a.j. from michigan, democrats line, jump in. hello, thanks for taking my call. this is -- i'm pretty young, so trump got elected, i wanted to look into the nixon thing, in case. and it is amazing to me how up.fectly this all lines also, i guess the second thing, it is surprising to me how often we hear republican line stuff about hillary. she lost, right? we're not worriedabout her, we're about what trump did. i guess i don't support the firing. host: last call on the topic and today in front of the senate committee, it is not director comey, it is acting f.b.i. director, andrew jackson andrew mccabe alongside mike pompeo testifying in front of intelligence committee, the topic is global threats, future of the f.b.i. ay come up in that discussion, as well, we invite you to watch

on c-span.

>> on c-span, we are live at the heart senate office building for a hearing this morning that will feature the acting at ei director, andrew mccabe, mike pompeo, director of national intelligence dan coats, looking at intelligence threats. beenr director comey had scheduled to testify this morning before his firing the other day by president trump. expecting a lot of questions at the hearing this morning about that issue, and more. live coverage this morning on c-span.

>> senator richard burr, the chair of the committee, subpoena

michael flynn for documents related to the intelligence -- intelligence committee us investigation. this is their worldwide threats hearing, getting underway shortly here on c-span.

sen. burr: i would like to call the hearing to order. i would like to welcome our witnesses today. the director of national intelligence, dan coats. good to see our former colleague. director of the central intelligence agency, mike pompeo. director of defense intelligence, vince stewart. director of the national security agency, mike rogers. director of geospatial intelligence agency, robert cardella. and andrew mccabe, acting director of the at ei. .- fbi thank you for coming in on such short notice. since 1995, this committee has

met with an open forum to hear about and discuss the security threats facing the united states of america. i understand that many people tuned in today and were hopeful that we would focus solely on the russian investigation and their involvement in our elections. let me disappoint everybody up front. while the committee certainly views russian intervention in our elections as a significant threat, the purpose of today's hearing is to view and highlight , to the extent possible, the ranges of threats that we face as a nation. security threat picture has evolved significantly since 1995. what used to be a collection of mostly physical and state taste national security concerns has been replaced by something altogether different. our traditional focus on countries like north korea, russia, and iran, is comforted by new challenges like strategic

threats posed by non-state actors. danger of transnational terrorists who can use the internet to inspire violence and fear in the homeland all without leaving their safe havens in the middle east. what has not changed, however, is the dedication and patriotism of the women and men who make up the united states intelligence community. the very people represented by our witnesses this morning. one of the many reasons i find so much value in this hearing is that it provides the american public with some insight into the threats facing our country. but it also lets people know what is being done on their behalf to the threats. the witnessesl today to not only a dress the threats to talk about what their doanizations are helping to

to help this country to the degree they can in a classified statement -- setting. coats, yours is a lengthy and detailed account of what this country is facing and thes evidence of why substantial resources and investments that this committee authorizes are in fact necessary. from the human tragedy of the refugee crisis in the middle east to the risk that territorial ambitions will set off a regional conflict in the south china sea, it is a complicated and challenging world. director pompeo, the korean peninsula is a point of concern to me and many on this committee. i would like your insight into what is behind north korea's unprecedented level of nuclear missile testing and how close they are to holding the u.s. mainland at risk of a nuclear attack. i also value your sense of how of the southctions

korean president will impact things for us on that peninsula. general stewart, i'm sure that you are aware of the reinvigorated policy discussions on afghanistan. while we all respect that you can't offer your own recommendations on what that veryy should be, i would much value your assessment of the situation in afghanistan today, including the state of governance in cobble and the proficiency of the afghan national security forces and whether taliban reconciliation is a realistic objective. if the u.s. is ramping up in afghanistan, we need to know the ioc's abuse on what we are getting into. youro will share assessment of the battlefield in iraq and in syria with us this morning. on the ground include ongoing operations to dislodge isis from proposal -- mosul.

