start think being it and start attempting to find a way to fix it is now. because democracy moves so slowly. the next consensus is in six years. that's the time we have to address this. host: thanks for being on the "washington journal." we appreciatexb it. reminder that three day weekend on book tv and american history tv which are c-span 2 and c-span 3. every weekend book tv three days of books. find everything that we are airing over the weekend and american history tv, three days of american history tv over memorial day as well including bob dole at the world war ii veterans memorial where he goes every saturday.

...

♪ ♪il [gun salute]

>> ladies and gentlemen, it is blue angels, the flight squadron will be approaching momentarily from behind me. [cheers and applause] [applause] ladies and gentlemen, we invite all our guests to remain standing for the national anthem.

[playing national anthem] ♪

[applause] >> i invite all who wish to pray with me, let us great. -- pray. god of all wisdom, knowledge, and learning, four years ago these graduating midshipmen arrived at the naval academy and marched through the circles of the hall to commence a life of study and service. it was here in the halls of this storied institution that they were infiltrated with the highest ideals of duty, honor,

and loyalty, and were prepared for the arduous task of military leadership. on this day, as they receive their commissions, grant that they may take their rightful place as true leaders in the service to which they have been assigned. bless them always with a buy health, -- help, protect them from harm. those who love them and are looking on even now with pride and deep affection. give them the rich satisfaction of knowing that without their crucial contribution the state would not have come for the midshipmen they call their own. finally, gracious god, bless our may evergrant that it serve as a beacon of light in a world of encroaching darkness. we pray this in your holy name,

amen. >> please be seated. >> ladies and gentlemen, the 61st superintendent of the academy,ates naval admiral michael h miller. [applause] >> good morning. you fory hagel, a thank joining us today as our guest of honor. we are pleased to welcome the ,mbassador of panama congressman whitman, thank you as a board of visitors, a supporter. is such a pleasure to have you here. secretary mavis, general amos,

dear friend, and we appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedules to join us. distinguished guests, family and friends, and most importantly the graduating class of 2014, what a great day. [cheers and applause] once again, we gather in the stadium, this memorial that happens to contain a sports field, to celebrate those who have gone before us and those who are about to embark on their service to the nation. we are all witnesses to the next of thisin the history remarkable institution as we commission another link in our long chain. today ceremony is book ended by traditions that draw our attention skyward. the blue angels fly over is always so impressive here at the welcome today's graduates into the fleet.

it remains one of the great physical embodiment of our service here at if they do not give you goosebumps, i do not know what will. the tradition some 66 years ago. we have been holding this ceremony and the stadium since 1966. only twice has it been canceled due to weather. creditgive you all the for the weather as well as our remarkable chaplain. it cannot be a better day. the other book ends of this graduation ceremony is the iconic moment when [indiscernible] this tradition has been around since 1912. the commissions were first awarded with diplomas upon graduation. over 76,000 covers have rocketed skyward, men and women who don the uniform of a commissioned officer. tosslue angels and the hat

elevates our perspective. it is fitting that we resist -- we reflect from a new and different angle. looking up words, we consider the future trajectory of these 1068 young officer careers. all that they have achieved here on the banks. think how much they will accomplish in the decades to come. skyward without acknowledging the persistent clouds on the horizon which will impact their early years in uniform. whether it be the south china sea, libyan, nigeria, you name it. there will be corners of conflict with their own challenges. class -- truly the classic 2000 14 steps into risk but it is not unprecedented. it has always been thus. would only need to consider those graduates 100 years ago, the class of 1914.

on june 5, president woodrow wilson delivered the address to 156 graduates who were entering ourncertain period in history. america's attention was focused on mexico and then imbroglio -- embroiled in a bloody civil war. the city was taken by u.s. marines and sailors and name battle plan. overseas tensions among european powers was building in a complex web of alliances had taken shape following the walk and wars of 1912-1913. clouds were forming on the atlantic. unbeknownst to the class of 1914, they would see the outbreak of world war one one month after throwing their covers into the air here in annapolis. president wilson gave no hint of the looming conflict but he did pass invaluable advice which remains as relevant today as it

was a century ago. he told the new graduate to be ready and fit for anything you have to do and keep ready and fit. do notslack here it suppose your education is over. begun.ucations have just for the class of two thousand 14, your education has just begun. while the clouds may change in appearance, a lifelong pursuit of knowledge and an indomitable fighting spirit remain the naval officers greatest advantage over any aggressor. your time has provided you an excellent foundation for a career of learning and leadership nomination rectory -- a trajectory of honor and intellect. you have the tools to excel. i have every expectation we will continue to excel regardless of what the weather may bring. this journeyrted

on a bright and sunny july day 1423 days ago. they have not all been sunny days a sense. each in its own way helped mold you into that which you have become, the envy of the free navy, the united states and marine corps officers. we gather here today to celebrate all you have accomplished and look with confidence to that which you will do in service to our country. there are no guarantees in life. as the admiral with its 100 50 years ago, our success has always depended on those who the face old action in of insurgency. may you always answer the call to duty with courage and confidence when faced with the fog and smoke of battle and repeat the call to our sailors and marines. "damn the torpedo!"

[applause] pleasure to introduce secretary ray mavis. he has an enormous scope of responsibility. i cannot count the numbers of people, then0,000 there is that fleet marine force out there. he received his undergraduate degree at ole miss and law degree at harvard, served as a young warfare officer in uss little rock before cutting the miss it is -- mississippi state auditor. he went on to become the youngest governor in mississippi in over 100 years. he was ambassador to saudi arabia. he spoke commencement for lsu and university of virginia. and the d.c. premiere of the blockbuster "godzilla" to to brush up on the threats to the

navy and marine corps. you may have seen him on john stewart or in the movie "battleship." or one of hundreds of venues were he is encouraging our sailors and marines to better themselves in our navy marine corps team. maybe just saw him hammering away at some chesapeake they blue crab. please join me in welcoming the -- the 75thretary secretary of the navy, secretary ray mavis. [applause] >> family and friends and to the platform guests, most particularly mike miller, he started with you in the class of 2014. becoming superintendent when you were beginning.

with you.ng this will be his last commissioning day. thank you for being a great superintendent. [applause] to our secretary of defense, chuck hagel, thank you so much for being here today. think you for all you do every day for our sailors, marines, and those who love them. thank you for taking care of them every day. [applause] to the class of 2014, welcome to commissioning day. i cannot think of a better or than theopriate place navy and marine corps stadium. here you are surrounded by so many memories of your time here

in annapolis and her were -- heroic deeds and storied bottles that line the stadium around us. back who --t your who are about to be and lieutenants, congratulations, you have earned it. you have put in the time. you have put in the work. you put in the effort. it is a journey that you started day you turned down your acceptance to west point. [laughter] [applause] behind every single one of you helping you to see -- to succeed have been mothers, fathers, grandparents, teachers, coaches,

king hall stewards, and many others that you probably do not even know. i know you are going to do this anyway, but take a moment after the ceremony to give them an extra hug to thank them for making this event possible. in so many real ways, today is their day too. i want younts here, to know i know exactly how you -- since i gotve to sit as a proud parent on wednesday watching my daughter annie graduate. annie is here today. i want to give a shout out to 23rd company -- [cheers and applause]

for making her an honorary member of that company. these past four years have challenged you in a whole lot of ways. they have prepared you for what lies ahead. graduated from college today like thousands of others across this country. representing that is your diploma. it is in the knowledge that you have mastered a very demanding education course. today you're also going to get a second document. it is a document you need to those who have completed a very intense training program at the same time that they are getting a great education. document that started the careers like chesterton in a straight here.

