high walls around us and life was relatively simple. very dangerous but relatively simple. now, as has just been explain, the whole worths has changed. the upside of that is this room and us leveraging the talent in the room to make the biggest difference. i'll stop there. -- whether it's coming from criminal networks, governments or other entities, and director comey, we heard yesterday from the defense secretary ash carter speak agent oxford, warning the russians no tot meddle in, quote, our democratic processes. so far the u.s. government has not publicly named russia as a prime suspect in the dnc hack and related cases, even though many in the private sector pointed to strong evidence that

the attack began with two competing russian intelligence services. so even if you're not prepared to attribute the attack to russia, can you tell us do you aggrieve with secretary carter there is a significant risk or even an operative plan to effect the american electoral results? >> i'll continue to the streak of not talking about that except in this respect. it's something that we, as a government, and i hope as a people, and i know we do as an fbi, take very seriously the notion that a nation state actor is messing with our electoral process, whether that's to disrupt to influence to show discord to create doubt, and so the fbi's job is to work very hard to understand whether that's going on and what are all the dimension so is we can equip our policymakers and the president with the information needed to decide what to do about it, and so i'm not going to comment on the work we're doing now except we're working very hard on it to try to

understand if there is such a thing and what are the dimensions of it, and what are the intentions and motivations and tools they use, but for ropeses i hope you understand i'm. no going to talk about a pending matter. >> as far as you know, have the state election systems been tested to see how they would hold up to so much an intruder or skills of a foreign state? >> i'm not an expert in general but especially with respect to those systems, my understanding is that we have in a way a wonderfully resilient, because it is incredibly disseparate and dispersed and run at the state local level, system for voter registration for voting, and i know that the fbi and the dhs have been making sheer sure we're equipping our state and local partners with the information they need to make sure that the lock is thrown and the dead bolt is thrown on their systems. don't want to say more than that >> is it a state function, the responsibility to do this?

>> it's a state function. our constitution commits to the states the running of our elects even for federal office, but there is an important roll to play for the federal government, first for those who may have indicators of compromise to share those with state and locals, whether in the election sector, the financial sector or some another path our country, and an important role for dhs to play in using their expertise to equip folk's how to make sure the door looks are on and the dead pot is thrown. >> you have dressed this as the sessions in as spend do you agree with secretary carter in terms of the danger posed by some foreign entity, perhaps russia in medsling in the democratic process. >> i think i said at as spend the fbi has investigative responsibility for this and has jim comey mentioned, that is ongoing. we as an intelligence agency are trying to make sure we understand what the capables

are, what the potential is, in terms of any foreign actors that might try to exploit and manipulate our systems here at home so this is one of the things we are continuing to work with our partners, making sure that fbi and homeland security and others learn what it is that we learn so it will help them as they fulfill their responsibilities. >> are you surprised by the breadth of some of these measures we're seeing, some of the apparent hacking attempts. >> i think all of us on the stage have talk about the concerns we have about that digital environment, that cyber environment, being summited by adversaries, hackers, individuals who are going to try to get into systems and networks, some you who are going after usth it because they wore fork nation states and others because they're trying to steal copy rights, individuals trying to get in to disable for destroy just to see whether or not they

can do and it this is one of the thing wes all have to emphasize, the important of working as a nation to make sure that we have the ability to protect our systems, our networks, from these types of intrusions and efforts to destroy. >> i should probably add as we're talking about thicks often times people lump together our internet connected voter registration systems around the country and our voting systems. the beauty of the american voting system is that it is dispersed among the 50 states and clunky as heck. it's not exactly a swift part of the internet so it's hard an actor to reach our voting processes and i'm sure there's curses in that, but there's a blessing in terms of reduce thing risk of a hostile actor being able to touch the voting process in the.

