we have to do something about it. we do not have unlimited budgets. money is wasted on a building that will never be used. that could have helped people in the united states. he keep seeing this again and again. i'm very proud to work for this administration. i think it is important to realize that i was appointed by the president. it is important that the people see that the government does care. there are a lot of people who care about wasting money. >> john sopko on his role as inspector general. sunday night at 8:00 on c-span q&a. >> you can take c-span with you

wherever you go. we have a free radio app. it is for your smartphone or tablet will stop listen to all of rta -- channels. there is a schedule on each of our network so you can tune in when you want. you can play podcasts from our signature grams. take c-span with you wherever you go. online orour free at your iphone, android, but there is also >> nancy pelosi named five democrats to the house committee on benghazi. elijah cummings, adam smith, linda sanchez, and tammy duckworth. those democrats join the minority leader at a press conference where she discussed the decision to up like her colleagues even though she opposed the creation of the ommittee.

>> good afternoon. ont happens in benghazi september 11, 2012 was a tragedy. families and loved ones for those were lost, lost their lives, and for american diplomatic corps and all americans. unfortunately, the republican obsession with benghazi has not been about victims or their families will stop -- we had hoped that they would not go down the path of forming a select committee. we have already been there. reviews have been conducted and the house and senate has had

documents released. millions of taxpayer dollars happens then. it was not necessary to put the families through this partisan exercise once again will stop -- we have exchanged in good faith sessions with speaker boehner on the shape of the committee. for a level of fairness and transparency. especially considering the subject matter. we were not able to reach any agreement. you can approach does not prevent the repeated abuses committed by chairman issa. that is all the more reason for democrats to participate. they must be there to fight for their process. they must bring some openness and transparency to what is going on. of thisthe purpose

investigation? what are they hoping to achieve? i could argue either way, why should we give any validity to this effort? it is important for the american people to have a pursuit of these questions. possibled not be leaving it up to the republicans. i aim appointing my distinguished colleagues to serve on this committee. i am so proud of them. all that they do for the american people. and for their constituents at home. congressman elijah cummings will be the ranking member. he is the ranking member on the committee of oversight and government reform. congressman adam smith, ranking member of the armed services committee has agreed to serve.

congressman adam schiff, committee on appropriations, subcommittee on state and foreign operations. very important in this discussion and member of the permanent select committee on intelligence. congresswoman linda sanchez, committee of ways and means and subcommittee of oversight. congresswoman tammy duckworth serving on committee of oversight and government reform. we will do right by the families of the victims. two families said don't take us down this path again. why is this being done? we hope we can shine a light on where our focus should be preventing benghazi from ever happening again. i told a the speaker in a phone call i just had with him that i'm hopeful that ranking member cummings and the chairman can come to some better terms on how we proceed and it is with that hope and his great leadership that i present the chairman, our ranking member on this committee, mr. cummings.

>> thank you very much, madam leader. and i, too, agree with you that we must be in pursuit of fairness and transparency, not only for the families of these great americans who we lost in libya, but also for the american people. i do not believe a select committee is called for after eight reports, dozens of witness interviews and review of more than 25,000 pages of documents. many of the so-called unanswered questions republicans have been raising recently have already been answered in these previous

reports. i also do not believe the select committee rules proposed by the speaker are fair, open or designed to conduct a neutral reason, fact-based inquiry. despite these challenges i have agreed to participate for two reasons. i want to thank my colleagues who have also agreed to participate. first, as you know, i served as the ranking member on the oversight committee for the past three years. and in that role, i have seen firsthand how abusive the republicans have been during this investigation. they've issued unilateral

subpoenas. they have made unsubstantiated accusations with no evidence to back them up and they have released selective excerpts of documents and transcripts that destroyed the truth. in some instances, when they had exculpatory evidence right at hand. they falsely accused secretary of state of misleading congress about reducing security in benghazi. according to the "washington post," fact checker gave four pinnochios. secondly, the family members of chris stevens have pleaded publicly for this not to be politicized. let me read to you their words and i quote. what chris never would have accepted was the idea that his death would be used for political purposes, end of quote. so i feel that i owe it to the

families of ambassador stevens and the other brave americans who lost their precious lives to bring some minimal level of balance to this process and to check false claims wherever they may arise. in short, ladies and gentlemen, i believe we need someone in that room to simply defend the truth. defend the truth. and that is why i have agreed to serve. let me just close by saying rather than fundraising off of the murders of these four brave americans and i must tell you i find that diss pickable. i believe the best way is to bring their killers to justice and work in a bipartisan way to strengthen security for all u.s.

peron ell overseas. thank you. -- personnel overseas. >> any questions? >> some members of your leadership team advised you not to do this? what ultimately was the tipping point and what caused you to say no, we are going to do this. >> mr. cummings has spelled it out very clearly the abuses that occurred in the previous issa investigation and then when the rules -- when the proposal was put forth as to how we would proceed, you would think that it would argue saying, don't go in the room, but, in fact, it said it heightened the urgency of it. it's a process that appeared to be transparent. there would be more trust in it. but since it wasn't, we need to be at the table and our committee was mixed, our members could have lawyered it one way or another. >> the house is going to vote tomorrow on the n.s.a. reforms --

>> tomorrow i will be here at 10:45 and we'll talk about that. >> congressman schiff, you had gone on our air fox news sunday and called this a colossal waste of time yet you are standing here ready to serve on this committee. can you talk about the difference? >> this is ground that we have covered time and time again, the pertinent questions have been asked and oonsed again, i respect the decision. representative cummings said that the decision was that we need someone in that room to stand up for the truth and that will be our responsibility to make sure this does not become a select committee on talking points and focus on the things that really matter and that is what can we do to prevent other people from being killed in the

future at diplomatic posts around and the world and where are we in hunting down those are responsible. if we can help direct this committee to focus on those questions, then i think it would be very important. but regrettably, that does not seem to be the direction they're heading. nonetheless we are going to make sure this doesn't become a circus or fundraising device but instead focuses on where are we implementing the sound recommendations of the accountability review board. >> even if you weren't able to strike a agreement with the republicans, mr. cummings have you talked to him and do you think you have a better relationship with him that you can come to some kind of deal and be in the room?

