i assured the rumors shared with me were simply not true. this narrative was shared from one journalist to the next journalist to the next journalist i assume they ran out of journalists. this was a coordinated effort to kill this nomination. advise and consent has the responsibility of united states senate i truly believe each member takes it seriously all members of this committee were offered the opportunity for individual meetings with tulsi

gabbard don't like it if you chose not to meet with verizon you. i done my homework, here are the facts, tulsi gabbard's historic life began at birth. she's the first american samoan born member of congress, period. she graduated from hawaii pacific diversity with a degree in business ããconcentration international business. 2002 at age 21 tulsi became the youngest woman america ever elected as a state representative. that was not enough in 2003 she joined the hawaii national guard when deployed, in a reelection her opponent raised the issue, could you serve the people that elected if in fact you were deployed? what did she do? she withdrew from her reelection campaign in order to

continue to serve our country. in the war on terror it would not be the first or the last time she put her country about her career. after multiple deployments and serving on the hawaii city council she was elected to the united states house of representatives where she served four terms. throughout her political career she maintained military service either in the national guard or army reserve. media stories an anonymous rumors have questioned her qualifications and patriotism and whether she be trusted ãã

winston churchill once said, those that neverchange their minds , never change anything. she served her city, her state, or country, while winning the support of the people she represented. she's fought in war, and yes she has tried to stop yours. at the ripe age of 43 she has the life experiences that match or exceed most members of congress. tulsi was serving in uniform for three years before some of us here today voted to create a director of national intelligence. chairman con, vice chairman warner, members of the committee, it's my honor to support and introduce to the

committee lieutenant colonel tulsi gabbard, thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you senator odni now our colleague senator joni ernst of iowa has taken time out of her busy schedule to be here today. >> thank you. good morning to my distinguished colleagues. i also do want to take a moment this morning to recognize the lives that were lost in the collision near dca last night. it is a truly y heartbreaking tragedy. my prayers are with the victims families and their loved ones. thank you. duty honor service. these are not just words, they

are principles that have guided lieutenant colonel gabbard. as a young enlisted soldier of the hawaii national guard, tulsi answered the call to duty upon her deployment to the middle east. from graduating at the top of her class, from the accelerated officer candidate school at the alabama military academy, the first woman to do so to serving as the youngest member of hawaii's legislature she upheld honor while breaking barriers both in uniform and in her civilian leadership roles. and today, lieutenant colonel gabbard demonstrates a commitment to service by sitting before this committee prepared to answer the nations call yet once again, this time as the next director of national intelligence.

tulsi and i share similar backgrounds. both to our nation and the communities. we've wore the same uniforms, serving in the army national guard and army reserve. leaving battalions and deploying to iraq and kuwait. we both had the privilege of serving in our state legislatures and in congress. representing the people who shaped our lives and our communities. tulsi exemplifies what it means to rise above partisanship. putting the needs of the american people over political division. she put her own life on the line in combat operation and now has set aside partisan difference as a former democrat member of congress to answer

the call to serve in a republican administration. the mainstream media has fought to paint their own picture of tulsi gabbard but let's talk about the real tulsi gabbard. the woman and the soldier who i've come to know and respect. and i've known tulsi for the past decade. relationships matter. in 2015, then congresswoman gabbard met my dear friend owen who was a dear friend of mine from iowa state university. l1 was a wounded special operations warrior. who embodies the resilience and strength of our military community. oh and was the subject of an attack in afghanistan.

after this attack or during this attack, owen was tossed into the dead piled on bleeding and excruciating pain cried out to his teammates, i'm not dead! thankfully his fellow warm fighter attended 201 but his fight was llong and hard including a stent at walter reed medical center. during this time owen met a fellow warrior and patriot congresswoman tulsi gabbard who became a friend and today they remain in touch. ellen prides himself on being a very good judge of character. and tulsi, he speaks volumes of your character.

one's final message to me before this hearing was, tulsi has maintained her integrity throughout her career, she is the same gal i met in 2015, she always makes time for our old broken warriors. colleagues, i will leave you with this. you know me, i trust tulsi gabbard. she will be honest with you. she will listen to your concerns. she will be receptive to your feedback. tulsi gabbard loves this country, affected by her willingness to put her life on the line to defendant. for over 20 years she's put on

before and checked her political views at the door. with one mission in mind, to protect and defend our great united states of america. tulsi, duty honor and service have marked your life, thank you for your extraordinary dedication to our nation, for embodying the values that make our military the best of the world. and stepping up to serve yet once again as president trumps director of national intelligence step relationships matter. i urge my colleagues to support this nomination stop my best wishes to you tulsi, and your family. god bless our country.

>> thank you senator ernst. i know that senator ernst has a busy schedule to include a hearing for dan driscoll the secretary of army dominique at the armed service committee. i'm sure senator burr has to go on a fishing trip or something. [laughter] we will excuse both senators from the witness table. miss gabbard before he moved to your opening statement is the of the committee to ask a series of questions to all nominees. first, do you swear or affirm to give this committee are full and truthful testimony. >> i do. >> second, do you agree to appear before the scommittee here or in other venues when invited? >> yes. >> if confirmed, you agree to send officials from your office to appear before the committee and d designated staff when

invited? >> yes. >> do you agree to provide documents or materials requested by the committee in order for it to carry out its oversight of actually the responsibilities. >> i do. >> will you ensure your office and staff provides such material to the committee when requested? >> yes. >> you agree to inform and fully briefed to the fullest extent possible all members of the committee of intelligence activities and covert actions rather than than the just the chairman and vice chairman. >> enqueue for those answers. we now welcome the opportunity finally to hear from you in your own words. >> thank you very much mr. chairman, dsbefore i begin, i t would like to start by offering my prayers and condolences to those who were killed in last night's s horrific crash. senator warner, senator moran, our condolences and prayers are with you and all of your

constituents. again, chairman continent, vice chairman warner, all the committee, it's an honor to be here before you today i appreciate the opportunity to meet with so many of you and address your questions and concerns before today's hearing. i know they have gone but i'm grateful to senators burr and ernst for their trust and confidence of taking time to join us here today. to my husband abraham, my family, friends, fellow veterans, metal of honor recipients and patriots, thank you for your love and support stop i'm honored and grateful to president trump for his trust and confidence in nominating me to serve our country as a director of national intelligence at a time when trust in the rtintelligenc community unfortunately is not an all-time low. chuck schumer admitted a few years ago, you take on the intelligence community they have six ways from sunday at getting back to you. for too long, faulty inadequate weapon eyes intelligence have led to costly failures in the undermining of our national security and god-given freedoms and titry to.

the most obvious example of one of these failures is our invasion of iraq based upon a totals application or failure of intelligence. this disastrous decision led to the deaths of tens of thousands of american soldiers millions of people in the middle east mass migration, destabilization and undermining of the security and stability of your allies in the rise of isis strengthening of al qaeda and other jihadist groups and strengthening iran, here are a few other examples. the american people elected donald trump as their president not once but twice and yet the fbi and intelligence agencies were politicized by falsely portraying him. title i of pfizer was used illegally to obtain a warrant to spy on trump campaign advisor carter page using a clinton campaign funded false dossier as evidence. by name campaign advisor tony

blinken was the impetus for the 51 former senior intelligence officials dismissing dr. biden's laptop as disinformation specifically to help biden when the election. former dni james klapper lied to this committee in 2013 denying the existence of programs that facilitated the mass collection of millions of americans phone and internet records, yet never held.under john brennan's leadership the cia abused its power to spy on congress to dodge oversight lied about doing it until he was caught and yet has never been held responsible. under biden the fbi used its power for political reasons to try to serve out catholics who attend traditional lot mass. labeling them as "radical traditionalist catholics". personally, just 24 hours after i criticize kamala harris and her nomination i was placed on a secret domestic terror watch

list called quiet skies. sadly, there are more examples. the bottom line is this. this must and. president trumps reelection is a clear mandate from the american people to break the cycle of failure and the weaponization on politicized nation of the intelligence community and began to restore trust in those who been charged with the critical task of securing our nation. i will do my very best to fulfill this mandate and bring leadership to the intelligence community with the laserlike focus on our essential mission. ensuring the safety security and freedom of the american people. as the president's principal intelligence advisor i will begin by leading by example, checking my own personal views of the door and acommitting to delivering intelligence collected and analyzed and reported without bias prejudice or political influence. i enlisted in the army because of the horrific terrorist attack on september 11 and

volunteered to deploy to iraq into a fibrous urban unit after nearly 22 years in uniform with three combat deployment middle east and africa i'm now lieutenant colonel in the u.s. army reserve i serve as a battalion commander of soldiers in oklahoma missouri and arkansas. i served in congress for eight years on the homeland security foreign affairs and armed services committees. it's my experience in the military and in the halls of congress that have given me a deep understanding of the complex challenges our nation faces in both roles engaging with world leaders and being privy to highly classified intelligence. i know firsthand how essential accurate and unbiased and timely intelligence is. the president, congress, and our war fighters. i also know the heavy cost of intelligence failures and abuses. senator collins, you led the