rogers, i made a couple of references to cyber already and that's for good reason. of the many difficult challenges we will discuss this morning, nothing worries me more than the threat of a well-planned, well executed widescale attack on the computer networks and systems that make america work. from banking and health care to military and critical infrastructure, the functionality of our modern society is dependent on pewter's. -- on computers. "nearly all information's systems will be at risk for years." that alarms me. admiral rogers, i look forward to hearing from you on this line of assessments. ,irector cargo low -- cardillo you're at the nexus of data collection and analysis.

given the complexity of what we are being confronted with and the global nature of what this country faces, expectations are high. we know that the ic cannot be everywhere that -- everywhere at once, but that is sort of a we look to them to do. i would appreciate your sense of what nga analytic strengths are today and what the role of commercial imagery is in the future. welcome to the, table and into the fray. to the extent possible i hope you will discuss the bureau's assessment of the terrorist threat within our borders. your agents are often our last line of defense here at home and i will say, continue to do outstanding work. we are fortunate to have six people with the experience and

the dedication that we have today. what i would like to highlight for my colleagues, the committee will be holding a crass -- classified hearing today at 1:30. i will do everything i can to make sure that the essence you ask in this open session are appropriate to the venue we are in. i would ask you to think about that long and hard and if there is a question, to move to a staffer to ask him whether this is the appropriate area and if you, as our witnesses, feel there is something you cannot sufficiently answer in an open setting, you will pause long enough to get my attention and we will try to make sure that we moved to the appropriate setting. with that, i turn to the vice-chairman for any comments you might make. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your leadership on this committee. good to see you

all, but it is impossible to ignore that one of the leaders of the intelligence committee is not here with us today. the president's firing of director comey tuesday night was a shocking development. dismissal, tothe me and others is especially troubling. and if there was any coordination in the campaign or efforts to interfere in the election. if it was related to this investigation. that is truly unacceptable.

we were scheduled to hear directly from director comey today in open session. we and the american people. we anticipate asking director comey a series of questions about his actions as they relate to the russians. trump's actions this week cost us the opportunity to get at the truth, at least for today. you may wonder, a bit, how seriously i wonder how the white house continues to dismiss this investigation. this administration doesn't take the investigation to seriously. it is important to restate the importance of the independence and integrity.

important to maintaining .he principal the present's actions that should be deeply concerning, no matter which political party belonged to. these developments make the investigation into the russian influence on 2016 u.s. presidential election even more important. while it is clear to me now, more than ever that an independent special counsel must be appointed, make no mistake, our committee will get to the bottom of what happened during the 2016 presidential election. i again want to, the chairman. we hope to speak to mr. comey.

mr. mccabe, i do want to make or that my first question to you, even in this public setting, will be for you to assure the committee that if you come under any political influence from the white house or others to squash this investigation or impede it in any way, that you will let the committee know. this investigation has had its ups and downs. could myself, have at times been frustrated with the pace. we will no doubt face other challenges in the future. and bumps,ns sometimes, is how bipartisanship works, it's a constant struggle but one worth making and i'm proud of how members of this committee on both sides of the aisle have conducted themselves

in one of the most challenging political environments we have ever seen. we believe this investigation to be on a solid, bipartisan footing. in spite of the events in the last one in four hours, i attempt -- i intend to maintain the committee's focus on the investigation. recent actions only increase the burden of responsibility on all of us to be sure that we live up to this challenge and uncover the truth. there is obviously consensus agreement among u.s. the exactce committee same playbook was used in the french elections. no one trip -- no one should forget, we had some of the folks in from the german service recently, there was a hacking into the german bundestag.

it's fair to say that they should be looking for more cyber attacks with their upcoming national elections in september. in short, russia's direct interference around the globe is a direct assault that we must work on together and it is clearly one of the top worldwide threats. that being said, gentlemen, i want to start again by thanking you for your service to the nation. i want to know the director coats, testifying before this committee for the first time since his confirmation, dan, i know that you and marshall were ready for retirement and i thank you both for being willing to serve one more time. also want to recognize the men and women that you represent here today. these thousands of dedicated intelligence professionals toil in the shadows, put their lives on the line, and make sacrifices most of us will never know. i also want to make sure that