>> certainly hopeful. i talked to gowdy briefly yesterday and we basically wanted to be in a position where we were consulted with regard to subpoenas. and if there was disagreement, we were asking that it be brought to a vote of the committee. and that's what we are asking for. it's a 7-5 split as you well know, so they have the votes. and one of the reasons we wanted that is because we believe that the consultation would be

significant in there have been things to move that process along so we count have to go that far. i don't know what's going to happen with regard to mr. gowdy. everything that i have seen from him and i do consider him a great prosecutor, and i have seen him in the prosecutor mode in our committee, but as far as this committee is concerned, we have to go in and be finders of the fact and go in neutral and don't need to be making accusations before we get in the room to hear the facts. i don't know what's going to happen, but the one thing he said to me he is hopeful that we would be able to have a situation where there would be fairness and i'm going to hold him to that and all of us are going to hold him to that. and the last thing, one of the reasons why the leader was so concerned about that and i was, too, is we had situations where in the oversight committee where we were not consulted at all with regard to subpoenas. and that's a very, very serious responsibility and we think the minority should be included in that process. >> i agree with my colleagues

and this is a committee that should not have been formed. it has been investigated eight times but since the republicans chose to form it, i think we have to participate to do our best to bring out the correct arguments. at this point it appears that this is a purely partisan and political effort. and that isry greetable because -- is regrettable because of congress' credibility and we don't have a lot of that. oversight is incredibly important. when something like this happen, congress has an obligation to ask the right questions and conduct proper oversight and that's not what the republicans have done. they have made it partisan and

political and undermined our ability to do our job as a congress. the commission is formed. we have to serve on it. i think to make the best comments possible, we can't let the republicans run the show, but i will tell you at this point i'm highly skeptical even when you look at the members they have appointed, they are lacking inexperience on national security or foreign policy matters for the most part. so what is the purpose here? and you read stories how they are fundraising off of this. this is a partisan political process. we hope as my colleague from california pointed out, the shift would be to talk about the issues that matter. right now, it does not look good. >> i would like to make one clarification here on the subject of subpoenas and also access to witnesses and documents and the rest, an element to your question. at first they said they were

going to call this one and that one, we don't think sk of state hillary clinton or john kerry need our help in the room. we know they are professionals, patriots, articulate spokespersons. my concern is who are these other people they are going to call. and when it was not guaranteed that we would have access to who they were and sufficient time in advance to prepare to even be able to make a judgment about who they were, that really argued in favor of saying, let's not worry about the the hillary clintons and the john kerrys they can fend for themselves but make sure there is not an exploitation of information

because we had not had access. to your point, we at first said to the speaker we wanted an evenly divided committee, we think that would have the most strength and most credibility. he said no. and then he said -- we said, how about give a democratic vote for a subpoena, a letter that steny and i wrote to the speaker so that legitimatizes the call for a subpoena. he said no. then we said what mr. cummings and mr. smith have said. if there is a subpoena, there should be consultation and if that consultation does not produce concurrence, there shouldn't be a vote of the committee. it means that they have the

votes, 7-5, to pass what they have. but that vote would have to take place in a business meeting which is in open session and that's what they are afraid of. i come book to the word transparency. transparency, fairness balance and all of this. i would like to -- hear from your view. we are proud from our entire committee, we think we have strength this terms of knowledge and understanding of what the challenges are and also shall we say experienced leaders in the congress. >> i'm congresswoman linda sanchez. i serve on the ways and means committee and ethics committee. as somebody who is in a position to have to be a trier of fact and take in evidence and make decisions based on what the evidence shows, when your leader asks you to serve your country on a select committee, it makes sense to be in that room and we have a lot of respect for the colleagues that stand behind me.

they are outstanding members. they are thorough members and sitting and trying to get at the facts leaving politics out of the room is going to be the challenge for this committee. and we are here to try to make sure we are looking at the facts, not just making up allegations. so i'm honored to be asked to serve and i'm honored and willing to do it. >> tammy duckworth i represent illinois' 8th district. i too am honored to be asked to serve my country in this way having been a freshman on oversight and government reform and watched representative cummings put forward for the truth and greater transparency. i sat in committee where the testimony of admiral mullen, on whether or not there were capacity for military aircraft to make it to benghazi in time. questioning his judgment as a military commander.

so i'm proud to et be on this committee and i'm going to stand for the truth. i'm going to start from square one. i want to make sure no american diplomat they are put in jeopardy as they carry out their nation's business around the world and i'm proud to serve on this committee. >> thank you all very much.

up, fbi director james comey testifies before the senate judiciary committee. president obama, on this management at the veterans affairs department. they may give the veterans affairs secretary the authorities are senior executives. >> coming up on the next washington journal, congressman phil roe from tennessee. the white house investigation into allegations of mismanagement at the facilities. representative peter defazio of oregon he will discuss funding the highway trust fund. washington journal is live every morning at 7:00 a.m. you can join the conversation on facebook or twitter stop

starting at the slanting, all of this, the stairwell and the banister, are the originals. this is where clara barton was. we are walking on the same stairs that clara barton did. that was for an eight year period of time when she lived in this building. what we find in the attic is the set, ae for a stationary military portfolio as it is called on here she used these as a fundraising product. this was well the civil war was going on. you can see how nice and fancy the engraving work is on this. she tied this together to hang was out trying

to sell these. she had a boost that -- who set the market. people could come by where she was and take a look at what she had their. >> the life and work of clara barton. starting saturday at 10:00 a.m. eastern. we will visit the missing soldiers museum. live at 11:00, you are calls and sweet for a man from the civil war museum of medicine. it is part of our three day memorial day weekend of american history tv. >> for over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs events directly to you. they put you at the room in congressional hearings and white house events. they offer complete gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house. it is all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created 35 years

ago brought to you as a public service. on hiss in hd, like us book, and follow us on twitter. fbi director james comey warned of the threat of terrorist recruits emerging from syria's civil war. theas also asked about prosecution of chinese officials accused of corporate buying. and the investigation of the deaths of patients. this is one hour 45 minutes.

i remember you set your confirmation hearing that your wife told you she did not think you would be chosen for this job. 90 were eight months into the job. i hope you and she are happy with the choice. one of the challenges i have observed is the focus on counterterrorism with a commitment to long-standing line .arsmen functions o most of us grew up knowing this. i urge you to make sure that the investigation are targeted and their, with respect for civil rights and civil liberties. that is a critical tool in successful and their prosecution.

we see on reruns of law and order and the dna is automatically there. as you know, from your own experiences in law enforcement, dna analysis is not widely available. does not solve a crime within a 60 minute time frame. there are two bipartisan bills. ande is a criminal justice rented science report. how prosecutors identify and prosecute the guilty will advanced technology. fbi will have new opportunities to bring criminals to justice. it can also raise significant civil liberties challenges. as a are new capabilities domestic investigative tool.

there are also serious privacy concerns. day ofs remind me every my responsibility to ensure that we protect our national security and our civil liberties. , youg known you for years believe in both. you want to protect our national security and our civil liberties. you are no stranger to the struggle. a hospital bedside encounter with officials who were urging an ailing john ashcroft to reauthorize the nsa surveillance program. the justice department concluded that it was illegal. -- as a deputy attorney general, you showed independent against the attempt to circumvent the law.