chesterton this. it conveys a special trust and diretly from the president of the united states. a specialmes responsibility, the obligation of leading our nation's best. the young men and women of the navy and marine corps. their commission is not about your past accomplishments. it is about your future contributions. are many throughout this nation's history who have held this special trust. link in that unbroken chain of service. thank everyone of you

for making the conscious decision to commit the next part of your life, whether it is five years or 40, to our country. you havee time that pursued your education and your training here, our navy and marine corps that you are about to lead have been globally ed and globally engaged. sailors and marines have continued operations in afghanistan. were finishing fleet ors and rains or beginning a massive sea-based mission to provide relief after the devastating earthquake in haiti. year, theyoungster launched tomahawk strikes into libya and flute carrier missions

there -- flew carrier missions there. the striker rose the first two years. it tooup responded with the earthquake and tsnumani in japan. as second-class men, they responded in this country to hurricane sandy. this year when you have been withinlass, they went hours when typhoon hyan stuck the philippines -- struck the philippines. dole for years you have been in -- the four years you have been here our sailors have been off the horn of africa to fight pirates. every day around the world they have conducted partnerships and

engagement missions in virtually every corner of this earth. the united states navy in the united states marine corps are the guarantors of the freedom of the seas and they provide him global security. they have and they do stand the watch. they provide presence and are ready for any eventualities. american sailors and marines have done this and have done this superbly for more than two centuries. now it is your turn. to join thatrn great legacy and to make it a greater legacy of your own. to do that you will need absolutely everything you have learned here at the academy. you will need the academics and the professional education. you will also need the spirit

that brought you here. second lieutenant like all sailors and marines look to farsea, you look to the horizon wanting to know what is beyond. absolutesolute faith, confidence, that you can and deal with whatever comes over the horizon. you're up to the task. the future of our nation depends on it. fortis, navy, super always courageous. ordelis, always faithful. welcome to the fleet. >> thank you.

it is my great honor to introduce our guest of honor, secretary of defense checuck hagel. he is the first combat veteran to serve as secretary of defense here it has brought a fresh perspective as we respond to the challenges of the 21st century. after serving in the army, earning two purple hearts, he continued to serve our nation in a variety of roles out of uniform, the corporate president and ceo in several different businesses, and ultimately a semester from the great state of nebraska for 12 years. he assumed his post as a 24 the secretary of defense. he is an author and avid football fan. [indiscernible] was thember that, it one that had all four seasons in one day. [laughter]

secretary hagel was undeterred by the rain, sleet, and snow and nary a complaint crossed his lips about the weather. inen his prior affiliation the army, my guess is that he might not have been pulling with the navy for -- with his entire heart. please join me in welcoming the secretary of defense, secretary chuck hagel. [applause] no are i forgot what you think >> good morning. i am deeply grateful for the opportunity to share this day with all of you. i mean.. that. i know these ceremonies come with the job. one of the more attractive features of this business to participate in this kind of

participation as you begin a new chapter in her life. thank you for giving me the opportunity to be part of this be part of your lives forever. it has been noted by admiral my affiliation with the nebraska, state of landlocked state of nebraska, my , orle some of you as to why put it another way why would he be worthy enough to aad naval the u.s. academy commencement. i would respond, aside from the

fact that i'm secretary of defense -- [laughter] explaining to you may be something you don't know nebraska does have a navy. it does not do much. it is a ceremonial navy that began about 100 years ago. i am in admiral. hello.the standard nonetheless, i am in admiral in the united states navy and the nebraska navy. so, therefore, based on that authority i hereby grant amnesty to all midshipmen who are on restriction for minor conduct offenses, there you are. [applause]

some osome of you look more relieved than others. the parents are relieved i know. if anyone objects, take it up with the secretary of defense. of 2014,ass congratulations on this tremendous, tremendous achievement. we are all very proud of you. today is the pinnacle of your naval academy experience that comes at a time of historic change. transformational change. as the world is reshaping and redefining as a new world order is being built. it is also a time of transition in this country, the country that you will serve. conclude your four years

of education and experience in isining, our nation concluding 13 years of war, the longest in our history. heard from vice admiral miller, you will soon be presented with great 21st-century challenges and opportunities, meeting the challenges, seizing the opportunities and managing willgh this uncertainty require exceptional leadership, exceptional leadership. charged with help leading american sailors and marines through this defining time. that is a heavy responsibility. menwill you lead these and women you will be responsible for? how will you earn their trust in their confidence in their respect? i have three suggestions that

may help you succeed. they are not just my ideas. they are what enlisted sailors and marines tell me all the time. it is what i believe as in a listed infantry men and i can succeed. you must connect with the people that you lead on a personal level. when you do, you are forging a bond that you can rely on years down the road. and under difficult circumstances. having built close relationships in the arts, you will do so across the fleet. technologies and social media making our relationship relevant, itn less is more important than ever to be personally invested in your will and build relationships face to face, take the time to ask them about themselves. it to know them. listen to them. that earns respect.

the value that you place on building relationships shows the kind of leader you are. iat is important because recently heard from one enlisted marine. he said you do not choose who you lead. they choose you. that is wise advice. second, try to understand perspectives that are different from yours. from the diverse group of people you will serve with to the allied forces you will interact and partner with, being able to see the world through their eyes, it through the eyes of others will be critically important. there is a sailor going through the training pipeline who expects his officers to be learning officers, learning evenrs, learning struggling to understand backgrounds and careers and lives outside of your own, whether they are enlisted or

civilians. this will help you not only in the military but everywhere all the time in your personal lives. allies and partners in opportunities to build relationships and engage in the world. andrstanding the intentions experiences of other militaries is a skill that is vital to our national security and america's few -- and america's future. my third suggestion is very simple and clear. be humble. stay humble. by virtue of your unique experience here at the naval you have much to be comfortednd about. if confidence is way too arrogant, both your superiors and subordinates will respond. it will not come out well for you nor should it. humility is about respect.

respect for others. give credit to others. remember, you will never ever know enough or be as smart or as good as you think you are. else will always has something to teach you. in the word of one petty officer, lots of enlisted have a lot of pride in what they do. a little bit of humility on the officers part, to be able to say "i do not know, what do you think" goes a long way. these three tools, personal interaction, understanding, youlity will all help personally and professionally. always remember that the first principle of leadership is accountability. the first principle of leadership is accountability. you have been taught that. you know that. you have been raised that way. you will now practice it. accountability to those above

you are the to those under your command and yourself and maybe most importantly to yourself. one to take up your duty stations and responsibility of findrship, you will yourself under tremendous pressures you have never experienced before. at times you will be pressure to succeed at any cost. sometimeshappens, it clouds the internal compass that we have that helps us distinguish right from wrong. some people regularly check that compass. some do not. not often find them selves drifting into and resulting in ethical or moral lapses that sustain our forces, damage our credibility and harm our nation's security. often thatn all too small actions can reverberate in large ways, whether it is sharing answers on a test, looking the other way when

someone denigrates another human being, or taking advantage of the trappings of your office. remember your actions will define you. your actions will define you in the eyes of everyone around you. it is not just what you do but how you do it. actions and interactions have consequences. as a leader, you are a role model. it may be your biggest responsibility of all. yet the power to inspire and encourage others to do the right thing. inspireave the power to and encourage others to do the right thing. you will be counted on to help lead sexual assault of your brothers and sisters in uniform. you see what these crimes due to communities. you know how they tear people in unit apart. how they destroy the bond of confidence and trust.