creation of odni, if confirmed i will bring my experience and fresh eyes to leading the intelligence community. in my day one priorities will be to assess the global threat environment identify where gaps in our intelligence exist, integrate intelligence on the moments, and freeze information sharing and on sure that unbiased a political objective collection and analysis to support the president and policymakers decision-making occurred. i will work to end the politicized nation of the intelligence community and ensure that there is a clear mission focus on the icy on its core mission of this unbiased apolitical collection and analysis of intelligence to secure our nation. i will work to rebuild trust through transparency and

ability. this is a national security imperative. i will work to assess and address efficiencies, redundancies and effectiveness across odni to ensure the focus is on the core mission of national security. my meetings i've had with many of you you express bipartisan frustration about recent intelligence failures as well as the lack of responsiveness to your request for information. whether it's a surprise october 7 hamas terrorist attack to the sudden takeover of syria by islamist extremists stop failures to identify the source of covid, and anomalous health incidences, uap drums and more. if confirmed oki look forward t working with you to address these issues. ensuring the safety security and freedom of the american people is a mandate of leadership that rises above partisan politics.have confirmed my commitment to the president to you and the

american people is this, i will do my very best to find the truth no matter where it leads and share that truth with president trump has advisors and you in congress dividing you with that unbiased timely and accurate intelligence as you make the tough decisions that will impact the safety security and freedom of the american people. before i close i want to warn the american people watching at home you may hear allies and smears in this hearing that will challenge my loyalty to and my love for our country. those who oppose my nomination and by that i'm loyal to something or someone other than god, my own conscience, and the constitution of the united states. accusing me of being trumps puppet, putin's puppet, besides puppet, motor use puppet not recognizing the absurdity of simultaneously being the puppet of five different puppet

masters. same tactic was used against president trump and failed. the american people elected president trump with a decisive victory and mandate for change. the fact is, what truly unsettles my political opponent is i refuse to be there puppet. i have no love for asad or gadhafi or any dictator, i just hate al qaeda i hate that we have leaders who cozy up to islamist extremists, minimizing them to so-called rebels as jake sullivan said to hillary clinton, "al qaeda is on our side in syria. syria is now controlled by an al qaeda offshoot hts led by islamist jihadist who danced in the streets on 9/11 and responsible for the killing of many american service members. democrat senators in the past resorted to anti-christian bigotry against some of president trumps judicial

nominees like amy coney barrett and ryan boucher. i condemn those actions of the democratic congress at the time as were linkages bigotry as early condemned all of us no matter the religion. unfortunately there are some democrat senators who still don't understand the principle of freedom of religion and article 6 of the constitution. "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the united states. unfortunately, they are once again using the religious bigotry card at this time trying to foment religious bigotry against hindus and hinduism. if anyone is sincerely interested in knowing more about my own personal spiritual path, hinduism, i welcome you to go to my account on x i will share more on this topic. if confirmed as director of national intelligence i will continue to live by the eioath that i have sworn, at least

eight times in my life. both in uniform and as a member of congress. i will support and defend our god-given freedoms enshrined in the constitution of the united states. i will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. thank you very much for your time, i look forward to the questions. >> a few reminders before we began our five-minute round of questioning a reminder to the audience i will not tolerate disruptions or disturbances, either in favor of or in opposition to miss gabbard. we all came to hear from miss gabbard not from you. two reminders to my colleagues we will have a five-minute round of questions, not 5 1/2, not six, five-minute round. we will also have a closed session after the hearing in which you will have another five-minute opportunity to ask questions. second, if any question as

senator alluded to begin to approach the line of classified material my staff will advise me and i will ask you to hold the question until we get to this 㦠>> i was under the understanding that in the open round because this is the only time the american people would be able to see this judgment you agreed certain members needed to ask the second round of questions in a public setting that would be available. >> as is our customer for member waits till the end of the opening round is a follow-up question we will commit the follow-up question. >>. >> if confirmed he will be entrusted with our nation's most important secrets, we are all entrusted with that information to serve the american people and keep our country safe. unfortunately, as you said in your opening statement we've seen too atmany instances in recent years the people who are trusted with my definition and went on to abuse and politicize the trust. in october 2020 more than 50 former intelligence officers

many of whom who still held top-secret clearance and wrote a letter invoking their credentials to make false claims about dr. biden's laptop the imblack 㦠>> yes mr. chairman, i do and it's an example of what needs to end and why the american elected president trump to bring about those necessary reforms. >> thank you. will you commit that nobody abuse this past position in this national security clearance in the future?>> aspects thank you. i want to be fair to my democratic colleagues such abuses are just a problem on the left, and 2020 president trumps former national security advisor john bolton published a book in which he revealed sensitive conversations with the president on national security matters including highly classified information he didn't set the book efor review and approval to ensure our national security secrets were protected.

do you agree john bolton's actions n'like whites undermine public trust? >> yes mr. chairman. >> will you commit that no one who so abuses is past position and risks exposure of classified information by publishing a book without submitting from review and getting approval before publication will hold a security clearance again ssor b trusted with maclassified information again? >> yes. >> let's move on to the topic of o dni reform i mentioned in my opening statement. congress originally envisioned the odni to be a small agency that reflects rather than replicates the 18 constituent agencies that make up our intelligence community. over the years, however, the odni has strayed from the vision that publicly boasts nearly 2000 people more than half of whom are not detailed from intelligence agency but rather, career odni bureaucrats they develop standards producing their own analysis. will you commit today to working with this committee to

restoring the odni to its original size and scope and unction. >> yes i look forward to working with you and the committee if confirmed assess the current ssstatus of who's working in the odni on the function they fulfill to make sure of its effectiveness and elevation of redundancies. >> do you support some of the policy proposals i mentioned in the opening statement about capping the size of the odni eliminating odni taxes returning employees back to home agencies to derail intelligence work i would forward to working with you as we assess where the odni needs to be in order to fulfill its core mission and function. >> in your preparation for this hearing and an important responsibility have you developed any thoughts that explains the mission and empire building that we've seen at the odni in recent years? >> yes i've had the opportunity

to review the history of the odni to speak to ambassador donte the first director of national intelligence as well as others who served in this position.i think there are a number of intervening factors to the creation of centers ãã not centers but offices like the recently eliminated office ddi i within odni and other are where i need to go in and assess the replication and duplication of responsibilities that exist elsewhere and some of the other intelligence elements that odni has oversight over. >> thank you. >> i will you'll back my time. >> thank you, that was a first. to be clear, at least in my views, i salute your service to our country. but i have serious doubts about your judgment and those are

some of the areas i want to pursue. first, until you are nominated by the president to be the dni you consistently praise the actions of edward snowden some i believe jeopardize the security of our nation and then thought that went to russia. even called edward snowden "a brave whistleblower. every dwmember of this committe supports the rights of legal whistleblowers. edward snowden's into whistleblower, in this case i'm a lot closer to the chairman's words where he said snowden is "an egotistical serial liar and trader who "deserves to rot in jail for the rest of his life". a simple yes or yeno question d you think do you still think edward snowden is brave?

>> mr. vice chairman, edward snowden broke the law, i do not agree with or support with all the information and intelligence he igreleased nor the way in which he did it. there would've been opportunities for him to come to you on this committee or seek out the ig to release that information. the fact is, he also even as he broke the law released information that exposed agree just illegal and unconstitutional programs that are happening within our government that led to serious reforms that congress took. >> chairman, i have five minutes. i take your answer, these are your quotes, brave, please join my bipartisan legislation calling for charges to be dropped against him. do you disagree the legislation was not appropriate? do believe he's brave or not?

>> once again senator, edward snowden broke the law. >> do we agree 㦠[multiple speakers] your words are still your brief yes or no. >> i'm making myself very clear step edward snowden broke the law he released information about the united states government illegal activity. >> man. >> if i may finish my thought. in this role that i've been nominated for if confirmed as director of national intelligence i will be responsible for protecting our nation secrets and i am for immediate steps i would take to prevent another snowden likely. >> mail, i would simply ask you again, i agree with tom cotton he's a traitor, for years until you got chosen by president trump have celebrated this guy as brave, you've called for him

to be parted for his charges to be dropped. i cannot imagine director of national intelligence that would say that kind of behavior is okay. how would we maintain the trust of the icm a contractors workforce how would we maintain the trust of our five eye partners. i find it t very troubling. i'm getting moved to 702. you had a long history of opposing it, many members of congress have but one things you actually have done is not formant but you actually say you wanted to repeal it. but now whether it's confirmation conversion or whatever you call it. .... on

to draw attention to the egregious civil liberty violations that were occurring at that time. cox i asked you a question please give me the courtesy of responding. you said the o reforms from any site me those question. >> causes a number of reforms cracks in the new law? all of you and your wisdom. >> my time is getting short. i've got to tell you after reforms were passed into law, in apriln of 24 you would on joe rogan's podcast in may. the bill is no law. you said quote this bill took an early bad problem made it many,

many times worse. again, in my mind this is a question of judgment. it's critical i preach at the pe conversion but i'm not sure you had such consistent position again i know my colleagues don't agree but rather than standing up to dictators like putin and assad, do 10 times amplifies talking point i do not understand how you can blame nato for this brutal invasion of ukraine. i'm willing assad used chemical weapons against its own people asked the question of american intelligence. you mentioned a lot about trust. once things i am so proud of this committee we follow through.