>> be tampering with voter registration lists to influencing -- >> the actual vote counting in this country tends to be kind of clunky, and in way, that's a blessing because it makes is more resilient and farther away from an actor who might be looking to contractual down a fiberoptic cable, and it's some woman nailed sally and joe and the pull out the punch cards and that's hard to reach. >> the chads hanging there. >> right, right. there's a lot of pain there but there's a lot of beauty. >> people often said that the most important thing is to establish a high cost for anyone who launches cyber attacks against the u.s. has china, for instance, paid a high price for the op espionage? has russia paid a price for the theft of white house and e-mails and have they paid a price, might we not be talk about the dnc hack. >> guest: if your look at china we have been able to conclude a

dialogue between the two nations which led to an agreement which came out since the two presidents met here in was in which an grandma on a broad cyber framework, things that would do not be done. that's positive develop. still continues to be a lot of ongoing dialogue at a nation state level how to get to a place where the concepts of deterrence and idea of behavior, what is acceptable and not acceptable are better snood and readily adopted. the reason i texas i don't think any of us are comfortable with the current situation and the thing -- >> the current situation? >> in terms of the level of cyber activity, the kinds of activity we're seeing in our nation, the kinds of activity we're witnessing elsewhere. the thing i keep trying to ask myself is so what is it that could helpmentally chang the dynamic -- change the dynamic and shape where we are now. many have come to the conclusion there is not a significant price

to pay for aggressive actions and i don't think that is in our best long-term. >> help us inside why that's a continuey towing around the russia effort. clapper quoted the presidenting a says, the experts have attributed this dnc hack to russians and add the rescue hack our systems all the time, not just government but corporate and personal systems. the "new york times" reported intelligence community has concluded with high confidence that the russians are behind this. would you dispute that -- >> i dispute "the new york times"? >> it's not just been reported in "the new york times." it's been reported in many media outlets. this is the view of the ic. the president seems to be signaling this through, saying this is what the private experts are saying. >> i would remind people this is a much broader policy dialogue. we're intelligence professionals would nor policy professionals.

we attempt to generate insight to characterize activity that helps inform the policymaking process so our political leaders can make -- and our military commanders can make smarter decisions. what you have seen is there's not a one-size-fits all. where we are today, there's no one sites all approach to this. so we look at every situation on the basis of the particular merits, the objectives and the actors involved and we make a case-by-case decision. which is one reason why you saw what we did in response to the sony hack is very differently than others since then. >> and we want to make sure that as we're trying to figure another what is going on that a nation state doesn't know what we know. they may not believe "the new york times." they may not know whether united states you've got is right or not and we are not willing to confirm that.

>> i'll pitch to another area. counterterrorism. and general stewart, want it to talk to you. this is an area where ate least own ground there have been some very tangible¢s in the fight against -- tangible successes in the fight against the islamic city, the shrinking of territory they control in iraq and syria has been drama. even affiliates in like bra and nigeria and afghanistan -- liberia and nigeria and naves taking hits put you said that taking mosul is an extensive operation and not something i see in the next year or so. do you stand with the timeline now and if so why not. >> we're cooking up to about that year when if made that statement. the conditions were not set to take mosul. the forces that were necessary to take mosul were not able to do that. i think we're getting close. we pushed isil out of a good bit

of the territory and now starting to isolate mosul. i would imagine that the operation will unfold sometime in the next two or three months. but it is not an easy operation. urban war fighting is not easy dismiss -- and this is a large city that has had two years to prepare to defend its position. so, it is not going to be an easy fight. going to be a multidimensional fight and fought at various levels and if ans a very stare is willing to stand and fight in an urban environment and you're at least limited to fighting -- the casualties you can impose it is going to be a long and difficult battle as it unfolds. >> some are saying we might even see the main offensive against mosul start by the end of this year. is there in kind of a counter-intough tut naught da jane in succeeding too quickly on the ground before, say, the

next follow-on element 0 government of governor of governance and humanitarian effort. >> absolutely. it is always -- let me rephrase. we have done fairly well in winning the battles. not always done well in winning the wars because we have not had the things in place to rebuild and create conditions for success after the fighting has end. so, yes, we could in fact execute operations, be successful, and not win the --y, are you worried that iraqis and other partners helping. the will not be prepared once there is success in mosul in the coming months? >> yes. >> director brennan, in an interview in the most current issue of the west point's combating terrorism center's publication, you said of the remaining foreterrorist fighter in iraq and syria that, quote,ing to the not killed in