lies at the center of our military. take this knowledge and whatever you can to make sure everyone is treated with the dignity and respect they deserve. we are all accountable. from new recruit to four-star admirals and generals, from second lieutenants to the secretary of defense, we all have to step up and take action when we see something that hurts our people and values. level, a few months ago i found my brother and commanding officer in vietnam, lieutenant jerome johnson, i talked with him for 1968 ast time since late few months ago. he is in chicago. brieflyo use and very of an example of what i am talking about. in 1968, first, that was a years

dear for america in vietnam. we sent him over 16,000 dead americans and one year from that war. we had a racial differences. discipline issues. the army was in trouble. in country was in trouble 1960 eight. this young african american had a lieutenant out of chicago, came to our unit and he stepped into the middle of this. he brought everybody together, african-americans, whites, hispanics. he said "no more of this, we are in this together. we are americans first. we are going to work together and get along and we're going to fight together and take care of each other. , we aresegregated tents together." the force of this one young

african-american second lieutenant in a majority white unit brought that company i haver like nothing ever seen. that is leadership. that is stepping up. that is doing the right thing. i have admired lieutenant johnson as my brother has sent it in 68. i want to acknowledge lieutenant johnson today. for what he did for all of us. wife ofon humility, his 40 years and his children and grandchildren never knew that he received the silver star in vietnam because he was too humble to even tell his family that he received that tremendous honor. individual who live something pretty special. [applause]

that is what leaders do. we face challenges straight up and had on him was strength of -- hea on which -- head on with string of heart. you pressed on in the face of tragedy. as we mark this wonderful celebratory day, recognizing accomplishments, and those who life toou through you get you to this point, with all of that, i know that today our thoughts are also turning to three midshipmen that the naval academy lost earlier this year. hans loen, max

allen. this community will always remember their enthusiasm and compassion that brightens the lives of all that knew them. hans and his wonderful family. his sisters here among you today. his sister will be commission today as a second lieutenant. -- will be commissioned today as a second lieutenant in the united states marine corps. [applause] our hearts and prayers go out to the families of all these midshipmen and their friends are at the academy. will bese of loss familiar to some of the sailors and marines to you all soon command. you will be people that may have lost friends to accident or

suicide or combat. you will be people who may be struggling with their own challenges like stress, mental health, or drugs and alcohol abuse. help,hey come to you for it is not mean they are weak. it means they are strong. asking for help when you need it takes courage and strength. whatwe need to remember our entire country needs to remember is that these countries do not need to be stigmatized. they need to be embraced. they need leaders. trust thaty know and will go the extra mile for them. the need leaders like parents, friends, instruct is, mentors here today -- today.tors, mentors here people who never squandered a moment or missed an opportunity to make the world a better place.

you will be that kind of leader. you will be the ones who lead from the bottom up who will help ofng about a renewed sense collective responsibilities to take care of each other. what out for each other. together and facial challenges head-on together, you and your failer -- fellow sailors and marines will always be a force for good throughout the world. declareslass model "where there is unity there is victory." transitiones ago, requires great leadership. in this particular time of change, the leadership we need cannot just come from people in positions like those of us on the stage today. it has to come from you. you will have within your grasp the opportunity to do more for your all on a personal level

than anyone else in the military. sees that special, unique, privileged opportunity. that is what your sailors and marines expect from you. officer.oke to a petty in his words "when you come to sortsere will always be and sorts in different sorts of challenges, every day is a different day. some days will be good. other days not at all days you need to be there for them, the officers and leaders need to be there for them." of 2014, connect with people. understand different perspectives. stay humble. be there for your people and their families. may you always be officers were

the not only of the people you lead but the nation you serve. work hard. have some fun. have some fun. thanks you on this wonderful, glorious day. and a congressman for what you have done and what you will do for our country. god bless you all. inc. you. -- thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> we will leave this event now. if you miss anything he said, go to c-span.org. we do have more live coverage coming up today here on c-span. at 12:30 p.m., we will go to the council of foreign relations here in washington were panelists will discuss technology policy. and how innovation influences in. that will be like here on seas

and. p.m. president30 obama is expected to name shaun donovan as the nominee to direct the office of management and budget. the president will also take the opportunity to tap the san antonio mayor to replace him is how -- housing secretary. castro is being those talking about as vice president of candidates in 2016. he would become one of the highest-ranking spending officials serving in the cabinet. third -- you is a can see that today at 3:30 p.m. eastern. coverage of commencement addresses start tonight. ofaiming -- it is a mix business executives and congressmen. kicks off with governor jindal. here's a preview. >> for those of you that follow

pop culture, you may take a note fight between that dynasty and the a&e network. of may have noticed that one the first and loudest and most aggressive defenders of the robertson family was the governor of louisiana. [applause] you may think that i was defending the robertson simply because i'm the governor of their homes stay, the great state of louisiana. you may have thought i defended them because my boys are huge fans of the show. you would have been wrong. i defended them because they have every right to speak their minds. however in delicately they may choose to do so. you can see all of his remarks tonight followed by deval patrick, john lewis, and

others. it all begins tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. not step up the enforcement side, if the only thing we can rely on to make them do what they should be doing is for them to get a bad story, that is a lot of victims. that to me would be a depressing conclusion. we've got to figure out someway to up the ante that is shorter waiting for another tragedy to hit the front pages. >> i would say less dollar amount and more folks. again, the changes i have seen institutions or to make our when they are immediately under investigation.

i would almost rather see an investment in a bigger team. >> in all fairness, they will be paying for this. we have an issue with budget and our government. what does that come from? we cannot just aimlessly hand out. i think every survivor would back that up. oncenter claire mccaskill combating rape and sexual assault on college campuses saturday morning at 10:00 eastern. and on but tv, the wife of former vice president at cheney and senior fellow at the american enterprise institute examines the political philosophy and presidential tenure of james madison. sunday morning at 11:00 on c-span2. tv, the lifeistory and work of american red cross founder clara barton. soldiersisit her office in washington, followed by your questions and comments

life you spam3. -- on c-span3. >> john carlin, assistant attorney general for national security, defended the decision to indict five chinese military officials for hacking u.s. companies thursday. he spoke at the brookings institution on cyber threats to u.s. national security. he said the justice department plans to bring these charges forward and believe they have enough evidence for conviction. he warned that to not bring charges is to say that this is not criminal activity. national security division was created in the after nine -- after that of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. [indiscernible] [no mic] >> there's nothing going on in the area of cyber espionage or