this committee some is viable work i do is we have bipartisan. we have worked to try to keep the intelligence committee and earn their trust earn the trust of the american people. but i respectfully, ma'am i just do not believe on the judgment credibility issues that this is the appropriate role that you take going forward think it was mr. chairman. mark center collins? let's think you mr. chairman. ms. gabbard edward snowden does stand out to have a particular grave harm to our national security by revealing top-secret information. including sensitive sources that's jeopardizing agents in the field. so, let me ask your question. if confirmed, would you support or recommend a pardon or any

kind of clemency for edward snowden? >> thank you for the question senator collins. if confirmed as the director of national intelligence, my responsibility would be to ensure the security of our nation secrets and would not take actions to advocate for or any actions related to snowden. quickly answers know is that correct? correct. parks in 2020 you introduce that whistleblowers act which would amend the espionage act to make it more difficult to prosecute individuals who reveal classified information in particular the bill would allow individuals to even top-secret information as long it's not done with the specific intent to

injure the united states or advantage any foreign nation. yorkville would also have created an affirmative defense of public disclosure of classified information was made for several reasons. one of lunch is to expose funds. i strongly oppose this legislation. which would hamper our ability to prosecute people to give our adversaries classified information. so let me ask you this, do you still support providing individuals who have access to top-secret informationth with te ability to make their own decisions regarding whether that information should be publicly disclosed? even though it disclosure may cause tremendous harm to our

country or our allies. ex- senator, we cannot and should not have individual vigilantes within the intelligence community how, where, when to expose her nation secrets. the intent of the legislation you pointed out, it was pointed toward ensuring due process for those in charge under the espionage act in a court of law. this is a law that's been abused in some cases. president obama charge more people under the espionage act when all other presidents combined. if confirmed as a director of national intelligence, my sole focus and goal will be our nation security which include securing our nation secrets. i would work to make sure we don't have any disclosures or

vigilantes taken it upon their ourselves. numerous legal paths feel they have concerns. look for to work with you in this committee making sure those protections are known by every single person in the workforce. an effectively implemented. >> so you do not support allowing individuals to make their own decision without authorization to disclose secret information? >> yes. >> i believe that the legal structure in place for those who have concerns to address them. as you know there has been speculation and the press you met with hezbollah a terrorist organization affiliated with tehran. have you ever knowingly met with

any members, leaders or affiliates of hezbollah? >> note and it's an absurd accusation.li let me ask you one quick question the short time we have left right with hamas, isis-k, the houthi, all the iranian proxies in syria iraq, yemen, and al qaeda all posing general resurgence in the middle east. with the i see on the threat of our safety we do not want him to call you back to his room after a terrorist attack. and ask how did the i see miss this great power competition, china, russia, definitely pose threats to our country. but the terrorist threat is

arguably the most imminent threat according to former fbi director chris wray. if confirmed what would be your strategy to re- focus the i see on the chairs threat to our country and to americans abroad. >> think it senator i agree with your assessment. this speaks to the need to exist. identifying the gaps in intelligence were able to get ahead of these threats instead of coming around after the fact and trying to assess we could have taken action to prevent it thank you. quick center widen? >> center widen? >> thank you very much mr. chairman. welcome ms. gabbard i'm going to try to get four questions in part i will be brief if you can reciprocate that we very much appreciated. were talking about section 702

the foreign intelligence and i believe it's critical d and i support additional reform to protect the privacy of law-abiding americans. in your written response to committee questions you wrote and i quote, warrants should generally be required for an agency undertake the query of section 702. is this your current position? >> i noted some circumstances there may be other options. a simple warrant requirement is ultimately going to be a policy decision that all of youec will make. all point to some few examples of excitement is short and you support a warrant. section 702 also involves a huge

loophole that was included recently that would allow the government to force anyone with access to a wi-fi router or cable box to participate in the warrantless of her surveillance program. do you support, as i do, eliminate this language? >> i'll have to look more into that and assess the impacts of the safeguards are come back to you and congress with reauthorization. >> it's a massiveonon loophole i hope to hear after you've looked at to be supportive of my efforts. let me turn now to the inspector general situation. in the present of the united states refused to fund inspector general for the intelligence community despite appropriations from congress? here is like a c yes or no. >> center, i do not know about the legal authority. and if confirmed look forward to

empowering our inspector general to fulfill the responsibility. >> good. congress either has the power of the purse or itt doesn't. you recognize independent obligation to follow the law that's a constructive answer. through each of the you support the biden administration department of justice policy restricting the collection of records you called the codification of those restrictions. we reconfirm that for me? i believe strongly in the that believes the free press. >> to protect journalists progress are not familiar it is a policy you called for the

codification of those records. going to accept or not changing her position. i appreciate it. you introduce legislation merck americans phones or apps include mechanism of their privacy technology. in your written responses to reconfirm opposition to the mandate is that still your position. question regards. >> backdoors lead down a dangerous path to be very helpful wrote your response whistleblowers must have clear to report concerns on authorized transmittal do you agree whistleblowers must have a clear path they do not need permission

from agencies to talk to us for death yes or no pickup center the answer is clearly yes but like a fate a few other options i would take if confirmed as director of national intelligence. number one victory to have a legalne constant within the community. making sure we enact security clearance are formed to limit access to our nation's top secret. make sure every single person in the workforce understand their rightsrc the legal channels to take which would include coming directly to you as members ofke congress. itll is also establishing direct call into myself should they choose to take that path. >> you support the declassification of the committee's full report on the cia torture program? i believe in transparency. i have not seen this so i cannot make an honest assessment for that answer. >> thank you.

gordon. >> welcome message gabbard. congratulations and thank you for your service. i hopean will take to heart the chairman's comments about the exploding bureaucracy. not on the government generally, but office of national intelligence. this a critical role is not made easier or effective bite such a large gun wielding bureaucracy. do you believe the president of the united states should get all of the lawfully collected intelligence that's available in order to inform his judgment as commander-in-chief? >> senator, not always the answer strong yes it is the director of national intelligence to make to the press has access to all the intelligence that he can make the best informed decisions for our country.

>> you will be the one actually briefing him on a daily basis, correct? >> the president's daily brief and we have heard 60% of it composed of information gleaned by collection under section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. i've heard your comments to others, you know i talked about the importance of getting dissenting views in front of the president so that we do not have groupthink. risk can be very dangerous particularly in the intelligence collection areas. i appreciate your agreeing that presenting the policy makers including the president with dissenting views is very important. are you aware overwhelmingly the courts have looked at 702 base

in the fourth70 amendment? and any potential war requirements overwhelmingly said the fourth amendment is not implicated by search of lawfully collected intelligence? >> i amm aware, yes senator. >> you agree with that? >> what i began to say as an answer to the previous question on this issue is number one, the decision about a warrant requirement will be yours to make not mine as director of national security. >> shall be the director of national intelligence. people will be wanting to hear from you about what we should do as policymakers. admittedly you're not going to be a policymaker. but you will certainly inform and, you do agree that held a warrant is not required correct question. >> yes senator i am aware off te court ruling. my commitment is to make sure we

polled the fourth amendment rights of americans to protect his unlawful seizure and search. the many different ways to do that the devil is in the details. there are examples of how even in situations under title worn a warrant is required to surveilled. >> title what is different i agree with you on that. >> from my point if i make. >> excuse me if that was misused in the case of carter page and basically an fbi lawyer lied in order to secure that warrant. >> which is why. >> what would be necessary to be shown to show probable cause to a judge in order to obtain a war? >> again, senator, that is not for me too say that's for you all to decide the attorney general to weigh in on. >> do you know what the elements of probable cause are whether that's practical and workable

solution? >> this is the center of the debate the high standard of probable cause required to get a warrant where this will continue to be a conversation again with the attorney general weighing in and all of you and congress making this policy decision. >> 's cia director, john ratcliffe said during his testimony before this committee he believes a warrant is not only required by law but is actually impractical. if you disagree with that or agree with that? >> i will be in a better position to make an assessment on the practical implications of this if confirmed as d and i put my commitment remains to uphold the constitution that americans amendment rights. >> where would the warrant be sought? would be in the foreign intelligence surveillance court or some other article three court? >> my understanding is former intelligence surveillance court. are you it held a warrant is not

required? >> i amth aware. >> thank you. >> thank you. thank you german. welcome. you travel to syria and lebanon and generally 2017. personally paid for that trip and his brother accompanied you to both lebanon and syria. the brothers have links to the syrian social nationalist party inan l.a. of hezbollah. 2008 the social nationalist party participated in the assassination of a former lebanese prime minister and assisted hezbollah in beirut to .when you to become of the links between the brothers and syrian social national question. >> senator, think of your your question. justst a point of clarificationi paid for my own expenses and travel on that trip. i was not awareri of any

accusations of these two lebanese americanss association until after the trip occurred. cook sets when it reimbursed? >> correct. i wanted to make sure there were note perceived conflicts of interest. i address the specific question to these lebanese americans would organize the trip they vehemently denied any associations with that group. >> there is not a great deal the public record about what you and syrian dictator al-assad discussed for so long in january of 2017. i think there's a great deal of interest from the american people about what was discussed in that meeting? so, what did you talk about and you chew press on things like issues of chemical weapons,

systematic torture and the killing of so many syrians? >> yes senator. upon returning from this trip i met with people like then nancy pelosiel, talk to them and answr about the trip quite frankly i was surprised there is known from the intelligence committee or state department reached outin or shod any interest whatsoever in my takeaways from that trip. i would've been very happy to have a conversation and give them a back brief. with former congressman who'd been there many times before you had met with assadwh before. a number of topics were covered and discussed into directly answer your question, yes i asked him tough questions about his own regime'sis actions. thech use of chemical weapons te brutal tactics being used against his own people. >> were you able to extract any concessions?