the fighting will present a challenge for our governments for years to come. what did you mean by that? and what does isil minus its caliphate? if it's shorn of its state, as what form does it take and how dangerous does it remain, for how long? >> i think it will remain a presence in iraq for quite a while to come, even with the battlefield reverses it has suffered, and i agree that we are going to continue to see this momentum and most of the territory will be taken away from isil. but we still have al qaeda in iraq, which is where isil came from. was able to be reduced significantly down to several hundreds and they were able on the re-eemerging. so i do think this phenomenon of isil, whether we're talking about in syria and iraq or the other countries where the franchises have cropped up are going continue to be a problem for the local governments because they're going to go into a number of areas where the

government doesn't have control or is able to project force. but you also have foreign fighters that have come into the theater that will either stay and fight and die trying, or they will try to return to their home countries. now, some of them may be rehabilitated and some of them may see they were on the wrong path, but i do think a number of them are going to remain a challenge for the united states as well as for other governments, for a number of years to come. >> what's the ability of governments whether in europe or north frequent to track returnees? >> i think the european countries are doing a better job of the past year or so, and in light of the tragic attacks in paris and belgium and other areas, it's tough for the european union of 28 countries, with 28 different legal systems and over 50 or so security law enforcement and intelligence agencies to interability and to

have an architecture both from an it perfect and from a mission perspective but i must say they have demonstratessed a strong willingness to do that and increasing ability to do it. i think the key is going to be having a an international architecture and as jim was eludeesing, to in in the united statesey node to heather stayed and local arctic tour and international architecture responsible for tracking individuals, either intelligence or security 0 responsible for borders to share the information and be able to act upon intelligence, and that's the key, intelligence is not an end in itself. itself is an enabler. i do see that there is increasing capability among these different governmentsed we're working with but it is very mixed in tomorrows of the capables as well as the progress that they're able to make. >> director comey, the last one on terrorism. wanted to did what you believe the impact of this military success in lands far away, iraq

and syria, will have here in the homeland? should we expect to see more isil inspired domestic strikes like in san bernardino or orlando and that's the fbi doing along with domestic partners to prevent that? >> i agree very much with john the threat i believe will dominate the next five years for the fbi will be the impact of the crushing of the caliphate, which will happen, but through the fingers fingers of that crue going to come hundreds of hardened killers who are not going to die on the battlefield and will flow out maybe to other places of met metastasizes sis a fuming number will flow to eastern europe and being quid for those, the paris, brussels type attackers, flooding into western europe and trying to take the fight their maintain isil's cred in the local jihad world with dominate our lives

and helping our european parter ins share information better among. thes and with us is critical. at the same time i think isil will start to lose its ability to attract travelers because the caliphate will be crushed and i think to produce the slick kind of propaganda that allows them to motivate screwed up people to engage in acts of violence but that's going to stay with is. at the same time we're facing this going dark fem you we can -- phenomenon where we cannot see these people and the way they're communicating. so working very hard to get our people, whether sources or undercovers in places where they can see the communications of either those radicalizing in place or those talking about looking to bring the fight here. >> why 0 into the slick propaganda efforts by reduces. >> it require facilities and people and some oater of bureaucracy and at your geography shrink, their media

machine will gradually be degrades of the next few years. >> director snap and car dill low i didn't mean to leave you out. your agencies don't get as much attention that's should i want to pivot the -- as we have a new argues, what you're organizations are doing, thinking about the challenge, where you have a formal transition team in place. telephone us about, in more detail than in our opening summaries how your organizations are adapting to these shifting threats we have just talked a little bit about here in the first few minuteses and what if any types of changes, reorganizations that your organizations are going through now as we have said we're right on the eve of the 15th 15th anniversary of 9/11 and kind of to assess what is working and what is not working in your real. >> i'll start.

we have always responsibility lot of time trying to kind pace with targeted and threats the big change is what we see in space threats and we have meat a lot of progress over the last several years with that focus on space resilience and we would certainly hope that focus -- it's ban focus of the white house -- is a focus for the next administration as well. we're performing our responsibilities quite well. we're doing very well in r & d and in acquisition. we're not re-organizing like some of my colleagues are. i think we're well structured an an organization to move forward in the area wes need move forward in. >> as one of the agency directors who doesn't have a tv show or movie or something like that, you're right, we do spend more time either

reintroducing -- can be a good thing, the. we spend more time either introducer reintroducing our capability and if i can build whan what life was like in our closed environment and what it need to be in the demanding, agile jeremy that has been discussed here today, i see the opportunity of transition being just that. so, where you could redefine, i'll say, the value proposition in a way that might be hindered by the past, and i mean that in a good way. this success of the past can sometimes keep you from making the next innovation. i'll go back to the audience and say that sometimes perhaps -- this is why betty and i are working close toward -- we may not have been as open the commercial application as we had been in the past or the commercial solution or the academic engage independent a way i know we are now. so i see those opportunities coming.