emerging national security threats these days. it'll be a short and relatively uninteresting session. i'm joking. it is an amazing time to have him here. know, it gives up them living in a cave for the last 48-72 hours, this is a big week in this area. it has involve some very significant and unprecedented actions by the federal government. specifically in the bringing of indictments against foreign military officials for cyber attacks on u.s. companies and espionage against american business interests. separately, the house just passed the usa freedom act. nsaificantly amending surveillance authority. there's a lot going on in the

area. activities with respect to spying and collection authorities and our response to other countries activities against us you. how we are responding. how different are they? is their principal differences between what we acknowledge that we do and we authorize under our law and what we object to when it is done to us? these are some of the issues i think we are talking about this week and i hope we will be talking about today. cannot think of a better person to address them for us. been actinghas assistant general attorney for some time and was recently confirmed in a permanent role. carlin has been acting

assistant attorney general for some time and was recently confirmed in the role. he served as the chief of staff to his predecessor and principal deputy to lisaen monaco. previously he was chief of staff and senior counsel to robert muller when he was director of the fbi. a career federal prosecutor, mr. carlin served as national coordinator of the hacking and intellectual property program. the prosecutors were specially trained to prosecute cyber crime in intellectual property cases. he has a lot of background in the area that gave rise to this week's indictment. he has a degree from harvard law and williams college. he will speak for about 45 minutes. and then we'll have a q. & a. with him over there and take questions from the audience. i ask that you silence your

phones. there are a lot of cameras in the room. please join me in welcoming john carlin. [ applause ] >> thank you, ben, for that kind introduction. i'm grateful to be here at brookings today discussing emerging national security threats. also a keen fan of the la fair blog as are many of us here. i appreciate your work there as well. on monday the department of justice announced charges against five members of the chinese military for computer hacking, economic espionage, and other offenses directed at six american victims in the u.s. nuclear power, metal, and solar industries. today i will focus on the growing threat. state sponsored cyber intrusion targeting for-profit, the sensitive and proprietary

information of u.s. companies. these charges against uniformed members of the chinese military were the first of their kind. some said they could not be brought. at the department we follow the facts and the evidence wherever they lead. sometimes the facts and the evidence lead us to a lone hacker in a basement the in the u.s. sometimes they lead to an organized crime syndicate in russia. sometimes they lead us to a uniformed member of the chinese military. no mat where they lead there should be and there are no free passes. we should not stand idly by, tacitly giving permission to anyone to steal from us. we will hold accountable those who steal, no matter where they are, no matter who they are, and whether or not they steal in person or through the internet. because cyber crime has real victims. while cases like the one brought

in pittsburgh are challenging, this week we proved that they are possible. the criminal justice system must be a critical component of the nation's cyber security strategy. as long as criminals continue stealing from american businesses, we will continue pursuing those criminals. the charges announced were ground breaking. they represent a significant step forward in our cyber approach are. within the justice department the national security division or nsd focuses on cyber threats to national security. those posed by terrorists or nation states. our approach to these threats is deeply rooted in our division's history and our success in the cyber arena builds upon a solid foundation. nsd was created in response to the grave threat of terrorism. after the devastating attacks of

september 11th, it became clear ha the justice department needed to reorganize to tackle terrorism and other national security threats more effectively. we needed a single division to integrate the work of prosecutors and law enforcement officials with intelligence attorneys and the intelligence community. so in 2006 congress created the department's first you litigating section in half a century -- nsd. nsd works closely with partners through the government to make sewer we leverage all available tools to combat the terrorism threat. we have prove nn that context that the criminal justice system is a vital part of the counter terrorism strategy. just this week, abu hamzai al masri was convicted in new york of an attack in yemen that resulteded in the deaths of four hostages and provided material

support to terrorists including al qaeda and the taliban. in march of this year, sulaman abu gait h was also charged. he was the son of osama bin laden and a senior member of al qaeda. he was the voice and face of al qaeda in the days and weeks after the 9/11 attacks. in both cases, while it may have taken more than a decade as a result of our integrated approach to combatting terrorism, these men were brought to justice. these cases are just to two most recent in a long line of successful criminal prosecutions of terrorist offenses. we took the lessons we learned from counter terrorism and applied them to our work on national security cyber threats. in the face of escalating threats we recognize the feed to reorganize and integrate.

when i was chief of staff to director muller at the fbi we undertook a transformation there to meet the same growing cyber threat. in 2011 we brought that approach to nsd. in late fall of 2011, ten years after 9/11, we established a review group to evaluate nsd's work on national security threats and chart out a plan for future threats. six months later, that team issued recommendations that shaped what nsd's national security cyber program looks like today. most significantly, in 2012, we graded and trained the national security cyber specialist network to focus on combatting cyber threats to the national security. this network known as niskas includes prosecutors from every united states attorney's office around the country along with experts from the computer crime and intellectual property

section and attorneys from the different parts of nsd. we now have prosecutors nationwide to review intelligence and investigative files. the creation of the network was motivated by the desire to make a tangible impact on u.s. security efforts through criminal investigation and prosecution. by december of 2012, we made public predictions that with the establishment of niscus by empowering more than a hundred prosecutors in the field working with the fbi on these cases that one would be brought. this week we made good on that promise. it is a new and integrated approach that made the pittsburgh case possible. as part of the creation of the niscus we brought prosecutors from wisconsin, new york, from georgia to help nsd build the

case. we partnered with the western district of pennsylvania where the victims were repeatedly hit. we worked with offices across the fbi are from california to oregon to oklahoma and back here in d.c. our team thought creatively, worked collaboratively and explored all available options for stopping this activity. that is how we were able to indict five members of the third department of the people's liberation army or 3-pla and unit 61398. these men stand accused of cyber intrusions targeting a range of u.s. industries. the indictment alleges specific actions on specific days by specific actors to use computers to steal information from across the economy. it alleges that while the men and women of our american businesses spent their days innovating, creating, and developing strategies to compete in the global marketplace that

these members of unit 61398 were spending their business days in shanghai, stealing the fruits of american labor. it alleges that they stole information particularly beneficial to chinese companies and that they took communications that would provide competitors with key insight into the strategy and vulnerabilities of the victims. now there are some who question this law enforcement action. generally speaking these questions fall into three categories. first, whether there is a clear line between what these individuals have been accused of and what the u.s. or other nations do. second, whether charges like these can truly impact cyber security, particularly when there may be significant challenges to arresting and ultimately trying these individuals in criminal court. third, whether government should focus on hardening defenses rather than pursuing charges.

as to the first question, while some commentators may ask whether this is a new line to draw, in fact, we are aware of no nation in the world that publically states that theft of information for commercial gain is acceptable. even in this case, china has not attempted to justify the allegations. instead, it denied them. this has been a consistent response. a little over a year ago, the chinese government flatly denied reports that unit 61398 was hacking u.s. companies. a spokesman for china's ministry of national defense said chinese military forces have never supported any hacking activities. china also challenged the united states to present hard evidence that could stand up in court that cyber attacks are connected to the chinese military. will, we did.