>> no ico did not expect too. but i felt these issues were important to address. >> according to your revised report, your third meeting in syria after meeting with assad and his wife was with, forgive me if i'm not pronouncing it correctly. in october 2011 speech warned the u.s. and europe we will prepare suicide bombers who were already in your countries if you bomb syria or lebanon. what was the goal or what did you accomplish by meeting with him? >> senator come before going on the trip and during my time in syria and lebanon i made it a point to me with different religious leaders of both muslim leaders as well as various christian and catholic leaders who were there in the region. i did that both in syria and in

lebanon to hear from them about what their concerns or thoughts were with regard to the war being raised at the time. >> real aware of his threats regarding suicide bombers the united states? >> i was not and had not heard that until today. >> who invented the people you met with on a trip to syria and lebanon? >> the itinerary was created by former congressman. hish, constituents who he had traveled with to syria and lebanon a number of times before. some of the individuals that i met with work looked at prior to the strip others came up during the trip that were unexpected. >> incomplete hindsight would you view this trip as good judgment? >> yes, senator. i believe leaders by the be in congress of the president of the united states can benefit greatly by going in engaging

boots on the ground learning, listening meeting directly with peopleit whether they be adversaries or friends. >> last question who do you blame, who is responsible for the war in ukraine? >> putin started the war in ukraine. >> and thank you. >> before your questions, which extend all of our condolences in particular to you for the loss of life of your fellow kansans last night our prayers are with all your people back home who've lost loved ones but. >> think it mr. chairman. so many people here throughout the halls of congress-kind expressing their condolences. i appreciate you sayingin this, and the setting just now. lieutenant colonel you listed iran and hamas and hezbollah in andnorth korea you also mention russia. but the only thing you said about russia and fully

explaining why it's a priority, is ending the war with russia. when you talk about russia, what are your fears or policy priorities beyond ending the war? how do you see russia as a threat to the united states? >> senator come if confirmed as the director of national intelligence and will be assessnt for me too where our intelligence gaps may exist. so that i can provide the president and all of you with the most accurate full picture of that threat assessment to directly answer your questions. i think it is a complex environment. remains a strategic competitor for there are a number of concerns that have to do with nuclear weapons as well as how the decisions and policies being made by this body by the president will impact her

own national security which is my foremost concern. >> i want to make certain that in no way does russia get a pass in either your mind or your heart. or in any policy recommendation you would make or not make. >> senator. i am offended by the question. my sole focus commitment and responsibilities about her own nation. our own security and the interest of the american people. in carrying out the responsibility as a director of national intelligence if confirmed no country group or individual will get a pass in my fulfilling that responsibility of providing that full intelligence picture so that you all can make the best informed policy decisions for the safety, security and freedom of the american people. you have my commitment to be completely objective unbiased and apolitical and i hope you

understand my commitment to our country'snd interests. >> i absolutely do. you've answered my question in the manner in which i wanted to hear that you will do this in an objective manner, provide the information necessary and are russia, if it is a threat you will tell as the cell and tells the details of that threat. >> yes senator. how would you restructure the national intelligence priority framework to better align with president trump's national security goals? >> center this is a discussion if confirmed i look forward to having with there president and his national security adviser. based on the threat assessment and based on the president's priorities. he hasdv spoken about a number f different priorities into her and partsof the world. i would work withan them on that national intelligence priority framework. it will serve as a foundation of the intelligence element under od and i. >> any e recommendations you haven't mind to make the president trump in that regard? >> going to make sure any

recommendations i make to the president are fullyma informed. from where i sit now i do not believe i can make those recommendations. i take that responsibility seriously we don't to shortchange him without first doing due diligence and work to make sure my recommendations are well-founded. >> how will you, lieutenant colonel as the dni if confirmed with the objectivity of political neutrality requirement to ensure your tongue the white house with a need too hear and not what they want to hear? a follow-up to that how we'll will youhandle conflicting intee reports from the various members of the intelligence w community and present a broad intelligence picture to the president? what's thank you for the question, senator. ies hope you have confidence iny ability to extract politics from what my role will be as director of national intelligence. something i've done from his 22 years now is wear a uniform both

serving in the national guard and the army reserve even while holding political office for there is a brick wall between the two i am fulfilled that obligation and uniform as i will as director of national intelligence if confirmed. i think the president, i note the president values hearing a lot of different views. i would make sure in the intelligence community's responsibilities the dissenting views are not only allowed, but encouraged. and where they present themselves too make sure the president and u.s. policymakers are aware you can make your best informed decision. >> would you agree with me bias and prejudice of it exists in a place exists both sides of an issue both partisan sides of this place called washington d.c. and the effort you will make is to make search and that all of the information is presented in a nonpartisan direct manner based upon the facts is known?

>> yes senator. i agree and you have my commitment this is essential for the american people and all of you to have faith and trust in the intelligence products been delivered. >> on the greatest challenges is knowing who is telling us the truth. wewe need a dni who tells the truth. >> yes i have a long record of speaking truth to power we continue that commitment if confirmed in this role. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. gabbard went to applaud and express your appreciation for your service both in the military and in congress. two very challenging jobs. i want to thankic you for that. i noted edward snowden was in hawaii of all places for a year end a half before he fled to hong kong and then on to russia. did you ever meet him or have contact drink that paired or subsequently with telephone calls, e-mails, zooms, contact

with lawyers? >> note senator have i had contact with edward snowden. >> introduced a bill in 2020 that was ace pardon. that said all charges should be dropped. you had a lot of where as in that bill pick where the factual basis for where the clauses come from? >> senator, if i recall in that bill came from publicly available information. >> okay i see. >> were you aware that is a bipartisan committee report from the house intelligence committee ine 2016 on snowden's activity? >> i do not recall specifically at that time. i am aware of that committee's report and executive summary that was reported publicly. do not have access to the classified reports the summer it was based on. >> did you read that report

prior to filing a bill in 2020? >> senator i do not recall d specifically. remember reading a lot prior to filing that bill. >> the bipartisan committeeg report, the first item edward snowden perpetrated the most largest andrd public release of classified information in u.s. intelligence history. student caused tremendous damage to national security the vast majority of documents here stole have nothing to do with program impacting individual privacy. you do not recall ever seeing the work of that committee? >> i am aware of those conclusions drawn. >> are you aware the time? >> yes i was, senator. edward snowden broke the law. there's no question about that. he should not overly sell that information that because that harm. there is no question about that. quick summary document that he release? >> i know he took over a million

documents. i do not know specifically how many of those million he specifically released. >> you stated unequivocably today snowden broke the law. you introduced a bill in congress along with congressman matt gaetz to essentially pardon him. he broke the law but it was not all that serious is that we thought in 2020? >> i take very seriously of holding our constitution and have sworn an oath to support and defend that constitution over eight times in my life. my statements in the past have been reflective of the egregious and illegal programs that were exposed in that leak. quick shoot and ignore vast majority as a committee fount bipartisan link adam schiff was the vice chair. the conclusion the vast majority of these things he released with constitutional rights, the fourth amendment. there are enormous compromises

focus on raising conserved and unconstitutional programs our government was conducting clearly violated fourth the fourthamendment rights. the most important thing i hope all of you find to be relevant here is that if confirmed as director of national intelligence i would take seriously the responsibility to protect our nation secrets. just as i have for almost 28 years of holding a security clearancean of some sort either secret or top secret have never once violated the responsibility and privilege that comes with holding that clearance. i have a specific action plan in place to makepl sure there's not another leak in the future. >> i think you testified you never saw the classified version of this report. on page 22 of the report there is a heading, that's not classified that says what damage did snowden cause?

there is a lot of redacted material did that not raise a red flag for you? or do not recall question. >> edward snowden broke the law. i did not have access to that classified. >> as you seek access to it? >> i believe so yes this is quite some time ago. >> you still introduce your bill. >> i take very seriously the protection of american civil liberties union fourth and memory rights. if confirmed of director of national intelligence i would make sure there is no further snowden type leak in the future those who have concerns have legal channels to raise those concerns so that we do not violate and release our nation secrets per. >> thank you. time is expired. senator lankford? >> it's good to see again thank you for the time we had a chance to spend together.

with your own party at the time and your service to the country through your service there there's a lot of questions about 702 and it may seemed like this is repetitive to come through it. there are thousands of intelligence employees and folks they've also taken oath to the country the constitution they serve our country every day there the folks that do not have uniform on it was his thank you for them people don't know who they are. they put their lives on the line edward snowden got mad at his employer that he did not get the promotion he wanted to start harvesting information and then found some things he didn't like audit and then kept going and then release them to mediate

went to china and went from china to russia became a russian citizen and continued to lay her out intelligence unrelated to the civil liberties of any american. and then said i have more and i couldn't release them anytime i want. they do not see him as brave. so the concern amongst so many here and people in the intelligence community of the responsibility of oversight is we want to believe this and think not just that he broke the law but he is a traitor. then with that's ever happened again. all that they trusted and they trusted them now their lives are at risk. all the programs that were determined lawful all collapse in the intelligence and the president access to a lot of information to decision-making.