quite frankly issue think it's the necessity of the mission that's going to drive us forward. there's demand signal and, let's face it, adversary signal that commands we make these changes. so i see the transition as nothing but an opportunity. >> this is an important topic so i want to go down the road here starting with general stewart, if you can touch on this for your organizations as well. people who are watching, listening to this today, are think can about what the leadership of your agencies are thinking about no just in the next 12 months, transition into a inside administration but the come can decades. >> i talk about the great challenges. we all know the great challenges. can talk about the shrinking budget. we all know about that ump if i could give maybe two things i would love to know from the next administration, first thing is,

a bit of advice. be ready nor world as it,-not the way you's like it to be. it is -- while you may be aspirational in what you's like the world and how we enter act as powers -- interact as powers we're in a state now, and you have to be ready to deal with that state. >> so putin says you're a good guy you have to be wary of that? >> he said i'm a good guy. but suppose you said that about others but i try not to follow it. but be ready for the world as it is. and then help me understand what most important for the next administration. if it's all about daesh, that's fine. we can re-organize for daesh, but there oar threats and challenges in the the world. and help me understand what the most important parts-and then stick with those priorities.

make the big things the main things the main things things tt distracted and i can organize our agency to immediate the requirements so a long as i understand the needs and where our interests lies and ready to deal the world as it is, not the way i'd like to it be. >> general rogers, as you talk about your agency could you also address the issue of the proposal separate the nsa job from cybercome? that will be a decision before you leave or this administration leaves. >> as we look to hurt for me, what i want to understand from the incoming team is tell me what your expectations are, what your priorities are, what you value ex-insayings you're countering on to generate and help inform your policies and priorities. >> what i would want to attempt to convey to them is, the rate of change for all of us is so high these days, is new people

come back in the government with a new team you can't assume because it was this way when is was last in government, it's the same way it is now. so one of my desires would be let me walk you through what our strengths and capables are and where you can have strong expectations and where you need to be more realistic, give you a sense for the challenges see in coming in terms of ability to generate insights you're look path and you feel you need to meet the priorities, in terms of the basic struck fewer for us right now. i'm both the commander of the cyber command, and i'm also the director of the nsa, the intelligence leader, running a large intelligence organization, and i've been very public about things. believe in the long run the right thing is to keep these two aligned but to separate them. as cyber chant obtain more capacity and ability, the demand on signber command's time and resources and capability just

continues to grow. you've need two people full-time folk cussed but need to keep these closely assigned. >> will that happen before the administration closes shop? >> don't know. that's up to them. >> director brennan you have been through one transition before. what is going on at the cia that you want people no know about internally? >> well, we're aware there's a presidential eplex in november. -- presidential election in november. >> good intelligence. >> that's the plan. and we are preparing, as we have done previous administrational changes. we have set up a president presidential transition office so we have the materials and briefings ready for the incoming team where we can tell them what our capabilities capabilities ad analysis, clandestine collection, covert actions and lee anson relationships making sure the incoming administration knows.exactly what we're doing,

what they're inheriting. but the other area that i am very concerned about is also is going to be a transition at the helm of the intelligence community. director of national intelligence, jim clapper, who i think all of us agree is the epitome of what a director of national intelligence should be. he is an icon within the intelligence community and his intended departure i think is one that i think concerns us all because he has been master philadelphia in terms his orchestration and secrettization of the community, and having the support we need and at the same time allowing to us carry out or statutory responsibilities. to jim clapper's departure is one that something that is concerning to me, but the same type of presentation to the new administration, doing that to the new director of national intelligence so he think forward what we need to be able continue