the response? hours after monday's announcement the chinese foreign ministry called the accusations extremely absurd. we are confident that we have the evidence to back up these specific accusations in a court of law. the indictment is particular. we have exposed the faces and names behind the keyboards this in shanghai used to steal from american businesses. this is not conduct that responsible nations within the global economic community should tolerat tolerate. in the united states we believe we are entitled to our property and intellectual property. we believe one's work should not be taken from you and given to others.

responsible nations do conduct intelligence activities and nations openly acknowledge that they have intelligence services. like others, our intelligence activities are focused on national security needs of our country. that's why the president this year reaffirmed in a presidential directive that , quote, it is not an authorized foreign intelligence purpose to collect such information to afford a competitive advantage to u.s. companies and u.s. business sectors commercially. u.s. foreign intelligence collection occurs under the framework of the rule of law involving oversight by all three branches of government. as the church committee recognized in 1976 the constitution provides for a system of checks and balances and interdependent power as between the congress and the executive branch with respect to foreign intelligence activity. the very protections that are built into that legal framework, subject that information to rigorous oversight and prevent

sharing with private companies for their private gain. let's be clear. those protections do not exist in other countries targeting every day american trade secrets, sensitive business information and intellectual property in order to steal specific information and pass it along to their domestic companies in order to give them a competitive edge and to prevend otherwise is to promote a narrative of false equivalency. even though we know of no nation that stands up publically to defend corporate theft for the profit of state-owned enterprises, in the shadows there may be some who encourage and support it. in short we alleged that the members of 61398 that we have charge committed theft, pure and simple. although this case is the first of its kind it is also in some respects just business as usual. prosecutors in the field and at

csips used criminal investigation and prosecution to disrupt cyber crime. it is one of our most important partners in the fight against cyber crime. law enforcement has long been used to combat cyber threats. as recently as this week the criminal cases made a tremendous impact on cyber security. as you have likely seen on monday the department of justice announced charges in connection with blake shades malicious software. these were part of the largest ever cyber enforcement operation involving more than 90 arrests in 19 countries. likewise in the national security arena when criminal law enforcement is the most effective tool we have to disrupt the terrorist threat. we employ it no matter how far away or shield it from prosecutions the defendants may see today. when criminal enterprises steal our intellectual sprott or

threaten security we investigate and prosecute. these aren't the first charges we have lodged against individual who is have stolen from americans to benefit state-owned enterprises. as just one example we successfully obtained a significant conviction for economic espionage. the first jury are conviction, earlier this year. walter lu obtained one of dumont's secrets, a process honed over decades for making a multi-purpose white pigment. he passed it to a large chinese state-owned company. what lu stole was something americans see and use daily. something that doesn't have any national security implication, something that simply brings a profit. lu stole the formula for the color white. he was brought to justice many the u.s. criminal justice system. we allege that the members of

63198 that are charged stole to benefit chinese enterprises. the thefts are similar. they took place in the united states but the difference is unit 63198 operated remo motmot from the previously safe spaces oh of shanghai. we will no longer promote safe havens. individuals cannot asoid consequences of their actions by capitalizing on 21st century tools and operating from the comfort of their desks half a world away. these crimes are the same as many crimes that we have investigated and prosecuted before, only the method or means is different. but the threat we face is increasingly moving out of the physical world and into cyberspace. thus, the prosecutions of those who steal from us remotely must and will become the new normal. we will continue to pursue this option along with others available to us. the threat of economic espionage

is serious. the threat of cyber economic espionage is mounting. some estimate that every year the united states loses more than 300 billion from theft of the intellectual property. and they say that figure is about equivalent to the current annual export level of u.s. exports to asia. losses of that magnitude cost the american economy untold numbers of jobs. real jobs. they reduced the profit that american firms make from research and development which, in turn, reduces the incentives and resources for innovation. as the u.s. attorney in pittsburgh david hickton said, when cyber intrusions occur, production slows, plants close, workers are laid off and lose their homes. such activity undermine it is trust between countries and companies that's necessary to do business in our global economy. our companies can't face the threat alone.

companies cannot depend solely on anti-virus software to defend against attacker linked to deep state military budgets. it's not a fair fight. to defend against those empowered by a government we need our government on our side. we must support our entrepreneurs by using every tool we have to prevent and deter this conduct any way we can. we need you. just as the local police can't control crime without victims calling in the crimes our law enforcement officials, too, need cooperation from victims. it is our hope the more cases we are bring and the more perpetrators we bring to justice the higher the level of cooperation we are likely to receive. we cannot let this conduct go undeterred. doing so threatens our nation's security. cases like the pittsburgh case will have a deterrent effect. to those critics who raise questions about whether the

charges will have any impact in light of the challenges associated with arresting and trying the individuals, the deterrent effect of charges can be significant. general keith alexander, former nsa director explained that the only way to deter cyber attack is to work to catch perpetrators and take strong and public action when we do. fbi director muller called for figuring out who is targeting us and going after them saying we must remember that behind every intrusion is a person responsible for that intrusion. a warm body behind the keyboard. whether they are in tehran, tucson, shanghai or seattle, bucharest or the bronx, our ultimate goal must be to identify and deter the persons behind the keyboards. the government and private sector alike are increasing the call for prosecuting cyber theft of trade secrets. we need to prevent attacks and deterrence helps.

prosecutions can smul tan kwously punish those who have committed bad acts already and deter those who might otherwise commit bad acts in the future. in other words, by going after the crimes we can help stop the next group of criminals. it is, of course, possible that weal never obtain custody. even if these five avoid arrest, laying bare the criminal activity takes it out of the shadows. law enforcement investigations can also support other valuable tools. criminal charges can justify economic sanctions from our colleagues in the treasury department. sanctions that prevent criminals from engaging in transactions with u.s. entities and deny access to the u.s. financial systems. they can facilitate by the state department as our nation's diplomats laying out evidence of the cyber theft to foreign government officials and force them to answer for their actions. or as they coordinate with other

victimized countries. furthermore, the investigations can lead other governments to take action when the united states doesn't end up doing so. so we will continue to bring these cases. however, it's not easy. prosecutions like this present unique challenges. cases can take years to investigate. they can sometimes be tough to attribute the unlawful activity to particular individuals. they involve difficult decisions regarding how to protect sensitive sources and methods and even after charging it can be difficult to obtain custody of defendants and bring them to justice. but difficult doesn't mean impossible. the status quo simply will not do. as the attorney general said this weekend announcing the these charges, enough is enough. we would not stand idly by as people hauled away our wealth in trucks. likewise we cannot allow it.

the indictment is an important first step. it must be just that. prosecutions will not solve the problem alone. we need to build on the success and keep responding with prosecutions where possible but also with all the other tools in the tool kit. we need to keep at it. we appreciate the bipartisan support we have received from congress including particularly supportive words if senators king and white house along with the house and senate intelligence, homeland security and judiciary committees. both before and after the action. many of the individuals provided are resources and encouragement as we undertook the transformation to combat the threat. we need help. we must continue until adversaries realize the cost of stealing from companies outweighs the benefits. so far we have talked about criminal prosecution and other tool ohs.