-- in the last collection of all data, it was phone records. i am glad the house representatives have a revised version to the freedom act. my main concern is important reforms. me as you will work with the senate takes up this important issue. addresslook at ways to cyber security concerns. fronts fromd many abroad. the fbi has a key role in preventing extremist violence here at home. i was part of the matthew shepard hate crime defense act. fbi was collaborating with

to anti-defamation league train state and local law enforcement agencies to protect the rights of all americans. i plug the fbi for doing that. i look forward to hearing more about those efforts. thank you for joining us for the first oversight hearing. men and women work hard every day to keep us safe. we can talk later. about to have your training program at the capital. i have gotten to know it because it has been part of the president pro tem. i will yield. >> welcome to your first

oversight hearing. i know you have been in office 10 months and a lot of things i talk about, we have seen takeover. my hope is that you will help us get to the bottom of some of these issues. first of all, i think you and your organization for helping us and for protecting the american people from so many different front. i'm a start as i often do. when the fbi director is before this body, it was only on monday that we received answers to her questions. that was our last day oversight hearing 11 months ago. the answers we received our august 2013. as of that means they have been laying around the black hole of the justice department after the fbi forwarded them for approval.

i do not know why take so long when the fbi had gotten on their on august 20 6, 2013. i told the attorney general in january when he appeared for oversight, without having responses to the previous hearings and responses, but that is not acceptable. in addition, when we met before the confirmation, i provided the director with a binder of all the questions for the records. they were still pending with his predecessor. the fbi has a dismal record of responding to questions. i wish i could say that all those unanswered issues have been fully dealt with, but they have not. directorike to ask the to make an effort to improve the levels of communication. i hope with all offices.

questions is not make them go away. they have to be answered fully and completely. turn fbi priorities to counterterrorism, it remains at the top. that is since the september 11 attacks. think it is fair to say that our country is safer. prepared to discuss the. i'm glad congress is in the process of considering reforms to some of the authorities. even as the president keeps changing his view on what is needed to keep us safe. pointed out that some of these reforms will actually make it harder for terrorism investigations than

even bank fraud investigations. i hope we will have an opportunity to discuss that today. those types of reform seem unwise. the threats to our nation are broader than terrorism. crime is on the rise. last week's events illustrated. efforts to hold the chinese government accountable for stealing trade secrets of u.s. companies. consequently, american jobs. i congratulate the fbi on its work to hold developers accountable for unleashing a computer program that can steal passwords and files. as well as activate webcams. that is all without knowledge. crimes are increasingly high-tech. the tools available to the fbi to combat them must be as high-tech as well. these tools have the potential

for misuse. it could jeopardize the privacy of innocent americans. know to discuss that with the department of justice and the inspector general. recommendations that the fbi develop special guidelines concerning drones, i would like to inquire about the proposal by department of justice that would make it easier for the fbi to hack into computers for investigating purposes. accesses --external successes. i find the lack of cooperation with the inspector general significant. they have delayed the office's work. necessary from one of the reviews. as you know, the inspector general's actions are very clear.

they must access these records. however, the inspector general thatnts me -- informed me all of the departments provided full access to the material sought with a notable exception of the fbi. fbi, with respect to the production of grand jury material, is a change from his long-standing practice. from 2001 until 2009, the fbi routinely provided misinformation. i would like to know, why has the fbi been stonewalling? 2009 cut offfter the flow of information from the fbi. in addition, i have questions about the status of the justice department reports on the fbi whistleblower.

obamaths ago, president release information directed to the whistleblower or teachers. it produced a report within six months on how well the fbi follows its own procedures. that report was also to examine the effectiveness of the procedures and whether they could be improved. is now more than a year overdue. once again, i have to say that that is unacceptable full they are in dire need of an update of these provisions. i have asked the bureau about specific whistleblowers who came to my office. the 1990's.ack to time and again, i've heard from whistleblowers that the fbi's procedures are ineffective against retaliation.

the attorney general posture or did not come out at the six-month mark. i asked the government accountability office to look at this issue. the fbi needs to cooperate. finally, as the director points out in his testimony, the fbi is actively investigating wrongdoing and getting results every day. that is why it is so perplexing to hear nothing at all itcerning the investigation has been just about a year since then investigation was opened. timee we will have the today to discuss the status of that investigation. thank you for coming in for the hearing. >> thank you. was sworn in as the seventh director of the fbi.

he also served as deputy attorney general for the department of justice. he was a u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. we are delighted to have you here. please go ahead. >> thank you. senators, let me start by thanking you for your support of the people of the fbi stop when i became director, one of the the impactssues was of sequestration. thanks to you, we now have the resources to rehire and fill those positions, to be the nsa -- national security organization that we need to be. national security remains our top priority. counterterrorism and intelligence. a few thoughts about cyber. it has been in the news.

it touches everything that the fbi is responsible for. i tried to explain to folks that it is not a thing, it is a vector. we have connected our entire lives to the internet. it is where our children pay and where our banking is stop health care and critical infrastructure. soon it will be where your refrigerator is and things you wear in your car. ouruse we have connected whole lives, the people who would do is home -- harm, that is where they come. for our children, as secrets, our infrastructure. it cuts across every responsibility that the fbi has. i was in indiana and someone was responding -- reminding me of the great vector change of the last century. it was the combination of the automobile, which introduced a new kind of crime to this country. criminals can travel very quickly.

it was important to have a national resource to respond to that. i was reminded of it while they were talking to me about john dillinger. i said in response, john dillinger could not do 1000 robberies in the aim day in all 50 states in his pajamas halfway around the world. that is the challenge we now face. it is a internet, challenge that we are trying very hard to respond to and attract and retrain great people and given the technology they need to build relationships with the private sector that are vital to us. they will get the training and equipment that they need to respond. you saw this week, two of the products of that work. the hard work being done and the scope of the challenges.

the charging of people over the world, and collaboration with 18 different law enforcement organizations. the challenge we face is that it blows away normal concepts of time and a. -- space. it requires us to shrink the world. both of these cases illustrate our commitment to reach around the world and make clear to people that we will not put up with this and that although the neighborhood has become dangerous, we will treat these burglaries for what they are. we will treat them as seriously as someone kicking in your door to steal your stuff. we are very hard to make sure that that is a rarity. priority.dy -- counterterrorism is something that this committee knows very well. i continue to focus on al qaeda and its off spring. its progeny throughout the middle east and africa are viral and best purulent -- virulent

and intent on doing harm to americans here and abroad. virulence across the continent and syria. these are coming to serious to build new relationships at some point, they will flow out of syria. there will be a terrorist diaspora. thisw everyone on committee remembers the diaspora we faced out of afghanistan after dj howdy involvement with the soviet. you can connect it directly to 9/11. we in law enforcement and the intelligence community are determined not to allow lines to fromawn between an outflow syria and future 9/11 incident. the big change i discovered in coming back to government is the emergence of homegrown violent

extremists in the united states. those people who can be inspired by al qaeda to kill innocents. in --ternet offers them access to poisonous information. in this form, i cannot say much about counterintelligence it remains a huge part of our work. we saw a reflection of it in the work we did to reduce the indictments. our counterintelligence mission remains at the forefront of our work. because we face nationstates that are determined to steal our information and because they can do it through the vector that i mentioned. we are a national security and law enforcement organizations. on the criminal side, we are working with corruption and white-collar crime. we are trying to protect kids and fight gangs and violence. the last thing i will say is about the wake of

recent disclosures about government surveillance. it is hard for me to find the space and time to talk about what i do and why i do it. i believe people should be suspicious of government power. i am. i believe this country was founded by people who were suspicious of government power. people should ask me, what are you doing and why. i needi can explain why the ability to execute lawful court orders to intercept communication and why i need the ability to track a bad guy through a cell phone will not it helps me save children and rescue kidnap victims and a number of other things. those details are involving the courts and congress and tremendous amount of oversight. hard for us in the current windstorm to find a decent time, i am determined to do that. let me close by thanking you.