to do to keep the country state. >> well you stay on. >> i have a daily contract with this president and the next president and my wife. >> in that order? >> that's a good point. my wife, the president, the next president. i have the best job in the world, and bar none. this is truly a tremendous honor. somebody who started his professional life at the cia to have the honor of being referred these director of cia, i can't think of a better job. so this is my last job in government, which is a rather liberating feeling know i will not halve to go through the character building experience of a senate confirmation. it is liberating. >> director comey, you're going to be in this job for a while. >> stuck in a dead-end job. [laughter] >> i'd like to give some portions of my job to a codirector, so i don't have to

do them. but i won't get so lucky. we will working as john has on a transition briefing project since march because we think, given the scope of the bureau's responsibilities and the number of new people, whether u.s. attorneys, or other parts of the intelligence community or presidential appointees at the white house or in defense depth or supplies else we want to make sure they understand the threats a we see them and understand the scope of the bureau's responsibilities and work. most people who come to understand just how broad our national security and law enforcement responsibilities are and what that can bring to the fight in term's intelligence gathering, threat awareness and threat mitigation is extraordinary and we want to commune that not in a good way. >> i'm going to init up to questions now. we have a little bit extra time. want to start the q & a with director sapp and cardillo.

pouf biggs is the gap between information technology personal specialists and that you have and how many you need. maybe you can each take a crack at that. >> i'd rather follow you. okay. how large is it? too large. let me tell you what we're doing about it. one thing we have evolved is we have come to understand that the way we've built systems in the past, developed applications, the we way have brought -- not agile, not responsive enough and not tombly. so we're short. -- shortening the cycle by creating the ability with our operational capability. we call them rapid feedback teams. small groups of dedicated analysts. i.t. specialist, dat scientists, computer programmers that work on a problem set.

so an intelligence outcome. and as they're working on that technical capability they're getting the immediate feedback from the analysts about what is working and what is not. so that's become a quick turn back into the application. we're doing that at the unclassified level, and we're more and more being fouled because some of the demand signals. like the president's -- the work in arctic we releasessed but doing at the classified level, too the question is how quickly can we scale that from the small attempts the large teams and some it a components of the budget but we're doing it as quickly as we can. >> we don't do data science. we do scientists, but when you talk i.t., the -- lots of data from space so the ground problem is tough. we have to do a lot of ground

processing to make that data make sense to analysts. ey used to halve our oregon i.t. and processing capable because it wasn't out there. now it is. the commercial has caught up with and surpasses what we need. so we're doing more from building our own and developing our own to actually buying commercially available service so we other would rather but our money into the payload capabilities. and the e the specific algorithms. the computer power is there for us to buy and that is a commercial service we can take full at advantage of and will take advantage of in the future. >> general surety there have

been serious allegations that they're delivering plately skewed also. what is the i. t. leadership doing to assure leaders are not signaling what analysis is to be produced? >> okay. this is my first questioning last year. i'm not going to comment -- suppliesingly, -- so many folks about either comment on the investigation or take action against the individuals that if the allegation is brought against them, before the investigation has been done. and working my tail off to not do that. having said that, we have put in

place a number of things to look at analytic integrity across the enterprise. we have revised our training effort to do the basic analytic training for the entire work force. it will take us a while to get there. we are doing product line reviews and revamping our training so we are doing the thing thatwith will strengthen our analytic trade craft over the next several years, then the third thing i'll comment on is how --ing it has been for know watch the entire intelligence community, the defense intelligence enterprise, subjected to the idea that across the enterprise we're not able to render judgments without being influenced by policy or politics. so even if the allegation proves

to be true, in this one case, it is not universally so. we've got great young men andwoman who are working theirtails off today to deliver the best insight is from the data they receive and absolutely ininfluenced by politics and or policy and those who have an inclination they know the answer before the question has even been asked. we got -- [applause] -- we'll continue to work on tradecraft, continue to provide opportunities for our analysts s and in the field their judgments are not valued. to ombudsmen and we'll get better as a result thereof this process. >> director brennan, can you expand on how the intelligence sharing relationships with both traditional and nontraditional foreign partners will need to progress to counter future

threats, whether they be isis or some foreign state actor. >> well, think we have seen over the last several decade an expansion of the intelligence relationships. liaison partnerships around the globe. in some respects with the threat frommed a kyle -- al qaeda and isil there are even broader attempts to bring in other country services, intelligence security services because the isil, daesh, phenomenon, does affect a much broader swath of the globe than al qaeda did. so there's keen interest in the part of a lot of countries and so when you look at our interaction with russia, even though we have lot of differences in terms of policy and discussions that are ongoing, there is a -- an interest on the part of the united states and russia to work together closely on the counterterrorism front. same thing with china and other countries.