we recognize stopping attacks before they take place is the goal. we will have succeeded when there are no more criminal charges to bring. to that end we have worked hard in government and with the private sector. the fbi works closely with companies that have been the victims of hackers through, among other things the info guard program which has more than 25,000 active members. it brings together individuals in law enforcement, government, the private sector, and academia, to talk about how to protect our critical infrastructure. likewise, the department of homeland security, the department of energy, and other departments and agencies routinely work together closely with companies to protect critical infrastructure. the department has heard from them and is taking steps to respond to concerns of the private sector. just last month we teamed up with the federal trade commission to issue a policy statement making it clear that anti-trust law is not and should

not be a bar to legitimate cyber security information sharing. earlier this month, justice department issued a white paper which clarified that the communications act doesn't ordinarily restrict network operators from sharing certain data with the government to protect information. this guidance will help the private sector collaborate more freely to protect itself. all of this is just a start. going forward we need legislation to facilitate information sharing between the private sector and the government. the charges announced this week benefit not only victims but also the broader american people and others worldwide. chief justice burger noted that criminal prosecutions as a general matter have an educating effect on the public. we may appreciate on a theoretical level that hacking to steal corporate secrets poses a national security threat. there is no substitute for the effect that an dimt has.

putting a face at the keyboard and quantifying the damage done may galvanize all of us to improve cyber security. it can make us more vigilant to the kmirks military and geopolitical dangers associated with cyberspace. for example, it might lead companies and other entities to examine logs closely to see what the activities reveal and from where. to wrap up, i want to applaud the dedicated investigators and prosecutors whose hard work produced this week's important indictment. it's a first step but a big step and part of the growing effort to hold accountable those who steal american innovation. at the same time we must acknowledge that prosecution alone is ultimately just one tool in the broader cool set for addressing the cyber threat and that prosecution alone will not solve the problem. trust in government depends in part on our ability to defend

justice for our citizens. it's a clear and powerful way. legitimize and improve allegations. these actions have real consequences for the criminals they target and deter those who might be criminals in the future. we continue to protect americans from being victimized through cyberspace and need your support to do so. thank you for your attention. i look forward to answering questions. [ applause ]

>> can you hear me? okay. thank you. i would like to start by pushing you a little bit on the distinction that you have drawn between u.s. activities overseas which we have heard a lot over the last year. and the sort of activities that form the basis of this indictment. as i understand the u.s. posture, we do not -- first of all, we obviously engage in es spee naj. we don't deny that some of the espionage involves spying on companies. the distinction we draw is when we spy on companies it is in the pursuit of national security objectives, not either in

pursuit of economic objectives or the particular objectives of helping u.s. companies at the expense of the companies that we are spying on. i'm interested in to what extent that is a distinction that only the u.s. could love. we are an intellectual property generating company. chinese is a giant manufacturing economy. they produce -- why can want they define their national security objectives as including the economic health of their companies? i mean is the distinction we are drawing a stable one in that we'll be able to sustain in an international argument over what's legitimate and what's illegitimate in the realm of economic espionage. >> it's a good question. let's think about it the other way around for a second.

because whether or not we bring prosecutions and follow the evidence where it leads is a choice no matter what. what we are seeing is we are seeing victim kpaens, private entities inside the u.s. and as the indictment details they might design a pipe and put a lot of research into designing the pipe. then there is a question over whether you buy what they have built with their hard work and innovation or steal it. when we come across a case of somebody stealing it by hacking into somebody's system without permission and taking the designs they would otherwise buy and sometimes right are before they are about to get bought, so we know they are interested in it. if we follow the facts and evidence where they lead, it might lead to a criminal group. if it led us to a criminal group, a standard criminal group, no affiliation with any

state, i think everyone would agree that the proper course of action would be to try to build an indictment and prosecute them if we can find them and bring them to the u.s. to draw a distinction that says when we follow the facts and evidence and it leads to somebody behind a keyboard and they happen to be wearing a uniform that now there is a free pass for what's criminal activity. it is the same theft we are seeing from other criminal groups. it's not a distinction the american public would want us to make. i don't believe there is a country in the world that would idly sit by and accept that theft. >> yet, we do have an understanding in the government to government espionage department that we do certain things, you do certain things to us. if we follow that keyboard back and if you find on the other end

it's nsa spying on your government, kind of supposed to leave that alone. similarly, if we follow that keyboard back and find out it is the people's liberation army, we're not going to have quite the same attitude toward an intrusion in a u.s. government computer system than we would if it were an organized criminal gang or an individual hacker. or would we? >> well, what we are talking about here is the theft from private companies for the benefit of other private companies with whom they are in competition. that's are where specific facts, specific actions and specific actors matter. when we use a charging instrument like an indictment we are not charging an ab tract ent my. we are charging particular people for particular acts.

if you look at this indictment they are stealing pipe designs from one company and the evidence suggests for the benefit of another company. you will see they were building a corporate intelligence database for a company. that's what they were paid to do as part of their job. that's theft. every country in the world, almost every country in the world has some type of intelligence service. the idea of the service to protect your national security is an old concept. what you don't see is countries saying we have service whose goal it is to steal what you're making and working and give it to our companies so they don't have to buy it or compete. >> you mentioned in the speech that china does not defend the practice.

they deny the pack 'tis. i'm curious. are you aware of any country that defends this practice or is it universally denied rather than defended? >> i'm not aware of any country in the world that defends this practice and says that we ought to allow whether it's the military or a spy service or criminals in your country to go hack into somebody else's private company and steal what they are producing. >> i want to talk about the value of indictments. you talked about this a little bit in the speech. some people will look at this and say you have no prospect of getting custody of the suspects. china is a big country. it's very capable of protecting its people. our jurisdiction is limiteded. therefore, the arole that an

indictment like this plays is one more of a combination of an overt diplomatic pressure, willingness to put facts on the record in the form you say that's provable in law that's backed up by evidence and has a certain heft. it is therefore a form of very are sophisticated legal p.r., rather than an indictment in the sense that you actually expect to get custody of the suspect and bring him to court and prove the case. as succinctly as you can articulate it, what's the the value of indictment in a situation in which you have no expectation of obtaining custody? >> i want to challenge the premise. these are real charges based on evidence that was painstakingly compiled over a period of years that we can and hope to present in front of a jury.

all rights of due process unless we believed we had the evidence to secure a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. i look forward to having the opportunity to do that. we indict individuals all the time who are not currently in the custody of the united states and we may not know their whereabouts. i referenced today two terrorism cases that took more than a decade to bring. we brought the charge. they said you have no expectation of getting this individual. they are overseas or in a cave, government territory, unfriendly space. they have committed crimes. we charged it. we waited until we could bring them before a court.

over the years whether it is in relation to the mafia or drug conspirators. but sometimes it's true. people evade capture. when they do evade capture and never face charges inside a court, i go back to what i was saying before, to not bring the charge is to somehow say this is not criminal activity and that you're not stealing, but you are. that's the effect it's having on american companies. that's the cost that we are with seeing in terms of american jobs and we are prosecuting the same cases when they are committed physically fds the united states and we are prosecuting the same cases when they are a group that's not affiliated with the government. to decide somehow here that we are giving it a free pass not only deters, it encourages individuals to pursue this type of theft. >> there has been a fair bit of

talk since monday that this is the first of a wave. and that we should expect to see a lot more of these. we wouldn't ask you about individual cases. but is this -- you said that there was a transformation going on. as a general proposition, is this something we should expect to see a lot more of and to the extent it is, how much of it should we expect to be about china versus other countries that we frequently hear are major thievers -- thieves of intellectual property in the united states. >> part of what i was discussing is we have had a transformation in terms of how we discuss these

cases. the national security division, we trained hundreds of prosecutors in conjunction with our criminal colleagues throughout the country to work on these cases and look at the intelligence day in and day out. the fbi is going to put task forces throughout the country. now that people are trying to build this criminal option as one of the options when look at the information that they are gathering, i believe they can and will bring additional cases. these are hard cases to bring that are technically complex. they cross national boundaries. it's always going to be difficult. now that people are working it, i believe they can and will bring additional prosecutions. they are going to follow the facts and the evidence where they lead and respond to the crimes that they see.