this is a big deal to everybody here because it's a big deal to everyone you will oversee and the role as well.l it's helpful for them to hear your heart on this. was edward snowden a traitor? >> senator, my heart is with my commitment to our constitution and our nation security. what is shown throughout my almost 22 years how seriously or take the privilege of having access to classified information in our nation secrets. that's why i'm committed if confirmed as director of nationaled intelligence to join you in making sure there's no future a snowden type leak i would do l so by making four specific actions.ns number one to make sure there are no illegal unconstitutional programs. limited in a big way those who have access to our nation's top

secret security clearance reform. making sure every single person in the workforce knows about that legal whistleblower channels available to them. sure there's a direct line to me should anyone be in concern. if people choose to step outside of those legal channels to raise any c concern that existed in te intelligence community that are classified no beat no excuse to do so they should be charged and prosecuted under the law. >> is he a traitor at the time he took americans and release them in public and ran to china became a russian citizen? >> senator i am focus on the future and how we can put prevent something like this from happening again. >> you have a worsese responsibility with counsel of the presidents a great privilege gardy have his ear quite frankly have a great relationship on that which is very beneficial. when president trump chose to take a strike on soleimani is going through an impeachment in the house. you are kind of tough on him at the time.

you call it a declaration of war. it would lead to an outcome to further undermine our national security. as a member of congress i also take seriously declaration of war and responsibility in that. he's acting in a way that came out in the intelligence gave the process of a strike on american citizensei and those folks overn the field at the time. the question i have od and i with options to the president would you have present a solo money strike at that time looking back at it now in retrospect and send this as an option you could take and hear just how to be able to do that question. >> thank you, senator that's an important question if confirmed as a director of national intelligence code makes for the president has all of the objective analysis and intelligence reporting so we can make the best informed decision

including all of the options and actions he has available to him. which should exist alongside an assessment of the possible repercussions or actions mights be. my own personal views have no place and that assessment and provided to the president and his advisor with all those optionsnd available. >> thank you. i would like to repeat my colleagues question to you. thank you i would like to repeat my colleagues question to you. here.you for beingik to answer these questions and for your service. was edward snowden a traitor to the nine states of america? >> senator i will also repeat my answer. he broke the law. >> you said earlier you were offended by a question might collect from kansas asked which is his duty as somebody on this committee to fulfill his

responsibility to advise and consent but we are not here to be a h rubber stamp for the president of the united states. so let me ask you again, do you believe as adjournment of this committee believes as the vast majority of members of the intelligence believes that edward snowden was a traitor to the nine states of america? >> center if confirmed. >> is on the rubber hits the road. >> i will work with you to make sure. >> thisu is not a moment for te media. it's not a moment to propagate theories, conspiracy theories or attacks on journalism in the united states.ni this is when you need to answer the question of the people whose vote you are asking for to be confirmed as the chief as my colleagues said this is not aboutd, you. it's about the people who serve

the intelligence agencies of the united states. is edward snowden a traitor to the nine states ofhe america? that is not at hard question to answer when the stakes are this high. >> senator as someone who. >> is yes or no. is edward snowden a traitor to the nine states of america? >> as someone for. >> i will go on. >> i understand how critical our national security is. >> apparently you don't. apparently you don't. let me ask you, i have working veryry hard to put your own wors in front of the committee. not fakeke news. the actual things you have said on february 232022 at at that

very moment russian tanks were rolling across the peaceful border of ukraine for the first time you tweeted at 11:30 p.m. your t time, this war and suffering could easily been avoided if by the administration/nato had simply acknowledged russia's legitimate, legitimate security concerns did you say that yes or no? >> i believe you're reading my tweet senator. >> yes is the answer. a few months later you said on your podcast i quoted quote this regime change war against russia thee u.s. and nato are waging va their proxy in ukraine did not begin when putin invaded ukraine. they had their eyes set on this objective long before that. did you say that, yes or no? >> i believe you're reading my tweets. there is a lot more you're quoting a podcast.

>> i have a conversation of the german about whether taking anything out of context i don't think i am. and your answer is yes. are you aware of proxy war at legitimate, legitimate concerns to quote your own words are in alignment with what the russians have said their invasion of ukraine. >> i don't pay n attention to russian propaganda. my goal is to take the truth regardless of whether you like it or not too. >> thank you i will take your answer is no a center usage of speaking truth to power i'm shocked to hear you now say that you are agreeing, not shocked because i know you said it. you areea agreeing that you basically said putin was justified in rolling over the peaceful border of ukraine the

first time since world war ii that a free nation had been invaded by a totalitarian state. you were there at 11:30 p.m. that night's to say you are with them, not us. and let me tell you something to say you don't know you don't y read russia propaganda. russia's state tv aired your comments. did you know that? >> that it should also quote the statement that i made criticizing putin for his invasion of ukraine. >> what i would to say, mr. chairman what the last, it's up to all of us. you are the senate you get to decide whether you're going to confirm this nominee. obviously we did not select this nominee. can't we do better than somebody who does not believe in 702? can't we believe someone who cannot answer whether snowden was a traitor five times, today? who made excuses for vladimir putin's invasion of ukraine the

first time i am aware of any american official has done that? i am questioning her judgment for that is the issue that is at stake here. and as you said and i totally agree this is about our intelligence officer. most of what we do here is in secret. one of the very few opportunities you will ever have with this panel in public. the record will be very clear the position you took with regard to edward snowden. in the record is going be very clear about your reaffirmation of the statements you made in the middle of the night when russia was invading the free countryuk of ukraine. >> your time has expired. senator, your time is expired. ir will note during the question

and answer their two disturbances in the room the first sound like a cell phone. i would ask everyone, both sides of the dais if you have not sounds or turned off your cell phone, please do so now. the second disservice was the cries of a small child but we will welcome such disturbances because the cries of an infant are the sound of answered prayers. >> only here with the answered prayers in church when they cry as well mr. chairman. first of all, thank you for your service to our country. i think part of the discussion here, as you seek we feel very struggling about 702 but we work with that literally every day. you can also tell we have some very, very strong feelings here with a report to the actions of edward snowden. iwa want to come back and have n opportunity to make any corrections or make any other comments with regard to both of

those argues product. but, before i get into that i want to get back into a little bit of your previous history as well you did served as a congressperson for eight years? >> yes senator. >> during that time you start on the armed services committee. during that time. you didn't carry a clearance. you worked your way through that time. you had an opportunity to look at a lot of information. can you share just a little bit about the weight you have looked? not just as a member of the congressional delegation but also during the time you were a lieutenant in both of those roles and exposure to different

side are critical national security is. and the uniquee role it plays in our national security. my most recent deployment which is part of a joint operation task force to support the government and military is focus on defeating al qaeda's one of the things we came across that i had not known previously even having served in congress how specifically was the biggest funder of al qaeda and the namingng peninsula. it should be of unique concern to c our own national security concerns. being able to engage the

customer of intelligence in both of those roles. of national intelligence. it's clear with fresh eyes becoming some of the frustrations i experience as a member of congress or the lack of information often times feeling everything we heard in a brief could have been read and the newspaper that morning. the essential oversight role that all of you play here in congress. unless you are equipped with that intelligence and information i am committed if confirmed as director of nationalli intelligence. >> when you and i first met i told you i thought you need to take about the change with approaching the private conversation. we wanted you to sit down with some folks directly involved in gathering the intelligence you did that. those individuals the thought

you were a quick study that opportunity 702 i've got about a minute left. anant to give you opportunity in front of this committee to show your position in your own words about how strong or how much it is needed with regard to continuation of 702 in your support for. >> think you'd senator. 702 provides a unique security tool and capability that is essential for national security. there are a number of areas that we would be blind from national security perspective without thisho capability. that must exist next to having the safeguards in place to ensure american civil are

protected. as you know it's illegal under 702 to target any u.s. person. several other sections that speak to civil liberty reforms that you pass in lester's legislation. >> will be finished with this. 702 its current forms you would agree to fix a number of items of a problem for is that correct? >> that iss correct. some of those reforms you enacted were a specific to some of the legislation introduced back when i was in congress. prohibiting the about collection as well. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your service. both in congress and u.s. military. i want to talk to you a little bit about your perspectives on china. how do you view china

international securitye? role? >> our relationship with china is one that is complex given how closely our economies are linked. there are a number of challenges and threats that need to be navigated with respect to china. some of which have come up most recently with a very serious cyber exploitation seemingly took us by surprise and the compromising of our telecom companies in an area of significant and great concerns. relevant to china are concerning. doesn't appreciate china's perspective for the nine sites with regard to tiktok. your past statements have said requiring messick ownership of tiktok is our complete can you

explainn why this is on tiktok question. >> the position i previously made, obviously not as a member of congress you consider tiktok legislation argument centered around the protection of first amendment rights. the lack of data privacy that would apply to tiktok, facebook, x, all these different social media applications collect on us as users of thect application. there other provisions within that legislation granted vague and grandiose authority to the president on deciding which private companies are or not a national security threat. >> let's talk about china specifically this is where want to make sure you understand what is at stake. we have had concerns over many

years with china's infrastructure it can manipulate the infrastructure turned on or off and actually address some the most recent cyber attacks we believe china had relevant participation. if china owns tiktok it means they can spy on the united states. on the american people can take all the data from our children. change the narrative of what people are talking about the algorithms. if it wants to create misinformation it's very easy. youu understand why it's important we require domestic ownership off tiktok? >> i understand the concern, senator. i would reiterate some of the concerns i stated in the past. this is about data privacy so many of what is collected by even u.s. owned. there's a bigger issue for congress and i'm all in for the conversation.