the magic of the fbi is its people. we cannot have a lot of stuff. we have amazing people. they are working national security all over this world, 24 hours a day. that is the great joy of my work. i can see them men touched the work they do. i know you feel the same way. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you very much. i was struck by a number of things that i would like to ask you. i'll open this session. it may make sense not of the hearing, but as a general briefing. we will find a time when you and those senators on both sides of securele can meet in a room and go over some of these issues. >> i would be open to that.

cyber.talked about that is something that worries me. you areno question that example of john dillinger today could be sitting offshore. it is still huge amounts of money. earlier this week, the department of justice indicted five chinese military operatives. they were stealing trade secrets. , severalcan companies bus wreck were in the white house, and we discussed several things. there were increasing that -- the rats. everything from our steel company store high-tech companies. they were trying to figure out a way to improve.

in whichred a hearing they testified. several of our members on both sides of the aisle worked on a proposal. can you elaborate on your efforts to curb trade secrets and steps. can you tell us, are the tools that you have, are they adequate? >> thank you. i agree very much of what you said. we face an enormous challenge. it was illustrated well on monday. a nationstate was engaging in fact. why build it when you can steal it? from talkingrned, to the private sector in my time on this job, there are two kinds of companies in the united states. those who have been hacked by the chinese and those who do not know they have been hacked by the chinese. it is a problem we are responding to with a lot energy and working with a lot of partners across government.

tools, iof statutory have the authority that i need. the challenge of these cases is that they are resource intensive. they require technology and training. that is why i focus on those things. >> the committee discussed at length national security agency's use of parts of the patriot act. aside the nsa's use of security15, national is based on the same relevance. require judicial approval. i would hope that nsa letters are not being engaged bible collection. bulk collection.

can you confirm that they are not doing bulk collection? the reason for the basic building block records of counterintelligence. may are not used to collect records and bulk. >> you have any intention of changing that? >> non-. >> i understand that you are planning to move the director of intelligence. you'll do analysis for the bureau as a whole. raise isquestion i that the investigations are broader in scope. they may rely on expansive data collection. i am concerned about whether privacy and civil liberties and those sort of questions.

traditional domestic policies may not warrant such a shift. agents have not developed basic criminal investigation skills necessary for more traditional crime solving. are you addressing civil liberties concerns? ensuring that this emphasis will not involve the expense of trading agents to fulfill basic law enforcement? >> i can assure you on both counts. to start with the second piece first, i intend to direct that all new agents do criminal work at the beginning of their careers so that they develop both the tools and techniques of law enforcement and also the

mindset. one of the great gifts of the fbi is that we have a respect for the rule of law and the fourth amendment and the fifth amendment and the sixth amendment. there is nothing like criminal work to drive it into the fiber of an agent. respect to what i intend to do on the intelligence side. i will make sure that we are using intelligence, whether it is criminal intelligence or national security intelligence in the appropriate way with due regard and careful regard for civil liberties protections that we are so passionate about. for me, it is about making sure that my criminal investigators are being thoughtful and taking advantage of the same smart and to seey panel what they might be missing a network. >> one last question. i mention this to the other

senator. , federal prosecutors have successfully convict the more than 500 terrorism suspects in our courts. that is a big number. we have a small handful in a military commission. that has been mired in controversy. a military commission defense lawyer is defending someone at guantánamo. -- alleges agents representingre september 11 defendants. they had some questions about the defense team.

i have a very serious question. was it the fbi who try to recruit somebody on the defense team? do you have anything you can tell me about this? >> is a matter i am aware of. i do not mean to hurt the feelings of my friends, but their reporting is not always accurate. a pending matter, i cannot comment on it. i can only assure you that we are being carpal -- careful to make sure that the judge is fully aware of the circumstances. >> let me suggest this. as this goes on, keep in touch with me. you are a prosecutor. i was a prosecutor. that any aspect of the

prosecution team tries tuneful trade defense team, that crosses the barrier that should not be crossed. one that i have dealt with throughout my career. i take it as seriously as you do. i cannot comment on the matter. >> the first issue i will bring up goes back a long time before you were director. it happened last month. by severalached female whistleblowers from the fbi. each had previously worked as a supervisor. that was where the rest of the colleagues were male. these women allege that they suffer gender discrimination. against. retaliated that was when they tried to report the abuses.

one was a large claims that she was disciplined for allegedly being "emotionally unstable." she was also accused of being "unable to work with others." there was a hazardous material suits. another whistleblower claims that she was denied a job when she was running first out of six candidates because her male supervisor claimed that she was "emotionally fragile." that was following a divorce. i'm offering these whistleblowers to the inspector general and asked them to determine whether these cases may be part of a pattern that the fbi needs to address. a general question that i do not -- that a long answer to will you make sure that the fbi fully operates with any review.

>> absolutely. that is the answer. >> i want to ask you about terrorism and fisa. you are someone with a rigorous history of questioning the constitution. and the debate over the reform, some are calling for changes. this is the fisa provision that targets the provision about foreigners. seven 02ble is section to the counterterrorism mission? do you have any concerns about whether it is legal? >> it is extraordinarily valuable. it goes beyond that.

it keeps the american people safe. i do not have concerns about its legality or constitutionality. gets back toion something i brought up in my testimony about the inspector general. all theles a person to records. that is government-wide. it relates to your department. it requires a review of the the departmentre is not violating civil liberties. lastng up to my question november, the inspector general testified at a senate hearing that the department of justice impeded his access to a grand jury. in march, i requested documents concerning this dispute.

last week, the inspector general provided documentation showing that the f e i resisted reviving others, even though groups within the doj had provided access to records when were ousted. -- when requested. i would like to have this added to the record. comey,s clear, director that the fbi's refusal started around 2010. obviously before you became director. we do feel very strongly that 2001 through 2009, the fbi promoted the idea with routine at -- provided routine access to these records. this predates your time, but do you know what >> i do not. i am not aware that there was a policy change.