they know that i appreciate their efforts and am proud to represent them not only as the vice chair of the intelligence , but our annual worldwide threat hearing is an important opportunity to review the threats and challenges we face as a nation. obviously, these threats continue to multiply. as the world becomes more complex and challenging, good intelligence gives leaders a heads up on the challenges that they need to address. the intelligence community in many ways is the nation's early warning system. however, a fire alarm only works if you pay attention to it. you can't ignore it just because you don't like what it's telling you. similarly, we need to make sure that all policymakers pay attention to the warnings provided by you, the independent, nonpartisan intelligence professionals. america has relied on global

systems of alliances, institutions, and norms since the second world war two inch -- to ensure prosperity. many challenges have come to that system. chinaning countries like and russia, challenging many of the global institutions. in many cases they are seeking to undercut and delegitimize. we must work together and stand vigilant. similarly, rogue states like north korea have sought to undercut the global nonproliferation regime. obviously north korea is one of the most pressing issues our country faces. admiral rodgers, as the chairman mentioned, we all share an enormous concern about the upside and downside of these technologies and the asymmetrical threats propose by ciber and other technology actors. i would add as well, director cardillo, the dominance in terms is at threat from

emerging nations. extremistgroups and nations are able to access these technologies. continue to suffer losses, it unfortunately continues to spread hateful ideology to social media indications. i only lightly touched on a few of the challenges we face. i look forward to the discussion we are about to have an eye thank you for being here. thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. vice chairman. for member purposes, we have a vote scheduled on the floor at 11:00. it is the intent of the chair in the vice chair that we will rotate the gavel so that the hearing continues through. members will be recognized by seniority for five minutes. when we conclude the open session with hopefully enough of a gap for the witnesses to have some lunch, we will reconvene at

1:30. the afternoon vote to my knowledge is not set yet, but he will work around that. back at the skiff at 1:30 for that to start. with that, director coats? the floor is yours. dir. coats: thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. i'm here with my colleagues from across the community. i'm sure that i speak for my colleague, mike pompeo, new job wer of the cia, the have inherited, and intelligence community with leadership professionals and intelligence expertise that is exceptional. it is a great privilege to hold these positions and to know that we have the support from across

17 agencies relative to gathering intelligence and analyzing and synthesizing that intelligence. several of those leaders are sitting here today. making contributions to the country into this issue. the threat environment is ever expanding and it has challenge the icc to stay ahead of the adversary. easy task.been an given the tasks we face around the world, we work to collect, and we appreciate very much the support from your committee these threats. the best and most integrated intelligence we could assemble. just some of the many challenging threats that we currently face. intelligence communities,

written statements for the record submitted earlier discussed these and many other threats. north korea is an increasingly grave national security threat to the united states because of nuclearing missile and capabilities. un is attending to prove that he can strike the u.s. mainland with a nuclear weapon. he has taken steps towards intercontinental holistic missiles, but they have not yet been flight tested. north korea updated its constitution 2012 to declare itself a nuclear power. it's officials consistently state that nuclear weapons are the basis for regime survival, suggesting cam does not intend intend -- kim does not

to negotiate them away. difficulties regarding north korea's isolation caused the icc to dedicate more resources to this challenge. it requires some of our most talent -- talented professionals to warn leaders of impending actions and of the long-term implications of their strategic weapons programs. we assess that the regime will maintain its momentum on the battlefield, provided as likely as it maintains support from the iran and russia. the continuation of the syrian conflict will worsen. already there are disastrous conditions for syrians and regional states. furthermore, april 4, the syrian agents againstve the opposition in what is probably the largest chemical attack i the regime since august of 2013.

the syrian regime probably used chemical weapons along the battlefront in late march, threatening key infrastructure. we assess that syria is probably both willing and able to use cw, chemical warfare, in future attacks, but we do not know if they plan to do so. we are still acquiring and continue to analyze all intelligence related to the question of whether russian officials have a foreknowledge of these attacks before april. as we learn this information, we will certainly share it with this committee. cyber threats continue to represent a critical national the unitedsue for states for two key reasons. first, our adversaries are becoming bolder, more capable, and more adept at using cyberspace to threaten our interests and shape real-world outcomes. the number of adversaries grows