it's by no means a strategy aimed at if i particular country. it's aimed at the crime and then following back the crime to see who committed it and the focus is on economic theft of the unit. those are the type of charges you may see in the future. >> i want to talk about one difficulty, complexity of this type of case that doesn't arise in a lot of other cases where you are primarily looking at witness interviews. you refer to the warm body in back of the keyboard. i know in a lot of the computer forensics cases you can prove that a certain thing happened from a certain account or that a certain thing happened from a particular i.p. address. it can be very difficult to prove that the individual whose associated with that account was, in fact, the warm body

sitting behind the keyboard when the offense took place. i'm interested for your thoughts on how do you -- what are the strategies that one has to go -- not the extra mile but the extra quarter of an inch. right? and that the hands on the keyboard are the person who -- you've got to know beyond a reasonable doubt. you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, not merely the account on the computer are the instrumentality but the individual associated with those is the one you think he or she is. talk a little bit about the challenge and how you meet it. >> that is a challenge. i'm not going to give all of the means and methods by which the fbi will try to find those individuals today. forgive me that. one key step to meeting it is

trying to meet it. so one change that takes place when you want to preserve a criminal option and have the opportunity to bring a criminal case is to focus on that type of specificity and attribution. that's a key principle of the criminal justice system. as for intelligence purposes, it might be sufficient to do the attribution and say, oh, this is so and so nation state trying to take in this type of information for intelligence purposes. that might be enough to do an assessment of what's happening. when you're doing a criminal case, as you say, you need to go the extra step. because we are not interested in the overall intelligence service. we are interested in a specific crime conducted in a specific manner by a specific actor.

one thing that's important to that which is why we need the cooperation and talk to companies and victims is knowing why when we are trying to prosecute the theft of the corporate secrets, why are they taking it? not why would a government generally take it, but what business are you competing with that would the specifically want that information and why would they want it at the time they took it? that can help narrow down the actor. >> so the basis of this indictment is u.s. domestic criminal law which forbids the theft of intellectual property from u.s. companies. i have not, nor could i look up chinese law on the theft of material from chinese companies for u.s. national security purposes or from chinese government servers for u.s.

national security purposes, but i'm relatively confident that criminal law has something to say that would forbid a lot of what we routinely defend you and i both in different ways that goes on at fot. meade. we have an open policy that we engage in espionage. i steal secrets for national security purposes. but probably run roughshod over a lot of countries' criminal laws in the course of doing so. i'm curious why -- whether we should expect foreign indictment of u.s. intelligence officials and why we would -- other than to say our law dwishs between the purposes, why would this be

different? how would we react if the chinese government started indicting nsa officials, current, former, future for acts that we would consider perfectly legitimate espionage. >> they said, again, this is not about intelligence collection by a nation state to figure out what another nation state is trying to dman strait. nor is this case an indictment of an intelligence service. it's an indictment of particular people for stealing particular plans that were to benefit companies in china, state-owned enterprises, that are competing with companies here. that's what we charged. it's specific in doing so.

we did charge economic espionage and trade secrets. we also charged violations of the computer fraud and abuse act. the problem we were charging is when you commit those acts for economic advantage in personal, financial gain. so that is a true distinction. it's one that's recognized throughout the world. everyone wants when they worked on something and they put hard work and creativity in it to have the rewards of the fruits of their labor. certainly china along with many other countries in the world has brilliant and creative entrepreneurs. they want to have the benefit of what they produce. when you knocked down the door, walk into the office and steal it out of the safe and go and use it instead of buying it or if you take it by the internet, that's crime.

>> i will ask one more question and we'll go to the audience. if you have a question, wait for the microphone. please sbro are deuce yourself, identify yourself before you ask a question. you ask a question. one additional question, what has the reaction from other governments -- there are a lot of governments that have anxiety about chinese activity in this area that have also cried foul in public but not so far brought criminal cases. what has the reaction from other intellectual -- other ip producing countries been to reaction this week? >> you can only answer what you know. it's been a slightly busy week. to give the reaction of countries around the world may be either some of my colleagues or you all reading the papers.

fair enough. gary in the front. always patient about waiting for the mike. >> i'm trying to remember your question. i write the mitchell report and when i've first heard about the indictment and then particularly listening to you today, being grilled by one of the best, i had two reactions one is about cost benefit and the other is about mr. rumsfeld's favorite, the known unknowns. with respect to cost benefit, the question that comes up for me is, though it is clear that you've been kax in the

indictment to name specific warm bodies behind specific keyboards and how difficult it is to prove they were there when it was happening. we're thinking larger term. might look at it as a specific indictment of a specific person. it's my assumption that president xi and premier lee do not. as a consequence, if that's true, as a consequence it seems to me it raises the kind of questions must deal with the cost of pursuing this indictment worth the benefit of whatever the outcome might be? and of course these terms i'm

talking both diplomatically but the difficulty of demonstrating just how much actual economic harm has been done and will be done by these acts so that there's the cost benefit question. and then the second is the known unknowns and what i mean by that is the minute i heard about this, i thought i wonder what edward snowden is doing right now. what i mean by that, snowden has revealed a lot about us and what we're doing that almost no one seemed to know about. so i wonder if mr. snowden is saying okay, if mr. green walt are saying, now it's time.

we'll let loose a few other goodies that people don't know about. they are going to make this difficult. >> put a lot on the table. a thoughtful question. the the president had said in the 2013, i believe it was, state of the union, publicly announced that the theft of our intellectual property is not acceptable and trade secrets is not acceptable and i think that tried to deliver to different folks in the government in every way possible the message that that's not intelligence business as usual. that's theft and reason why they are making that distinction is because it is immediately

causing real harm to private citizens who are losing real jobs and the ability to produce and participate in our economy. we have a responsible that when there's real harm occurring in actuality each day to take action and not just to watch it occur. and if we were to watch it, track it, investigate it, follow it, at the end of the day we're not going to bring criminal charges for these acts depending on who the actor is. is not an acceptable place for be for american companies and citizens. in terms of cost benefit, that's the status quo. if i may flip it, we need to raise the cost and make it clear that the benefits you're getting from stealing this information

do not outweigh costs and we need to up the cost until the behavior stops and in that sense, i hope never to bring another criminal case. the activity will stop -- also raises the issue of future disclosures, i hope everyone -- no matter what persuasion is, would like to see this activity stop, this stealing of corporate secrets wherever they are occurring and president has made it clear this is something that the united states will not do, which is won't go stealing other people's trade secrets to get an unfair advantage. >> carrie johnson. >> carrie johnson from npr, the other day i read the fbi was