>> the second question. according to the inspector general's office, the refusal cooperate delayed access for 14 months. you think generally, that is consistent with the legal right to have access to records? >> i don't know the particular, but on the face, it strikes me as too long. i meet with the inspector general because i think what he does is important. i'm not aware of that issue. an issue thated we were cumbersome with our approval process and have asked the general counsel to make it faster. i ame bottom line is hoping you can commit that the f fbiwall stop -- that the

will stop stonewalling. i know you have only been there a month. -- 10 months. fromed to squat brace and the standpoint of the general statutes -- wewe will not doing the -- will not do any stonewalling while i am director. >> thank you. i have about two minutes left. the chairman gives me equal time. i understand that the department of justice is seeking to change the rules of criminal procedure to make it easier for the fbi to break into computers for evidence especially in cases where the computer's physical relation -- location is unknown. i think that is extraordinary power that i'm not sure americans understand.

butnot saying it is wrong, it ought to raise concerns. you explain what this change could mean for the fbi? and what safeguards are in place to make sure the fbi is not unlawfully intruding into computers of innocent americans? >> thank you, senator. the proposed change to this rule of criminal procedure has known -- nothing to change the standards the fbi must meet before it gets a warrant to search a computer. we still have to make a showing under oath to establish probable the device contains evidence of a crime to nothing changes that bedrock detection. this is about which judges you have to go to. it does away with traditional notions of space and time. this is about trying to respond to the internet brett by

allowing judges in one jurisdiction to pass on that and issue a warrant if the computer is not in the jurisdiction at the time. about an arcane question of venue and not the subsidence of protection that is important to the people. >> i'm going to submit a question on the ebay five b5 program.e i would appreciated if you could put these questions ahead of the others the department has not answered. i yield. >> welcome, thank you for being here. congratulations on a banner day for the fbi and the department of justice is today. between the credit squeeze plea -- suisse please for

facilitating tax cheating. the conviction of abdul hamid hamza.abu in the indictment of the chinese pla officials on the cyber charges. in view of the black shades take down. yesterday was a great day for you for attorney general holder and the fbi. you andlations to congratulations on the indictment of the chinese military officials. as you know, i have repeatedly pestered and hectored witnesses why the score was zero in terms of indictments on this issue while the administration was telling us we were on the

losing end of the biggest transfer of wealth in history. you have put some good points up on the board. there were is a predictable squawking -- there is predictable squawking from the chinese. could you explain why this is different? >> i have heard some of that same commentary. the notion that this can somehow be dressed up as a national security matter. this is stealing, theft. this is not about one nation tate trying to understand the actions of another. this is about enterprise stealing it from somebody who devoted millions of dollars to building it. it employs lots of people in this country to make those things. rather than make it yourself, it is stolen. is burglary. it is no different than if somebody kicked in the front

door and marched out with file cabinets. >> the other question is how well organized we are for the cyber effort. which, as you have said, is a thesector of danger for american public. we have to be adaptive in responding to it. you mentioned john dillinger and the highway system provoking a change in the way we went at traditional crime, particularly the bank robbers of that era. it required new structured. you are now the head of one of those new structures, the federal bureau of investigation that was set up because highway patrols were left at the the border. came toy, when aviation the world as a new science and

industry, the military had to change its structure. as a subset of the signal corps of the army grew into the air force. an institution we are proud of. as i look at the department of i see thed the fbi, national security division, icy counterintelligence and criminal and cyber, all working in this area. assurances wehe have recent really received -- recently received. to better manage the ability to manage cyber threats, doj has integrated functions into a cohesive effort that fuses the legal authority and to coordinated action. that make the question whether

we are structured right. that should debate the question whether we are structured right. that makes the question whether we are structured right. i am interested in the question should structure ourselves looking forward to this continued vector, this continued danger. topicr that is a discussed and analyzed by the council. >> i can't speak to the council. i can remember sitting here the details of it. i know what is being discussed throughout the government. especially by me. i'm trying to figure out, given it touches everything i am responsible for, and my deployed and organized in the right way? the answer is, i think so. toon't know enough about give you a high competence answer right now. >> and conceivably even a high

competence answer would not be right in five or 10 years during which the most important thing we are -- tenures from now. >> the most important thing we can do is get everybody to share everybody's reacting in the right way to the different dimensions of the threat. >> next is the senator. >> thank you for your service to the country. tonk you for your commitment cooperate with this committee and congress. not always been the case with the administration, but i appreciate the approach you bring to it. it in your opening statement, you mentioned al qaeda inspired terrorism. by theyou are inspired facts of the found hood -- fort hood attack.

do you agree with the intelligence community's assessment that he was inspired by al qaeda to conduct that attack? >> yes or, based on everything i have read. i was not in the office at the time, but i do. >> i appreciate that answer. it seems almost obvious, but for some reason people want to call it workplace violence. these strike me as wrong and misleading. ba -- va.n to the i know we have been shocked with the revelations starting with the phoenix va hospital. dismay.k and there is a story in the newspaper that says the number of veterans facilities being

investigated for problems has more than doubled to 26. each day that goes by, there is another revelation. allegations of destroying evidence. perhaps secret waiting lists. it will dying because they did not receive the treatment they are entitled to. i know you agree with me that to live up with your commitment to the veterans, we have to get to the bottom of this and solve systemic and cultural problems underlying the crisis. to start with, we have to get to the facts. the serious allegations and reports that have been made. the inspector general testified last week that the office was cooperating with prosecutors in arizona. to determine if any of this conduct warrants criminal prosecution. the scope of these allegations

demands the expertise of your agency. the fbi has to be part of that. i would like to ask you three questions and they are all related. if you could respond to each. are you willing to support the specter general's investigation? what assets does the fbi have that can be brought to bear in a matter of this nature? some whistleblowers have come thatrd to be report - evidence is being destroyed in spite of congress and in order by the va. what can the fbi do to make sure the evidence is preserved for an appropriate investigation and perhaps further proceedings? >> thank you senator. this morning, the fbi has

not been asked to assist in any part of the investigation. a ore were asked by the v justice department, what we can bring to bear our great people with periods. am always focused on making sure evidence is preserved. the destruction of evidence is something we take very seriously. this particular matter, we are not yet involved in. >> who would that request come from? from the attorney general? the president? >> in my experience, it would typically come from the va ig. it could come from prosecutors at the department of justice, asking us to help. if we are asked, we will do everything we can to assist. >> we don't want to get snarled up in the red tape and bureaucracy. the point is, if you are asked by the appropriate authority, you will respond. >> of course.

>> thank you very much. >> thank you, senator. director, thank you for your testimony. welcome to your first oversight committee. upon your review of fbi operations after taking the helm, i would be interested in your findings regarding the partnership between the fbi and state and local law enforcement. i have focused some of the conversation efforts on the vital and valuable partnership between the fbi and federal law enforcement. both in prepared testimony and your work. these have highlighted the valuable areas. i want to know what you would think of the most critical resources and programs that advance that partnership. what you think we can do to better support that partnership. >> thank you, senator. i agree. the partnership we have with

state and local law enforcement is vital to everything the fbi does. there is nothing we do alone. that is one of the ways in which law-enforcement has gotten better in my career. from terrorism to protecting children to cyber, the task forces we have with state and locals are essential. i have been making it my business in my nine month on the job to travel the country. to speak to state and local law enforcement and say, thank you. formed these task forces and may give us their stars. they send us their stars. the partnership is vital across my responsibilities. about is a need for digital literacy changing. it used to be you would execute a search warrant and find paper. in a drug case or assault case.