so whether or not it's tourism, proliferation, organized crime, instability, there are a lot of reasons for governments to be able to work closely together and the more interaction there is among intelligence and security services i think there's better opportunity and more potential for governments to have a shared appreciation of what the landscape looks like as well as what the options are that we can collectively pursue. so, i do see the growth of the liaison front being something that is part of our profession and that's why i include our liaison relationships among our five core mission areas. >> just picking up off the broader theme, several questions from the audience on sir syria. you have described this as perhaps the most difficult challenge you faced personally in your career. one of the questions here is, what is the biggest intelligence

challenge in trying to deal with syria? is there a plan to stablize the problems? >> well, syria is the most complicatessed issue i have faced because there's so many internal actors and external actors involved as well as inherent tensions among the goals and with our partners. so, what i see happening in syria, obviously, is almost systemic of the challenges we face in the region where their at lo's animosityies between groups and weaknesses in terms of governments abilities to address security challenges domestically. a lot of very weak institutions of governance through the middle east, south asia, africa, that allow these terrorist organizations, extremist grews

to grow and develop because of the disenfranchisement of so many parts of society. so, even though we are able to reverse some of the battlefield excesses of icele and syria and iraq, i think that the challenges that a lot of those government ins in the region will be facing in terms of political rear forms, economic reforms, social, religious tensions, second sectarian conflict. this is much nor sim county of the landscape overall. >> director comey, a number of questions on this front, too. do you thing islamic leaders and organizations -- what responsibility too you think islamic leaders and organizations have in stemming radicalization inside the united states and what is the fbi doing to help facilitate that? >> the same responsibility as leaders, as parents, as teachers, as any other group might 1/2 trying to keep young people, troubled people, from

moving in a direction that's going lead to death destruction, and the good news is they feel there's no muslim way feel about your children or christian way to feel about your children or jew wish way to feel about your children. we all feel the same way and our interests are aligned which leads to very productive relationships. people do not want young people in communities of any sort going in a direction that's going lead their death or the death of innocent people, and so it's one of the reasons we have been so keen not to let public discourse, which is often messy in a democracy, and wonderful, chill those relationships because we need each other. we need the help from those communities and they need our help. they need information from us. things to look for from us. the good news is, it's in a pretty darn good place. >> this is an audience participation as well as the panel participation. races your hand if you have had personal information stolen over

the internet. all six of you. nobody? okay. now, briefly explain their position on ending encryption. >> want to take a shot? >> i love strong encryption. i love end to end encryption. joest, if have instagram constant with nine followers, all immediate relatives and one serious boyfriends of my daughter itch don't want anybody looking at my stuff. don't want anybody looking at my banking information, my health care information. it's a huge part of the bureau's amt ability to protection the american people i love encryption. i also care deeply about public safety and those are crashing into each other, and what i mean when i say we need to have an adult conversation is we need stop demon nicing each other, stop saying it's impossible, you want to destroy this or that. and sit down and say, our values

are in conflict that we all share. what could we do? what could be do? and is there a piece of this problem we can start with and see if there isn't a way to accommodate those two values? my great frustration is people don't realize that absolute privacy has never been a feature of the american life. the bar gab our found issues struck was your stuff is private unless the people of the united states need to see and if oversight, demonstrations of probable cause and warrant, they can see it. we're moving to a place where we are going to a place -- a lot of places we are already there --y huge swaths or of lives are private but there's significant cost for that phenomenon a public safety perspective. want the american people to either say that's a great idea-want to be absolutely private, or not. we need figure out what to do about that to reconcile to opt nice the two values but can't be about bumper stickers or twitter, tweets, demonizing.

we have to recognize we share values and figure out what we want to do about it. >> i would echo jim's comments here ump i've always been struck by -- at its heart america is a state of can do, and you can't bet to can do and can't innovate if you can't even have a conversation. and the real estate environment we found offers for a variety of rope wes find ourselves in today, this has become such a charged emotional issue that we're not really having the die explosion -- dialogue of what is possible. do -- gee don't have to be constantly yelling at each. my first comment. lots of things we can do teaming with each other at a much lower level, smart people can sit down and say, what's in the realm of the possible. think in the end we'll have two conversations.