purchasing some malware and i'm wondering what the nsd role in part created to oversee the intelligence gathering inside the u.s. in general terms, mr. carlin, how does the nsd oversee the fbi's investigative/offensive cape ablts in the cyber area? >> not familiar with this specific report you're referring to but a couple of different roles, one would be if the fbi were applying before the foreign intelligence surveillance court under the fisa or foreign intelligence surveillance act, before they can prevent such application to the court it would go through lawyers at the national security division who would see whether made out the

proper predicate, probable cause under title 1 of the fisa act and those applications to the court for proper approval if they were going to use it for intelligence meetings. similarly, if they were applying to use it through the criminal system, and maybe lawyers from the national security division either counter terrorism inception and espionage, whether maintain the approvals through the criminal court, criminal court process. we also do have an oversight section that does national security reviews and reviews the use of certain national security authorities and so if they were attempting to use such a method under one of those authorities, reviewing it to ensure it abided by all applicable legal rules

and predicates. >> yes, in the back. >> hi, i'm mike with abc. mr. carlin, media reports out today are saying that the justice department has tapped nsd prosecutor steve pont cell lo to probe the foreign fighters into syria. i'm wondering if you can talk about what exactly is is he going to be looking at and doing? why is this necessary and who exactly tapped him? >> the problem of foreign fighters going to syria is a significant national security threat that we're facing right now. it's at the top of the agenda for the department of justice and u.s. government at large but also for our european partners and others throughout the world.

there's a substantial number of individuals from outside of syria who are traveling into syria to commit acts of violent extremism and just as we were concerned with the conflicts in the afghanistan/pakistan region and with those traveling to somalia to participate in al shabab. we're concerned both about those traveling to fight as foreign fighters and we need to be concerned and alert and vigilant to those who may return after committing acts there with training and ideology and desire to commit acts of violent extremism here. so we want to make sure that individuals in the counter terrorism section and u.s. attorneys throughout the country are focused on this threat and we want to make sure we work regularly with our partners in

europe and elsewhere to see we do what we can do to stop the threat. >> what does it meeb he'll be doing? in terms of al shabab, i don't remember a prosecutor being tapped to lead the effort with that. in similar cases that didn't happen. why this and why now? >> i think he is focused on the foreign fighter threat and it's important to coordinate the different cases across the country to provide relevant expertise that you learn how to confront this threat and to be available to meet with foreign partners. >> sir? >> my name is peter, i'm representing myself ittoday. a little over a year ago the app 1 report came out. what are your thoughts on that? was that a precursor to what you were doing?

were you already working on this? what are your thoughts on reaction to that report? >> i thought it was an excellent product, it was good work that was done and it's important as we mentioned earlier, not just that the government is working on threats but the private sector is working on them as well. and without discussing exactly when our investigation started, it did not start because of the report. shane harris in the back. >> thanks, mr. carlin for being here. you talked about the difficulty of putting these cases together and that it can take years and very particular allegations and evidence in the indictments. i'm wondering can you talk about to what extent the victim companies themselves and presumably there are many others can be useful and are you reaching out to them to try to

encourage them to come forward with information that might be helpful or do you contact them and ask them to participate in the investigations in any way? >> because this is an open case, without discussing this case in particular, yes, in general the national security division, the national security cyber specialists in the field and our partners at the fbi and other agencies are definitely reaching out to companies both who warn individuals about the threat and encourage them to stay tepz to keep them from happening but also work with them when it does occur. that's critical, that type of partnership so we can learn and take steps to try to protect u.s. companies and it's critical if you're going to bring a criminal case to have that sort

of cooperation and talk to the company so you understand what was taken and why it was of importance, what it meant for it to be taken. >> i'm curious how much consideration -- >> please identify yourself. >> arturo menendez, i'm curious how much consideration you gave to potential consequences of this precedent you're setting. you talked about positive consequences but some of the negative ones. and specifically some thinking of that there's most likely going to be retaliation in the chinese or other countries and while the u.s. might make this clear distinction between economic and national security espionage, others might not. i'm curious if you thought about these potential negative consequences and you know, in

worst case scenario maybe you might -- it might lead to a level of level brinksmanship against the powerful or something like that. i'm curious as to those type of considerations. >> just if i might add to that, i would imagine the point of view is the nsd on this question would be subtly different from the point of view of the intelligence community which might have anxieties about the amount of people asking you to bring a case like this and might similarly be different from point of the view of the state department which has to interface with intelligence. everything that the question raises, i imagine plays out in inner agency as you contemplate something like this, yeah? >> in all of our work, criminal prosecution is a tool in a larger set to try to stop threats to the national

security. so that's true in terms of stopping the terrorism threat. it's true in stopping the threat from spies. and there are counter espionage section and it's true in stopping the threat of those that would steal our trade secrets. in each of those instances it won't be the only solution. you won't be able to bring it in every case. in every other context it's one of the tools we have on the table and there's been no unilateral decision to say we'll never bring a criminal case. that should be all of the more true when the conduct is such traditional criminal conduct. the other thing is the chinese said bring us hard evidence, evidence that could stand on current activity. one hopes and continues to hope that now that we have, that

they'll take action to stop this criminal activity. not aware of any country that condones this behavior so now it's laid out, maybe it will stop. >> in the back. >> appreciate it. sort of building on mr. jimenez's point, this is the largest populated nation in the world. second largest economy in 20 years likely by measures number of measures of the largest economy. they could be trade sanctions or any among a number of roots and retaliations against the united states. symbols could be everything. how broad could the consequences be when bringing these charges against a formidable economic

power? thanks. >> we're going to follow specific criminal acts that we find where they lead and have been clear that stealing trade secrets from american companies and using it to provide to their companies who are in competition with them is an act that's criminal and when it occurs inside the united states we'll follow it where it leads. and in this case it led to five particular individuals who happened to be where they were and happened to have the jobs that they had. we brought the charges and laid out the evidence that we had. and comfortable, that's the proper way to proceed and we'll continue to follow these cases where they lead. >> we have time for one more question, but we actually shall let's get a few people start with over there.

and what we'll do is go around, collect a few and give mr. carlin a chance to wrap up and address whichever so many of them as he feels inclined. >> i'm jen song, go to american university. how does this affect the indictment on this case especially since these are individual -- individuals in the chinese military, considering it was their job, how does it affect if they got their instruction from higher ups and how will it affect our u.s./chin he's relations? >> the woman in -- right there and then gentleman in front of her after that. >> i'm courtney with real clear politics. in front of the judicial committee yesterday he mentioned there are two types of large american companies, those that

have been hacked by chinese and those who do not know they've been hacked by chinese. do you expect and overflowing amount of cases to come out now that there are faces put to black shades and if so how will the cases be divided among those working in cyber crime? >> john mueller from ohio state. going to the first question, is united states government prepared to guarantee that although it does spy on foreign businesses, none of the information gathered makes it in the hands of american businesses? >> let's add one more if there is one more. >> gentleman in the corner there and then we'll give mr. carlin a chance to wrap things up. >> thank you. curious a little bit about the legal line drawing that you've been making