now you find it from drive -- find a thumb drive or ipad. they need help coming better cyber investigators. i'm working to get with the secret service to see if we can push training out to state and local law-enforcement. to help the departments around the country whose -- who are called on for assistance. >> thank you. as you work your way around the country, the 30 cities road to 40 or 50, i would be grateful. law enforcement is playing an important role in helping us respond to a dramatic increase in violent crime. i want to applaud your focus on intellectual property theft. both in your spoken and written testimony. i want to applaud the bureau for securing five indictments against chinese actors that stole trade secrets.

i think it is important this is the first case brought by the department. of the cases enormous. i want to hear from you how many agents are assigned to investigate. as the challenges the fbi is facing in working effectively with other countries. simply want to thank senator hatch or his leadership in cosponsoring the act. director, the number of agents and challenges you are facing working internationally. >> thank you, senator. i think the number of agents we have specifically designated as intellectual property trade secret focused is something between 50-100. i cannot remember the exact number. he will -- the number working

the threat is larger because it touches my counterintelligence responsibilities and the entire cyber division. i have hundreds of people addressing this problem. the challenge we face is the world is as small as a pin hand with -- pinhead when you are facing a cyber challenge. shanghai is next door to wilmington. we need to get better at understanding the threat, working well with each other, and building relationships with war and partners. the that guys have shrunk the world. we have to shrink the world. that is why i am looking to see if i can expand the footprint internationally to put more cyber agents abroad to build those relationships. the bad guys do not recognize the borders. >> i think that is a great idea. i look forward to working with you in close partnership. able to pass are our bill and strengthen your resources, we can do a stronger

job of defending america's innovation. >> senator sessions? talented. very we have to expect a lot of you. you know how to do it. the complex cases that have been discussed, you do -- you any bureau deserve credit for. the fbi is the greatest law-enforcement agency they air is -- there is. but you are a national leader. i am concerned about a few things. i want you to get a little perspective here. article street journal -- you seem to make light of marijuana use by those who want to work for the fbi. you say you have to hire a great

work force. kids wantme of those to smoke weed on the way to the interview. do you see that could be interpreted as one more example of leadership in america dismissing the seriousness of marijuana use? our abilityndermine to convince young people not to go down a dangerous path? >> very much, senator. i determined and not to lose my sense of humor. there i was trying to be both serious and funny. i was asked the question by a guy who said i have a great can today for the fbi. i said, apply. i watched philosophical and funny.

usingead set against marijuana. i don't want young people to use it. it is against the law. we do have a three-year ban. i did not say i will change the band. -- ban. >> i appreciate that. i think you should understand your words can have ramifications out there. the american medical association just last october said cannabis use in adolescence causes persistent impairments. use is associated with increased rates of anxiety, mood, and psychotic thought disorders. that is the ama. i am very concerned that the leak that was used against the administrator, who expressed

concerns about some of the to attackwas used her. theyea indicated -- indicated they could move it under your leadership. did you have anything to do with that? >> no. >> thank you. high official, probably in the department of justice, attempted to attack her and discipline her. with regard to -- senator grassley has written, and i have i see there was a conviction he pled guilty to. the account he probably violated. campaignoney to a above the limits by moving money.

i don't think he ever fully did i do -- denied that. we would like some specific answers about that case. looking at the data we have seen -2006, not a single charge was made. 2013, only 24 were charged under the statute. three a year. i have never seen the movie. tos was an individual known challenge the president. there seem to be no corrupt financial dealings. i want to know more about how he turned out to be the one who got charged. did you personally review that indictment? >> no. wouldn't you normally know if

you're fbi is working on a case and bring that kind of indictment? >> not necessarily. say you haveines to ask washington's approval even at the local level involving someone of high profile. i can't remember exactly, but it is not about members of profile. if you read the department of justice thing. say, i am not and of the belief that prosecutors fraudaud -- prosecution -- bank embezzlement in 2009 -- >> we can have another round if you like. >> i apologize.

you are right. i am over time. >> some of the senators have to go to a hearing. you, mr. chairman. my apologies, senator sessions. and foru for being here your service to our nation. thank you to your family. most particularly, your wife for her service to our state of connecticut. i don't know if you are still residents of connecticut, but hopefully at least for a couple more months you will be. thank you for the great work you have done so far. jobs in one of the best the nation. not only because of the mission, but the great people who work for you. i want to thank them through you for all they do to keep our nation safe. focusing on the subject raised by the senator, i have been dismayed and outraged by some of the revelations about the secret

records to read destruction of records. false statements. these are allegations but they may have caused injuries or deaths among our veterans in phoenix and 20 locations. i know you have not yet been asked. would you agree the legend -- the alleged criminality race so that has been raised so far would provide a predicate for the fbi investigation? >> i don't know more than what i have read in the newspaper. it looks to be a significant matter. but we haven't even been asked to take a look at it. >> would you agree if there are credible and reliable indications of full statements to federal officials, distraction of federal records, obstruction of federal

investigation, all of them have been alleged. there would be sufficient etiquette for an fbi investigation? >> yes. >> would your involvement depend on your being asked by either department of justice attorneys or the inspector general? >> yes. in nearly every circumstance of we won't jump -- on it without being asked to be involved by the prosecutors or the agency. >> my view, for what is worth, is only the fbi has the resources expertise and ofhority to do the kind investigation that is vital to restore and sustain the trust and confidence of the american public.

our nation's veterans. in the integrity of the veterans administration. i will be making that view known to the attorney general of the united states. i have informally and indirectly. i hope you will be involved as director of the fbi. personal will devote attention to the matter. let me turn to another matter that is close to the heart of the administration. gun violence in our country. the fbi is responsible for enforcing laws to try to make our nation safer from gun violence. would it be helpful to the fbi in its investigation and prosecutorial duties to have a prohibition against illegal trafficking? >> illegal trafficking in drugs? >> of guns that are stolen or

otherwise legally possessed. >> i don't think i know -- my reaction is a criminal prohibition on gun trafficking would be useful, but sitting here today, i think i have done cases involving straw purchasing any legal transport and lrafficking -- and illega transport and trafficking of guns. >> enhanced penalties might be helpful. >> yes. for thesorry imprecise question. let me close. my time is limited. the national background check uniforms well as the crime reporting system are critically important source of information. i hope that they could be reliable to provide

and inaccurate data about gun violence. they are hampered by a lack of dissipation by local agencies as well as the breakdown of data within those systems. i hope perhaps the fbi can do more to make them more useful as sources of data on gun violence. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> senator hatch. >> thank you. i am a big fan of yours. iowa's have been. -- i always have been. you are a good man with the ability to be able to do what needs to be done. it is an overwhelming job. we don't always provide you with the facilities and capacity to be able to do it as well as i know you can. let us know what we can do to help you more in this work. it is important. there is no bigger supporter then i.

han i. humantatement identifies trafficking as a priority issue. victims end up as prostitutes or part of a pornography trade. including child pornography. the screen court held that the statute requiring restitution to theims is not suited for kind of child pornography crimes we see today. i introduced a bill to amend the restitution statute so it works for child pornography victims. i hope more will join us. i hope investigators, prosecutors, and judges will understand the unique nature of the crimes and the way it harms the young victims. harmthe internet, that

literally never ends. you have made a case for how called gated it is because of the internet in so many areas of anti-crime. ucd connection between crimes. >> yes sir, very much. >> the computer collective called anonymous is best-known for denial of service attacks on government, religious, and corporate rep sites. this website. -- corporate websites. since much of this information is legally accessible, targets cannot prevent their personal information from being obtained by members of the public.