i want you to appreciate china. what is your view with taiwan? do youan think it is something your intelligence efforts will understand how important the relationship is on ships manufacturing? president trump is most recent one a% tariff on ships from taiwan. yours about ships act to make sure domestic production is invested in it we have the supply chain. your public statement of the chips act have been an negative and don't seem to appreciate how important that independence is for national security to be beholden to try never to be beholden to taiwan in a place where we cannot do our own national intelligence. >> yes senator. i fully supportga the investment and building and strengthening her own domestic capability. if i recall that capability had a lot of other provisions in it

that had nothing to do with the production of her own capability or distraction away from and a potential obstacle towards achieving that. >> she will recommend to the present we continue to investoun the semiconductor industry in the united states for own independence as well as our national security question. >> yes senator i would base my recommendation on a number of these, all of these if confirmed as dni for the full assessment of the picture the president understands the o ramificationsf the potential cost toward any of the policy positions that he will make in all of you will make.wi >> and last i want to return to the soleimani strike. he said it was illegal president trump did would cause a very significant problems on the line. what is your position on that strike and will you be able to advise the president in future issues with regard to national security? >> those broader issues i raised

with war powers i've been consistent on i did not have access to all the information behind that strike at the time. myth concerns were that may be n escalatory action. president trump was right. there was no escalation beyond that. his policies towards ironic turned out to be very effective for own national security. >> do you disagree with the president taking away the who are nowor those being targeted such as previous secretary pompeo question.mp >> senator i cannot answer that without being able to look at the intelligence assessment and the threat assessment for that or other decisions a of precookd thank you. senator young? >> good to see you. we y had a nice visit in the office, appreciate you being here today. it was clear from the visit in the office that we share a lot of concerns. concerns about ill advised pouringre regime change interventions. about the weaponization into

certain instances of our domestic law enforcement and intel authorities. we talk about something, edward snowden on which we may not agree. it has been recognized he fled overseas with the numbers one and a half nine classified documents pretty share them with the press he absconded to china and russia. you have any response to the bipartisan findings of the house intel committee that stated he caused tremendous damage to national security ing two militae and intelligence programs of great interest to america's adversaries? i will give you an opportunity to respond, hopefully, briefly. ms. gabbard: as i have said before, edward snowden broke the law and i do not agree with how he chose to release information. and the extent of the information intelligence that he snowden caused tremendous damage to national security including military, defense and

intelligence programs of great interest to america's adversaries did not say yes, he did hurt various ways our national security. the same house committee also reported based on dod assessments should the chinese or russians access certain documents relating to dod capabilities that we know snowden still "american troops will be at greater risk in any future conflict. >> i would be very concerned about that. i've not had access to information or intelligence that led to that assessment. it anything that puts our men and women in uniform unnecessarily at risk should be of grave concern. sen. young: i share that as a former marine corps intelligence officer. when we find america's private citizens or contractors or uniform personnel have shared

sensitive designs about military technology or plans to a foreign government, however well-intentioned, we rightfully throw the book at them. snowden did just that yet you have argued many times that he should be pardoned. you introduce legislation as has been discussed here, he has been able to publicly hide as i see it behind this facade of being a so-called whistleblower. but he likely endangered american lives through his actions. as the leader of the intelligence community, how would you think you would be received based on some of these past actions to support or even pardon edward snowden?

ms. gabbard: i am grateful to have received letters of endorsement and support from many current and former individuals who have worked within the intelligence community. those who have worked or are still working within our military. because i believe they trust that my goal -- my sole goal and interest is in our nation's security and upholding our oath to the constitution. they trust that if confirmed as director of national intelligence, i will take the very specific steps i have laid out in informing every single person within the intelligence community about the legal pathways they have to blow the whistle or bring any concerns to the forefront to include coming directly to members of congress, to limit access so we don't have people who are e's or e4's taking upon themselves to release information, giving them

a direct line to me to once again make sure we are all fulfilling our responsibility to ensure our national security and uphold our constitution. sen. young: thank you. was edward snowden fall stood or false to a duty? ms. gabbard: i don't understand. false? sen. young: did he betray the trust of the american people? which according to merriam-webster, that is the definition of a traitor. ms. gabbard: edward snowden broke the law and release the information in a way he should not have. he also acknowledged and exposed information that was unconstitutional, which drove a lot of the reforms that this body has made over the years to make sure americans constitutional rights are protected. sen. young: for what it is worth, if mr. snowden is watching these proceedings, he has posted on social media even indicating that tulsi gabbard

should indicate that i harm national security, which may be the rare instance in which i agree with mr. snowden. i think it would be for you and be helpful the way you are perceived by members of the intelligence community if you would at least acknowledge that the greatest whistleblower in american history, so-called, harmed national security by breaking the laws of the land around our intel authorities. so thank you for being here. chair cotton: senator kelly. sen. kelly: colonel gabbard, thank you for your service to this country. ms. gabbard: likewise. sen. kelly: thank you for meeting with me a couple of weeks ago. you're nominated to lead and coordinate across the intelligence community's numerous sources of collection and analytic capabilities. in a few sentences, can you

describe how you make assessments and how you're going to sift through all of this intelligence and make careful and thoughtful conclusions? ms. gabbard: yes, there are great professionals who work within the intelligence community. i will build a strong team around me as they present the intelligence to provide to the president to the president's daily brief and to respond to issues and concerns that this body has. i will welcome dissenting voices to be able to make sure this information, intelligence, is thoroughly vetted prior to presenting it and make sure the truth is reported, whether that is convenient or not. sen. kelly: thank you. i appreciate that. the president and others are going to rely on that. i want to discuss such an assessment made by the ic. for years, the u.s. analyzed evidence of numerous chemical attacks in syria was to eventually, we were able to assess that bashar al-assad was responsible for a number of these attacks that slaughtered

his own civilians. do you accept the conclusion broadly that assad used chemical weapons against syrians? ms. gabbard: yes. and i am on the record. sen. kelly: among the attacks u.s. assessed assad come as a member of congress and a presidential candidate and as recently as this month in your written responses to this committee, you have cast doubt on the assessment that assad is culpable in these two attacks. is that still your position? ms. gabbard: senator, i raised those questions given conflicting information and evidence that was presented at that time. sen. kelly: thank you. to help inform the public the trump administration least declassified intel evades --

intelligence in 20 and 2018 showing how experts analyzed multiple types of evidence, satellite imagery, medical experts witnesses describing sources and showing the reasoning used to determine his culpability in using these chemical weapons including in yuma douma. i have two documents i went to submit for the record. chair cotton: admitted. sen. kelly: were you aware of the declassified assessments, the one i reference? ms. gabbard: yes. sen. kelly: as a member of the house armed services and foreign affairs committee, did you take time to review these? ms. gabbard: yes. sen. kelly: thank you. can you explain to me than why you doubted the intelligence community's conclusions in these two cases, douma and country could not the others? ms. gabbard: these two cases

were being looked at as to be used as a pretext for major military movement and another -- my fear was a repeat of the deployment of another half million like we saw in iraq towards what the obama administration's goal, which was regime change in syria. the question specifically erased around these two came about because there were two reasons. one, the assessment was made with high confidence and low information. the information that they had came from those on the ground and al qaeda-controlled area and therefore were al qaeda link sources and there was conflicting information that came from the u.n.'s office as well as in m.i.t. professor ted postel. calico did you look in his

credentials? ms. gabbard: yes. calico are you aware of his appearances on russia today used by the russians to disseminate government approved messages? ms. gabbard: no. sen. kelly: chemistry student with a record of defending the assad regime? ms. gabbard: at that time i was not. sen. kelly: do you consider these two individuals, do consider them a better source for the chemistry of sarin gas than the u.s. intelligence community? ms. gabbard: iss at the time the information, i don't know the second person you are referring to come but m.i.t. professor ted postel and the investor -- inspectors provided credible questions that deserved examination. sen. kelly: did you attempt to wait post old's against the significant evidence and assessments already conducted by the ic? ms. gabbard: yes. sen. kelly: here's my concern.