one conversation is what could we do? that's a very technical, engineering, what's in the realm of a legal framework? the second question that its important part of the conversation is what should we do? and those are two related but very different conversations, and we need to have both of them here. ask yourselves what could be do? and perhaps also, as a nation, we need to sit down and talk about what should we do? because there is this conflict and we have to knowledge there's tension, this tension between two fundamental imperatives for us as a nation and we as citizens need to decide what is that right balance. >> thank you. i'm not sure who might want to answer this. how do you see the addition of big data and artificial intelligence augmentation of analysis as opposed to trying to replace analysis?

the i cri needs intelligence -- how do you see your agencies being able to create fundamental change together to better the i.c. as a whole? >> if i could -- this is for us, big data is for us. it's the heart for us. so as we look at the problem, this it not a binary solution. it's either human analysis or artificial intelligence. the thing i'm interested in, in artificial intelligence, and machine learning, is that helps you get to steal to address global problems. at the same time you have to ask yourself, how does that fit and where is the human dynamic in this? i see that in our foreign intelligence mission that this is particularly significant for news the area of cyber defense. because if you can't get to some level of everyone or machine learning just were the volume of

activity you're trying to understand win you're trying to defend networks from activity of concern, if you can't get to scale your always behind the power curve and you can throw all the manpower you want against the challenges of information assurance and cyber defense you're not going to humanize your work force. it's got to be some combination of the two. >> we have joined -- we're joining the club that might just described because we come from an era in which our access was quite limited and you could arguably attempt the human centered approach to answer questions. we're long past that now. and every day our data is larger and larger. i think most of our solutions down the road -- not that we won't continue to rely on betty and scienceties to create

wizardry in pace, will be on the ground he we use the data, model it, print, connect it, bit the way, this -- thank you for bring upping the dni and jim clapper. we're all now part of the eyesight team, and through his and stephanie's strong encouragement, of course, but quite frankly we're already seeing the benefits of it because our data is now being exposed in ways it never could before, and if we just had humans going after it, it would just be confusing. so it's the algorithms that betty was talking about that will solve it. >> i'll just pile on. we built something called sent sentient which is a learning ground machine that we set up initially in a lab environment and is now operation, and that got more visit for more v.i.p.es

across the intel and the dod community that any system we have ever built. that is the only way, again, a ground system that learns based on input from the analysts and keeps pace at machine speed. the only way he'll get after fleeting targets to have that machine work for us and not have people have to do somethings that again people just don't move at those kinds of speeds. so that's crate control. >> clapper said the nro is building 27 of -- -- he said most of them are in the green but there are exceptions. how many are not in at the green and are the primary problems cost, schedule or both? ...

this is a question for both general stewart and brennan, do we have sufficient military analyst an intelligent analyst as well as tradecraft to deal with the threat by russia and china and specifically on russia, to russian made a close range in her step of the american aircraft on wednesday. this is one of a series of recent potentially dangerous incidents. what's the significance of this and how should a more general u.s. audience perceive these kind of incidents before between the u.s. and russian armed forces? [laughter] >> no we don't have enough analyst.

that is a period of time when that was the only game in town. the other challenges were missile. now we find yourself faced with threats, a whole host of challenges. we now spread all that analytic effort across the big challenges so we have not grown the analytic force, we've just grown the problems. there isn't enough and there will probably never be enough and that's why some of the things that we are doing, i just mentioned with big data analytics, those tools will help us. there is still that human dimension about what it all means and i'm not sure the

machines will ever be able to truly tell us what it all means. we need people to do that. with regard to russia's activity lately, whether it's russia, soviet russia russia or russia in the 21st century, we are always have a russia that believes it should be used as a great power. a great power will compete with other great powers and we will have to find ourselves bumping into each other where our interests collide and i think that's probably the norm rather than the exception. director brennan will clean up. >> the answer is not always that we need more and more more. we need to make sure that we are working as effectively and efficiently as possible. i think that's what a lot of us are doing.