as nationstates, terrorist groups, criminal organizations developrs continue to cyber capabilities. secondly, the potential impact of these cyber threats is amplified by the ongoing integration of technology into our critical infrastructure and into our daily lives. our relationships and businesses on social media and communication technologies and on critical infrastructure. and is becoming increasingly reliant on the internet. as such, this raises the potential for physical, economic, and psychological consequences for a cyber attack or exportation event to occur. the worldwide threat of terrorism is geographically diverse and multifaceted. it poses a continuing challenge to the united states for our allies and partners who seek to counter it. isis is experiencing territorial

and syria with persistent counterterrorism operations degrading its strength. however, isis will continue to be an active terrorist threat to the united states due to its to directlyty inspire attacks against a wide range of targets around the world. outside of a rack in syria, isis is seeking to foster interconnectedness among its global branches and networks, aligning efforts to their strategy, standing counter to isis efforts. maintain thet they capability to directly enable, assist and inspire transnational attacks. how kate its affiliates continue significant terrorist threat overseas and have remained primarily focused on local and regional conflicts. homegrown violent extremists remain the most frequent and unpredictable terrorist threat to the united states homeland.

this threat will persist, with many attacks happening with little or no warning. in turkey, tensions might , rapidly and as thectably, in 2017 government's consolidation of power, crackdowns on dissent and restrictions on free media continue. let me know take just a quick run through some key areas of the middle east. primaryk, baghdad's focus through 2017 will be recapturing and stabilizing mosul and other territories inhabited by isis. they continue in their insurgency and terrorist campaign. we assess that iraq will still toe serious challenges stability, political viability, and territory owned integrity, even as the threat from isis is reduced. reconstruction costs billions of

dollars in ethnic sectarian and political record -- reconciliation will be an enduring challenge. , they want to preserve the joint cap rance a plan of action as they view the deal as a means to remove sanctions some computerng capabilities. the implementation of the deal has extended the amount of time that iran would need to produce fissile material for a nuclear weapon from a few months to about a year. the malignant activities of to continue, however. it ran provides arms, financing, and training to shia fighters in syria to support the a sob regime -- assad regime. they have sent hundreds of their own forces, including members of the islamic revolutionary guard corps and the irt see force to syria as advisors.

in yemen we didn't's -- assess that the fighting will almost certainly persist between hootie alliance forces and the mne government led by the assad coalition. either side is able to achieve decisive results through military force at this point. al qaeda in the arabian peninsula has exploited the conflict and the collapse of government authorities to gain recruits and allies to expand their influence. asia the intelligence community assessment of the political and security situation in afghanistan will almost certainly deteriorate through 2018. even with a modest increase in military assistance by the united states and its partners. underminedoration is by its dire economic situation. afghanistan will struggle to

curb its dependence on external theort until he contains insurgency or reaches a peace agreement with the taliban. meanwhile, we assess that the taliban and is likely to ,ontinue to make gains especially in rural areas. afghan security performance will likely worsen due to a, nation of taliban operations and combat calories, poor logistical support and leadership. pakistan is concerned about international isolation, seeing its position through the prism of the rising international status in india and its deepening ties to the united states. pakistan will likely turn to china to offset its isolation, empowering a relationship into the indian ocean. in addition, islamabad has failed to curb militants in pakistan. these groups present a sustained

threat to the u.s. interest in the region that continues to india andtacks in afghanistan. pakistan is also expanding its nuclear arsenal and expanding -- tactical nuclear weapons, expanding the potential threshold for their use. let me know turn to russia. that russia is likely to be more aggressive, and informed, in global affairs, more unpredictable in its approach to the united states, and more authoritarian in its approach to domestic policies and politics. willsess that russia continue to look to leverage its military support to drive a political settlement process in syria on their terms. moscow is also likely to use russia's military intervention , in conjunction with efforts to capitalize on the fears of a growing isis and extremist threat to expand its role in the middle east.