how is the fbi approaching this? >> we see that kind of behavior. the trick for the bad guy is to get you. any e-mails like a knock on your door. the trick is to get them to open the door. they are trying to use false information. something they know about you. to get you to locate -- click on the link. we see it in hack to vest hacktaviost- behavior. the chinese criminals. >> i am sure you are following the current debate about sentencing reform. especially the push to lower sentences for drug offenders. this was addressed by the dea administrator.

based on her personal background and law enforcement experience and current leadership with the dea, she said mandatory minimum sentences have been important to our investigations. then we received a letter -- signatories included two former u.s. attorneys general. two directors of the office of national drug control policy. 21 former u.s. attorneys. includes officials from both republican and democrat parties. chairman, i asked of that letter be traced4 -- placed in record. objection, i will also place in the record a rebuttal. criticisms about the smarter sentencing act. fear itact says, we

will make it more difficult to build cases against the leaders of organizations. you served a stint. you agree with the administrator and the doj officials, or do you take another position? >> similar to michelle, throw my career, mandatory minimums were an important tool to andpacitate bad actors create incentives to cooperate. i have used them extensively. >> my time is up. >> do you have any concern about the fact that is somewhat that a lawyer, stockbroker, well respected wall friday afternoons, the

regular routine where somebody comes in with their $200 worth of powder cocaine. if you are caught, you will be told my goodness gracious. week doinge you a some kind of public service. helping clean up the local park or something. a minority kid in the inner-city, you buy $200 worth of crack cocaine, you get a mandatory minimum and go to prison? you will never get a job when you come out? you see a problem with that? both concerns me most -- because i am concerned about disparate treatment of people and the perception that the system is not fair so i think it is important both be taken

seriously. >> senator graham? >> thank you for coming today. i appreciate the leadership you are providing at a difficult time. are you familiar with the case of bin laden's son-in-law? >> yes. >> how long was he interrogated before read his miranda rights? >> i don't know sitting here. >> can you get back with me on that? >> yes. >> is it the policy of the obama in administration -- do we have enemy combatant interrogations available to us under the law? >> do we as a matter of law? >> as a matter of policy. someone like him could be held as an enemy combatant you agree? >> i do. >> did we choose to do this? >> no. >> you believe that one good way to defend the nation is intelligence gathering from

high-value targets like this gentleman? >> very much. >> i would suggest to attorney general holder that we are abandoning enemy combatant interrogations. we are at war. i hope we will reconsider that policy. sequestration, briefly. if we do not change it, what will it do to the fbi? >> it will return us to where we were when i became director. unable to fill vacancies. spend money on gas to interview people. it's a big problem for us. >> it would really reduce her capabilities at a time when we need them the most? >> i agree. >> you mentioned syria as a potential al qaeda presence. do you agree with the director that it represents a direct threat? >> yes. >> do we have a plan to deal with that? as a nation? >> yes. >> is that classified? >> yes.

>> i'd like for you to believe me about that -- briefed me about that. i think the next attack is going to come from someone trained in syria. >> the senator was not here earlier when director comey agreed to set up a time for a briefing, classified briefing. >> thank you. that will be helpful to the committee. benghazi, how close are we to catching someone who attacked our consulate? >> i'm not in a position to say. >i know the answer but i'm not n a position to say. >> fair enough. he is widely known to be one of the ringleaders. i don't know if you can say if he can be -- has been charged or not. this person has been interviewed on cnn. times of london. reuters.

press can have access to this person, why can't we capture him? >> and limited in what i can say about the matter. i can't comment. sometimes the international media can get access easier than law enforcement or the military. a would someone like -- former gitmo detainee -- one of the members or founder of all an enemy would he be combatant? >> i don't think i can say. if it is thew policy of the united states to read them their miranda rights if they are captured? can we hold them as enemy combatants? just get back to me on that. if we could use a drug take them out. -- ager ronin to take them out. -- a drone to take them out.

do you think a u.s. it's an could become a combatant under ae law of war -- could become combatant under the law of war? >> i don't the guy am expert enough to answer that. >> my view is they can. you have had americans side with the enemy and have been treated -- there were at least one or two who were held under that authority when i was deputy attorney general. policyink these are big issues. you agree homegrown terrorism is one of the things that keep you up at night? >> yes. >> the enemy is actively trying to penetrate our backyard? an american citizen would be a valuable asset to al qaeda? >> extremely. >> they are trying to recruit people in our backyard. is generaly,

petraeus under investigation regarding classified information? >> sub and also i cannot comment on. -- something else i cannot comment on. >> thank you very much for your service. i appreciate what you are doing for the fbi at a difficult time. to all your agents out there who are fighting on multiple fronts. you represent the front lines of defense. thank you. >> think very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good to see again, director comey. i think of you as my law school classmate. i'm very glad you are the director and pleased with the work you are doing. i know you brought up human trafficking. i was chairing a here men about retirement -- chairing a hearing about retirement. i wanted to ask you about this. is a horrendous crime that gets overlooked. it it has been overlooked for too long. we are finding statistics in our

own country where we have learned that 83% of victims are from our own country. we see women being trafficked from other places. predominantly mexico. a few weeks ago, i was leading a has with cindy mccain who been focused on this issue. we met with your counterpart with the federal police as well as the attorney general of mexico and others. i know they are starting to engage in this issue and pass legislation. work with their law enforcement on persecutions. i wanted to know what the fbi is focused on what this issue. there is some prosecutions that have been brought federally. versioneading a bill that passed the house yesterday along with four other sex trafficking bills. have focuses on

younger victims. many of the victims -- the average age is 13, under 18. the bill creates incentives for harbors soreate safe they are not prosecuting the young victims. they are giving them help. getting them to testify against the john's and pants. which for too long we have been neglecting. that's part of the equation. i wonder if you could comment on this issue. prosecutions in places like the birth occurred at oilpatch. dakota the north oilpatch. >> this is a scourge that has many dimensions to it. involving children, people trafficked within the u.s. people trafficked by drug trafficking organizations. americans traveling overseas.