when we began this, described the thoughtful approach to analyzing and reaching conclusions. this is what we expect of our professionals. but we just kind of walked through how you came to question assad's use of chemical weapons in these two cases with a different approach. i don't reject seeking out differing viewpoints. we need to do that. he started from a place of doubting the conclusions of the u.s. intelligence community and then you sought out information that confirmed your viewpoint. that led you to embrace the opinions of two individuals that i think we disagree on this. you think they had expertise. i do not. and others do not. of these individuals were sympathetic to russia and the assad regime. it led you to the overwhelmingly information that contradicted your viewpoint. including the expert assessments

of our own intelligence community. and they don't get it right 100% of the time. i get that. but what i have seen makes it clear at the same time you are skeptical of our intelligence communities assessments, you would not apply the same skepticism information that came from sympathizers of russian assad. i think that is all something we should be concerned about. chair cotton: i want to recognize and welcome to the committee our newest member senator budd come although we all regret senator rubio's departure. we are all pleased that he is the secretary of state and also please we have a great new member on our community -- committee. sen. budd: thank you for your leadership as well. colonel gabbard, great to see you. i enjoyed meeting you in my office a while back. i've enjoyed our friendship and our time serving together in the u.s. house. section 3023 title 50 states in

individual nominated for appointment as dni shall have extensive national security expertise. you served four terms as a member of the house of representatives which is a constitutional office. throughout your tenure, or a member of the armed services committee and the foreign affairs committee. correct? ms. gabbard: yes, senator. sen. budd: you served over two decades in the u.s. army including holding commands at multiple levels and served through the ministrations of both political parties was? ms. gabbard: yes, senator. sen. budd: throughout your time you have been both a consumer of intelligence and policymaker. how important is it for the intelligence community to provide timely relevant, factual, objective? ms. gabbard: nothing less than our national security. too often the multitude of

intelligence failures that our country has seen, that objective has not been met. now cia director ratcliffe talked about in his testimony before this committee how the cia's own internal metrics have shown analytic objectivity has gone down within that organization. this is the very kind of thing that i would seek to address if confirmed as director of national intelligence. ensuring that politics, biases, or personal views are checked at the door. i would lead by example by doing it myself in ensuring that intelligence analysis and reporting meets the objective the president and congress requires, which is no politics, no personal abuses, and making sure that objectivity in a timely, relevant fashion is brought to the president so we can get ahead of problems and ensuring our national security rather than being caught on our heels and forced cash being forced to respond to them.

sen. budd: i think it is clear from your background you more than meet the statuary requirements for this position. i want to switch gears. there's been a lot of discussion today and i think it is a necessary discussion about your position on section 702 of fisa. i think we talked about this only served in the house together. i voted against the reauthorization when i was in the house. however, i recently voted to reauthorize section 702 with additional safeguards to end the politicization of the tool and international privacy -- ensure privacy and civil liberties are protected. tell us how has your thinking on section 702 developed over time and why? if confirmed, what we do to ensure this new statutory safeguards that they are fully implemented? ms. gabbard: as she pointed out, many of the concerns that we raised we serve in the house of representatives were centered

around the lack of safeguards to protect americans for commitment rights and civil liberties as it pertains to searching of u.s. persons without incidental collection that occurs under 702. you and i both know and agree national security capability that is provided by section 702 that enables this foreign surveillance on non-us persons overseas is critical. period. my commitment is to make sure that our national security tools are maintained to fulfill that requirement while also protecting americans fourth amendment rights and protection against unlawful search and seizure. there are a number of those reforms that you referenced such as the provision of a balance collection, at which we brought up we serve in the house. making sure 100% of u.s. persons by the fbi on this incidental collection are reviewed by the attorney general herself.

there are a number of other reforms i believe strengthen significantly those safeguards, a number of them that i had worked to try to bring in place when i was in the house of representatives. i look forward if confirmed as director of national intelligence to overseeing and assessing the implementation of these reforms and reporting back to you as you begin to consider next year's reauthorization and meeting that mark of ensuring our security and upholding americans fourth amendment protections. sen. budd: switching gears a little bit, talk briefly if you will about the dual task of simultaneously protecting whistleblowers and protecting classified information. ms. gabbard: there are more than sufficient legal -- legally protected routes for whistleblowers to come forward should they have concerns on any actions occurring within the intelligence community. i've spoken about the additional protections that i personally will put in place if confirmed as director of national intelligence, understanding the

seriousness of protecting our nation secrets and one that i hold personally. sen. budd: thank you. chair cotton: i will recognize senator wicker. so powerful, and he could go to any committee he once and ask questions any time. sen. wicker: i look at it differently. i think what you're saying is that i'm the only nonvoting member of this committee that is here at this hearing. i have been at an armed services committee hearing most of the morning. let me ask about something that happened a long time ago and something that is happening right now. colonel gabbard, i was a member of the house of representatives on 9/11. i was at the pentagon that very morning when the attacks happen. where were you when 9/11 happened? we all remember where we were. ms. gabbard: i was in hawaii.

there is a five or six hour time difference. when i woke up that morning, it was several hours and i remember the first thing i saw in waking up was that horrific footage of those airplanes attacking the twin towers in new york city. sen. wicker: you obviously have read a lot about it during the 24 plus years since that and most americans have. there's a general consensus that there was a mess intelligence failure. this caught is all by surprise. even though the world trade center had been attacked earlier. do you think stove piping was a problem in our intelligence failure? ms. gabbard: there is no question about it, senator. sen. wicker: ok. ok, based on your reading --

could you elaborate? ms. gabbard: when we looked back at the post 9/11 reporting in the post assessments that were made, it was very clear that there was stove piping of information and intelligence that occurred at many levels, at the highest but also lowest levels, where information that was collected by the fbi, information collected by the cia was not being shared. it was almost ships passing in the night. where there was an integration of those intelligence and information being shared, it is highly likely that horrific attack could have been prevented. sen. wicker: and that is the reason really your position was created. there's been some discussion this morning, again, i have not been able to listen in but understand there has been some discussion about reforming the office of dni to eliminate redundancy and increase

effectiveness. do you worry that in doing so we might be getting back to the same problem that we had in 2001? ms. gabbard: the problem that we had in 2001, senator, it remains at the forefront in my mind. this is exactly why the odni was created. given my limited vantage point not being in this seat, i'm concerned there are still problems with stove piping that need to be addressed. and in some cases, my concern would be that unnecessary bureaucratic layers may be contributing to that problem. this is where coming in and being able to really take a fresh look given my experience and my background will be essential to making sure theodni is accomplishing the reason why it was created in the first place. sen. wicker: i have a lot of suggestions about how to make the department of defense more efficient also.

i was simply caution you before i move on to other quick question that as we are trying to eliminate overlaps that we avoid getting back to the thing that created your agency to start with. let me just ask about anomalous health incidents. i know you're not in the intelligence community yet, but having read, as most of us have come about havana syndrome incidents, what is your understanding of that now and what are your plans? ms. gabbard: thank you for this question. it is been deeply concerning throughout this period from the first time this was discovered so long ago to where we are today that the intelligence community still has failed to identify the source and the cause for havana syndrome, as it

is commonly known. even as many people who are in service are suffering the consequences of it. i look forward if confirmed as director of national intelligence to addressing this. of course making sure those who have been impacted are getting the care they need and deserve, but getting to the truth behind how and why this has occurred. sen. wicker: are you saying we are not any closer to understanding where this came from? ms. gabbard: based on my understanding, there is not been any definitive reporting from the intelligence community on the source and the cause for these anomalous health incidents. sen. wicker: well, perhaps you would like -- i can follow up on the record. i think there is a more public information that is recent about that. thank you, ma'am. chair cotton: senator wicker, the custom of this committee to allow a follow-up question for

senators who remain present at the end of the regular five minute round of questions. this is a follow-up question, not a five minute round. we will have ms. gabbard in a closed session for each of us will have yet another five minute round of questioning. is there any senator who wishes to be recognized for a follow-up question? sen. wyden: ms. gabbard, there was an area that i believe is still uncertain. earlier this week the trump administration illegally attempted to withhold federal funds from a broad range of organizations. i'm interested in knowing what you would do if president trump told you to withhold congressionally approved funds from the intelligence community inspector general. so my question is, if president trump orders you to withhold appropriated funds from the inspector general, will you refuse that illegal order? ms. gabbard: i don't believe for a second president trump would ask me to do something that would break the law. sen. wyden: that is not what i'm

asking. i am asking if you are asked about any illegal order, what will you do? you can say, it will never happen. what will you do if you're dealing with an illegal order? ms. gabbard: my commitment has been and will be if confirmed as director of national intelligence to comply with the law. chair cotton: senator wyden, that is two questions are ready. sen. wyden: i'm not asking two questions. chair cotton: are there other senators who would like a follow-up question? senator kaine? sen. kaine: i would like to follow up on my line of questioning of edward snowden and understand how you analyzed the facts leading up to her 2020 bill providing him a pardon. there was a house committee report which was redacted but under the heading, what damage did it because for 5.5 pages of redacted material? i would have thought that would have raised the question in your mind. secondly, edward snowden, about