we are trying to make things more efficient. how that analytic engine is going to help empower other parts of our mission as well paired whether it's a question of the additional tools that we have to bring to bear, i've seen the evolution of technical fronts in my career, when i started in 1980 we didn't have pcs. we had electric type riders. i had to color code things to show the correlation between data set. there are a lot of challenges and issues here as we try to think about the framework that could be put in place to take advantage of the tools, the expertise, the people, i have seen the great impact that data scientist can have on our business because we are overwhelmed in many respects with so much data, not just which is collected by intelligence capabilities and organizations but also the open

source world that is just overwhelming and how do you make sense of it. >> here are couple related questions. to what extent does our intelligence analysis affect global warming and specifically the intelligence community and military, how can they address this as more of the arctic comes available to exploration and how much are we working with our partners to mitigate future russian. [inaudible] >> much more than we have been. we do analysis on the effect of

the fact of the rising temperatures. you mention the additional access to the arctic region. when the president made the first trip, the sitting resident beyond the circle, he directed directed us to work with the national science foundation to create the data set that didn't exist before. this is the geographic data set, both a alaska and the arctic. we didn't deliver it to a secure facility, we put it on the world wide web. whether that's working with the office and science technology, our commercial partners or that is a new area for us of course. you get to the point where it's to now all of our interest because that creates more than just an environmental issue, obviously a human train issue, it creates opportunity for some of those bumps in the road or

those places where our interests can overlap whether it's a national resource contest, think of what were seeing now in the south china sea, we can see that scaling in the arctic at some time or if its ownership issues, either way you can frame the picture and you can understand what's going on and inform the policymakers what their options are. >> we will end with one last question that deals with looking at war. it has been said that the i see needs members that go into the private sector to gain new experiences in cyber and bring that experience back into the i see. as someone who's done this, i can say there's no dedicated pathway into the community for intelligence officers. what would you suggest someone with experience do?

i leave that open for everyone. >> i'll go first because i want everyone to know. there's a button that says engage, what it is is it is an avenue to do what you just prescribed there. we have positions available where we will take on an industry partner, essentially as a government employee they will be vetted et cetera to get government experience. likewise, we have talent available that we will send out to industry because we want the same experience. this has been available for about four months now. it has spiderwebs around it. if we were advertising it incorrectly, please try again, we are trying to do what you

just said. one of the premises is that we have got to create a construct where people can go out in the private sector and come back and we can bring people from the private sector that don't have a previous experience in the intel community but they have insight and knowledge that would generate value somebody who laughed and wants to come back to us, you are seeing more more of that. >> we hire from everywhere we have folks who go work for industry and exchange programs. people come in for a while and get government experience and go back to industry in the same thing vice versa.

>> i spent 25 years and found it invaluable opportunity to learn about the private sector and until they understand some of the challenges we have are not all that on similar, it was very, very educational and enlightening to me. like others, there will be an unprecedented need for a partnership between the public and private sector if we are going to help to secure. [inaudible] i think it it needs to be the

wave of the future. i think in the u.s. we can set the path for how this needs to be gun done. >> i want to thank the panelists and thank you for your interest. >> today, a hearing on the federal response to the flooding in louisiana. edwards ofhn bel louisiana testifies. that is on c-span2. today, the family research 2016 valuess the voter summit in washington dc. remarks by senators tim scott and james lankford of oklahoma. later, we will have more from the summit, including remarks by donald trump. p.m. easternt 2:05

on c-span2. makes c-span radio app it easier to continue to follow the 2016 election wherever you are. it is free to download. get audio coverage and up-to-the-minute schedule timesation, plus podcast for our popular public affairs and book history programs. app means you always have c-span on the go. >> "washington journal" is next. at 9:00 a.m. eastern, the u.s. house returns to debate a bill that would allow 9/11 survivors to sue the saudi arabian government. coming up in 20 minutes, new york congressman tom reed, who has endorsed donald trump, talking about campaign 2016.

7:55, representative gregory on outreachew york to african-americans and other minority groups. ♪ host: good morning. it is friday, september 9, 2016. the headlines focus on congres'' full plate. lawmakers face a number of issues, including passing a spending bill to keep the government-funded beyond the end of the month. lawmakers are locked in battle over a host of other proposals, including a measure to provide funding to combat the zika virus , a bill to allow families of september 11 victims to sue saudi arabia, the nomination of merrick