ourre attacking it through civil rights program. our violence against children program. we are trying to send the messages you just talked about. being a pimp or exploiter of young people or women is a very serious offense. we have two meet people hard. nuisance just a social offense. we have to treat the victims as victims and get them help. help prosecuting the pimps and exploiters. it is something we take seriously. >> i also wanted to thank you. you have been of help in cases in minnesota. we had a major drug bust in our state involving heroine. we have a new u.s. attorney. workingaken this on,

with law enforcement, primarily bea. -- dea. i wanted to thank you for that and ask you what you see in increase.he heroine the correlation with prescription drugs. those kinds of cases as well. >> thank you, senator. i care about it everywhere i go. i have been to 27 field offices and will visit the rest he for the end of the year. i will be in minneapolis in a few weeks. state and law enforcement raise this question with me. i have seen intelligence -- analysis that the country is heroin withe deadly consequences. overdoses are up. it is a dea lead. i have told my offices, ask what

you can do. if we can contribute, lets contribute. >> i appreciate that. with the work that went on on the federal level, the number of clearusts, it sends a message where our state is. i appreciate the help you gave. the last thing i wanted to mention is i am going to the floor to pursue my effort with senator graham to get a federal bill passed. seeing metal theft spreading throughout the country because of the price of copper and other metals. as we approach memorial day, brokenc companies are into many times. we have seen houses explode

because people explode the pipe to read all the bill does -- most scrap that all dealers are honest. it does what many states have done. it says you have to write a check if you're going to get more than 100 bucks of scrap metal. it makes it easier for law enforcement to track down these people. we don't have a situation where where they are stealing metal and bringing it somewhere else. we have not seen a decrease in the number of deaths. believe it ise we a federal issue. i want to raise it to your attention and have you watch over the cases. at some point, we will have a break and everyone will wonder why they were listening to the scrap metal dealers and that of law enforcement. enforcement. law

two veterans groups. -- to the electric companies. that is my last speech on that for now. i am sure you will hear about it again. >> thank you very much, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. for your service on behalf of the country. what you do is important. it affects a lot of americans. is a lot you do that protects americans from harm. i want to talk to you about the electronic communications privacy act. this is a law that was enacted in 1986. there are some interesting ramifications that this law has. it is something of anachronism in our legal system. it allows the government to

e-mail,he contents of once a particular e-mail has ripened to the age of 180 days. this was in 1986. i was in ninth grade at the time. idle the guy had ever even heard the year -- word e-mail. it was not a means by which anyone stored information at the time. people primarily communicated and then deleted. or they would print it if they wanted to keep it. the paper record would have been treated differently. the electronic remnants of the e-mail would be subject to subpoena by the government and could be obtained without a warrant once it ripened to 180 days old. i don't think too many people raised or even imagined too many concerns at the time.

partly because most people had never heard of e-mail. there was no such thing as cloud computing. at least now we know now. , people communicate a lot of information by e-mail. they transmit a lot of information into the cloud. we live in a different world in which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. one in which most americans would not draw a real distinction between their expectation of privacy in their papers, houses, effects, and persons -- and their e-mail. most would kindle their e-mails to be part of their papers or effects. recognizing this anachronism in the law. the potential for abuse. and iends chairman leahy have introduced legislation that

would get rid of this neck and is him in the law and required the government to obtain a warrant before it wants to go after someone possibly e-mail. it would not -- go after someone's e-mail. there is a report that was released a few days ago by the white house calling for updates to the act. it said -- it recognize the increasing role of technology. it suggested the e-mail, text messages, and the cloud should receive elections. -- protections. with the f b i policy and practice regarding the use of after e-mail and cloud storage? >> thank you, senator. we do not do it. we treat it as information that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy. we obtain a warrant without regard to its age.

that's our policy. the statute may be outdated, but we are doing it in the right way. >> to your knowledge, there are no circumstances in which the fbi would choose to take the subpoena route. read itugh they could to allow that. >> i think that is right. i think our procedures required by policy we obtain a probable cause based warrant from a judge , no matter how old it is. i don't sit here knowing i am wrong, and i will correct it. but i think that is our policy. >> would you see any distinction treat e-mail and something on the cloud? or text messages or anything like that? >> no. where aware of any reason the fbi uses subpoenas to go after data on the cloud? >> i'm not aware.

i think we treated like the content -- whether an e-mail or text or cloud form -- the stored content of the communication is something we treat to a warrant. >> i see my time has expired. i have more questions i would like to ask. i will communicate them in writing. i would like to echo the concern raised by senator sessions regarding the domestic sousa case. dsouza case. this is something like brought against a critic of the administration, that raises eyebrows. a lot of us have questions about that. whether the appropriate levels were requested from washington.

to what degree washington was involved. thank you very much. >> senator jarden. thank you. we had a hearing in my committee. i understand senator hatch raise the issue -- i would like to ask for observations or comments on the issue. senator lee and i cosponsored the smarter sentencing act. to the fiveding percent increase in federal incarceration -- 1100% increase in cost -- we are estimating our federal prisons are 40% overcrowded. as we pay more for incarceration, we have fewer

dollars for law enforcement. prevention, treatment of drug addiction. we have the highest rate of incarceration of any country on earth. what we are trying to address is the question of making the individual decision. the bill that senator lee and i have introduced, which is passed out of this committee, does not eliminate mandatory minimums. for all crimes, it maintains the top level in terms of mandatory minimum. for a specified category of note, drug offenses involving violence or gangs, we reduced the low end of the mandatory minimum to give deese questioned the judge. we think this is a way to address a body of offenses which are not a serious violent threat to america. but need to be dealt with.

any much more specific and personal way. -- in a much more specific and personal way. it is within the discretion of the judge to.choose the sentence . we don't want to lessen our concern about drugs in society. we want to do this, as we said in the bill, with a smart approach. what is your response? >> i didn't mean by my answer to senator hatch to be criticizing any piece of legislation. he asked me whether they had been a valuable tool. my answer is yes. i don't have a view on what the exact mandatory should be and the incentives that flow from that will be. what you are saying makes sense to me and prince paul. it is always -- makes sense to principle. >> one of the aspects addresses

an issue for which i plead congressional guilt. increase theto sentencing guidelines on crack cocaine over powder cocaine. it was ame we did it, full-scale congressional panic over the arrival of this new, cheap, addictive narcotic that destroyed lives and babies mothers were carrying. we said hit it and hit it hard. with a 100 to one disparity. orther it should be 100-1 1-1 which i happen to endorse, we have reached a congressional compromise that 18-1. the bill addresses the people serving prison sentences under the old guidelines for crack cocaine. it does not treat them as a class.

it only allows each individual to petition for reconsideration of their sentencing. i had a man in my office age of 17 in the rockford, illinois, he was convicted of drug conspiracy and sentenced to a life sentence plus 10 years. he served over 20 years in the federal prison system. average cost, $29,000 a year. of a seriousple mistake made by a teenager paid for with a major part of this life. what is your thought about those still serving under the 100-1 guideline? >> idle to get thought about it carefully enough to give a good answer. drug enforcement is not a big focus of the job i am in now. as prosecutors and investigators, it is always important we look back and see if there are ways to do things better and smarter. >> last question.

your predecessor and i worked on something that came as a shock to me. fbi computer system as it was was totally inadequate, did not have access to the internet, did not have ways to reference and search, and had no capacity to transmit documents or photographs online. 9/11 wereuspects of identified, photographs of the suspects were sent to the fbi offices in overnight mail. could not be sent by the computer system. your predecessor labored long and hard to bring back computer system into the 20th century, let alone the 21st century. where are you today? >> thank you, senator. one of the many gifts i in heritage from bob mueller is the investment in that kind of thing, the technology.