24 -- 20 countries that don't have extradition treaties within the u.s. will stop pete rouse -- u.s. how did you introduce a bill providing him with a pardon? it is not the same as a tweet or commentary on a podcast. i'm concerned about your apparent lack of interest in the scope of edward snowden's traitorous activities. ms. gabbard: i have answered this, some version of this question many times in this hearing already. my foremost concern has been, it remains, and will continue to be in upholding my oath to the constitution to support and defend americans for commitment constitutional rights. if confirmed as director of national intelligence, i am committed to ensuring that we protect our nation's secrets by

implementing a number of actions i have outlined so that those who have concerns about programs within our intelligence community, that we don't have another snowden-like leak and they're able to raise those concerns either directly with congress or through any one of a number of legal paths that are available. i think it is important and in-line with many of the bipartisan concerns i have heard from this committee in security classification, security clearance and classification reform in narrowing severely those who have access to the most sensitive and compartmentalized intelligence reporting and capabilities. chair cotton: senator bennet. sen. bennet: thank you for your generosity, mr. chairman. thank you again for hanging in there for this discussion, colonel gabbard. the house intelligence committee review of the snowden

disclosures found not only that he was a traitor but that since snowden's arrival in moscow, he has had and continues to have contact with russian intelligence services. you can see the deep concern on both sides of the aisle here. you had in your opening statement all kinds of complaints about former officials, intelligence agencies, united states press, journalists, media, democrats. suggested you were not being treated fairly when you are coming here. no condemnation at all for this comment which leads me to wonder why it is so hard for you to say edward snowden was a traitor to our country and the question i guess i have for you is, how if you can't say that, you feel that the concerns that this

committee has -- that we need somebody here who will actually honor their oath as you said. maybe i should make it easier. edward snowden did not honor his oath to the constitution, which is what you just said is the most important duty, must important obligation that you have in this role. why is he being treated like a folk hero by you instead of the traitor that he was? ms. gabbard: as i said, my focus and what should be of relevance to all of you and everyone watching is what i will do as director is national intelligence to work with you to make sure there is not another snowden-like leak even the paramount importance of our national security and keeping our nation's secrets. i have laid out a number of ways i intend to do that if confirmed in fulfilling my responsibility in this role. chair cotton: senator

gillibrand. sen. gillibrand: i just want to continue along with regard to china because it is such an important part of your portfolio. i know on armed services you had hearings over the last 15 years about their architecture and how they are building up space capabilities, sea capabilities, every type of capability they could. that aligned with their more -- maligned foreign influence and their ambition with regard to taiwan. it just creates a very dangerous scenario and concerning one. so i wanted as good about japan because recently about a year and a half ago, 13 months ago, you said you did not think it was wise to allow japan to build up their own defense architecture. and you thought it was shortsighted. can you speak a little bit about that? our alliance with japan is so important in our ability to defend against maligned

activities of china, not only geographically but because for the last 50 years they have been close allies, allies that we rely on, we share intelligence, operations. they are a great ally. what was your concern about and have you had any views that have shifted in that regard? ms. gabbard: i agree, japan has been a strong ally of the united states. in a different capacity as a member of the national guard, i've got and conducted training missions in japan with the japanese self-defense force. their forces and the constitution has been primarily focused on self-defense. the concerns that i had raised previously had to do with really looking at the bigger picture of the context of the history with japan and china and recognizing the implications of what -- how this kind of shift from a

self-defense posture that japan has had constitutionally to a more offense of -- a defensive posture could result in escalation and given the history, we need to acknowledge what the ramifications could beat her own security interest. that is something i am looking forward to being able to provide to all of you enter the president if confirmed as director of national intelligence is that in-depth analysis and various policies and actions that you are considering are fully thought through given that broader context of nuance of history and the complexities that exist within the asia-pacific region. having grown up there, i'm very familiar with. chair cotton: senator kelly. sen. kelly: colonel gabbard, when russia was denying assad's use of chemical weapons, they accused the u.s. of supporting terrorists. this is a line putin used frequently during the syrian

assad civil war as assad he supported. they did it repeatedly, did it in public, did it at the united nations. in 2016 you said "the u.s. is providing direct and indirect support to terrorist groups in order to overthrow the syrian government." in 2019 and the democratic presidential debate stage, you said of president trump, "this current president is continuing to betray us. we were supposed to be going after al qaeda. but over years now, not only have we not gone after al qaeda, our president is supporting al qaeda." i am interested to hear, what was your goal in saying these things and did you consider before saying them theiran in russia, with their motives may have been before making these claims? ms. gabbard: as someone who

enlisted in the military specifically because of al qaeda's terrorist attack on 9/11 and committing myself and my life to doing what i could to defeat these terrorists, it was shocking and a betrayal to me and every person who was killed on 9/11, their families, my brothers and sisters in uniform. when as a member of congress i learned about president obama's dual programs that he had begun really to overthrow the regime of syria and being willing through the cia's timber sycamore program that is now been made public of working with and arming and equipping al qaeda in an effort to overthrow that regime. starting yet another regime change were in the middle east. dod train and equip program. again under president obama, is widely known, looked at, and

studied that resulted in over half $1 billion being used to train who they called moderate rebels but were actually fighters working with and aligned with al qaeda's affiliate on the ground in syria. all to move forward with the regime change and not acknowledging what was obviously at the time and impartially has born true which was a regime change war in syria, much like in iraq, toppling of qaddafi and mubarak, would likely result in the rise of islamist extremists like al qaeda taking power. i shed no tears for the fall of the assad regime, but today we have an islamist extremist who is now in charge of syria, as i said, who danced on the streets to celebrate the 9/11 attack, who ruled over idlib with an islamist extremist governance, and has already begun to

persecute and kill and arrest religious minorities like christians in syria. why that should be acceptable to anyone is beyond me. sen. kelly: it shouldn't be. i appreciate your answer. my concern has to do with the tendency to repeat russian and syrian and even in some cases i think we will get into in the closed session iranian information and to discount what comes from our intelligence community. ms. gabbard: every american deserves to know that people in our own government were providing support to our sworn enemy al qaeda. that should not be acceptable by anyone. chair cotton: in conclusion, senator warner. sen. warner: one of the things i love about this committee and i know folks and of -- this is

always been a bipartisan committee. my friend richard burr who said we always kinda follow the truth. one of the things i was proud of , people would come in, they did not know whether the staffer was a democrat or republican. we were all looking out for the same thing. ms. gabbard, support and commend you for your service. but we have heard this morning taking from individuals advice on chemical attacks, not taking american intelligence community as we subsequently discovered had iffy ties, not enough due diligence. we heard on your trip to lebanon you are fully aware the folks were paid for the trip. had these relations and ties to the syrian party. i know i have asked you and i understand on the trip that you said you met with shia religious figures and you did not know who

they were. i can understand that. although i can't understand shia religious figures that did not have ties to hezbollah. we can have a difference of opinion on tiktok. the chairman and i feel very strongly that it is a national security threat. on 702, i am candidly confused. senator wyden come in favor, senator cornyn you backed off of that. and then on edward snowden, you will back off of brave, won't back off legislation. you won't call him a traitor. i think rt has been tweeting about it today, blasting me. the men and women of the intelligence community. i don't know how they're going to have confidence that if someone in your leadership, if

somebody else stepped out that you would not take the same position that you have not walked away from on mr. snowden. i guess my last question, and i think one that was in some of the press and i believe you and your husband took a trip to rome last summer. i'm not talking about the conference. you did not ask who paid for the trip, i just want to get this off the record right now. if you and your husband -- not if you are reimbursed, the did you pay for the trip on the outset? ms. gabbard: there is a nonprofit organization that was coordinating with the vatican to set up this meeting that was centered around security interests in the western hemisphere. chair cotton: so you did not understand your trip was paid for by german -- by german and the clementi foundation? ms. gabbard: the nonprofit -- my understanding -- pay for the trip. sen. warner: has enormous ties

-- by mispronouncing his name. somebody that america sanctioned . i imagine we can get into this in the classified hearing but again, the due diligence that is required before you take these trips or make these assumptions is something i find very troubling. thank you. chair cotton: i would note that same new york times story reported there is no indication ms. gabbard did anything wrong on that trip. ms. gabbard, thank you for your time and for your testimony. thank you most importantly for your service to our nation. as i said at the outset, it is no secret's nomination has generated more attention and interest than most nominees before this committee. we have received a large number of statements, letters, and other such materials in support of and in opposition to the scabbard's -- ms. gabbard's nomination. i will submit those. we will hold a committee vote as soon as possible.

therefore for planning purposes, and he who wishes to submit questions for the record after today's hearing, please do so by close of business tomorrow. that is friday, january 31, 5:00 p.m. eastern time. let me explain what will happen next. committee security and ms. gabbard security will escort her and her immediate party out of this room through the door behind me. everyone else will remain seated in this room. the capitol police will secure that door so no one else leaves this room until ms. gabbard has reached her break room in preparation for the closed session. we will convene in the closed session in approximately 30 minutes at 1:10 p.m. this open session is adjourned. [gavel]

[applause]

>> thank you everyone for coming. [applause]

watch tv every sunday on c-span2

and find a full schedule in your program guide or watch online apple tv.org. ♪♪ c-span's "washington journal" a live form inviting you to discuss the latest issues on public policy from washington to across the country. coming up friday morning from americans for prosperity reviews his organizations tax-cut campaign in the agenda during a trump administration and executive director of the american public health association for the public health action and then alex white house reporter for the hill talks about the latest in the federal response to wednesday's deadly midair collision in d.c. joining the conversation live at seven easte f