we assess that the moscow strategic objectives in the ukraine, maintaining long-term influence over key have an frustrating attempts to integrate into western institutions will remain unchanged in 2017. russian military intervention in eastern ukraine continues more than two years after attempts to reach an agreement. russia continues to exert military and diplomatic pressure to course ukraine into moscow's interpretation of the political of the agreement. among them, constitutional amendments that would effectively give moscow a veto 'ser key have's -- kiev feature decisions. china will continue, we assess, to develop an active foreign the asia-pacific region, highlighted by a firm stance of competing territorial claims in the east and south china seas, relations with

taiwan and pursuit of economic engagement across east asia. china views a strong military as a critical element in advancing its interests and will also itsue entry -- interests in one build, one road initiative to it and its economic role across asia through infrastructure projects. quick look at sub-saharan africa, home to more than one billion people and expected to double in size by midcentury. governments face the threat of coups, uprisings, widespread terrorist attacks from okada and its isis affiliates. in the western hemisphere, venezuela's popular autocratic government will turn to increasingly oppressive means to maintain unrest. oil has been the cash cow, but

mismanagement has led to the climbing output and revenue. we assess that the government will struggle to contain inflation, make payments, and pay for imports. mexico's government will focus on domestic priorities to prepare for the 2018 presidential election while seeking to limit the fallout of strained relations with the united states. public demand for government action will add to political pressure. as cuba heads into the final year of preparations for a historic transition into a earlyeneration leader in 2000 18, the government's focus will be on preserving control while managing recession. cuba, which continues to use strained democracy activism blames the slowing economy on lower commodity prices. the u.s. embargo and the economic crisis in venezuela as a key benefactor.

let me make a statement on the threat of illegal drugs. the threat to the united states from foreign produced drugs, especially heroin and synthetic opioids has grown significantly in the past few years. this is contributing to previously unseen levels of u.s. drug-related mortality, which now exceeds all other u.s. causes of interest death. finally, i would like to make a few points here that are important to the ice going forward. section 702, the pfizer amendments act, is due to expire at the and of the year. i cannot stress enough the importance of this authority in how it does its work to keep americans safe. i know that that is shared by everyone at this table. extremely2 is an effective tool to protect the nation from terrorists and other

threats. as i described in my confirmation hearing, it is much of the to so critical work in protecting the american people of threats from abroad. the intelligence community is pledging to work with all of you in classified and unclassified sessions, to assure that you understand not only how we use our authorities, but also how we protect privacy and civil liberties in the process. additionally, many of you have asked me as part of my confirmation process about the status of the ic. its effectiveness and efficiency and how it could be improved. as part of the administration's goal of an effective and efficient government, we have already begun a review of the entire intelligence community, to include the office of the dni and to answer the very questions about how we can make our process even more streamlined, efficient, and effective.

my office is proud to lead this review and i look forward to the confirmation of my deputy to shepherd this process to completion and i have total confidence in her that she has the capacity and capability to effectively lead this effort. the recently passed intelligence authorization bill includes the requirement for a review of the andocused on structures authorities 10 years beyond the intelligence reforms of the mid-2000's. between these i am confident that i will be able to report back to the committee with constructive recommendations on the best ways forward. have been ontime i this job i have learned that the ic is full of dedicated, creative, patriotic men and women who are committed to keeping america safe. we must maintain this posture while looking for ways to improve. in conclusion, the intelligence

committee will continue its tireless work against these and all threats, but we will never be omniscient. that we have extensive insight into many threats and places around the world, we have gaps in others. therefore we very much appreciate the support provided by this committee that will continue to work with you to be sure that the intelligence community has the capabilities it needs to meet its many mission needs. we are ready to take your questions. sen. burr: director coats, thank you for that thorough and comprehensive testimony on behalf of the intelligence committee. you make us proud, seeing one of our own had the entire intelligence community and i want to thank you and marsha, personally, for your willingness to do that. dir. coats: thank you. sen. burr: we are anxious for your deputy to please be considered by the committee, would you please send us the

nomination? i'm going to recognize myself for five minutes. director? did you ever hear director comey tell the president that he was not the subject of an investigation? heare me, did you ever director comey tell the president that he was not the subject of an investigation? to your microphone, please. dir. mccabe: rookie mistake, i'm sorry. sir, i can't comment on any conversations the director may have had with the president. sen. burr: ok. general stuart? ?- steward there was an expected deterioration of conditions in afghanistan. can you give us their assessment of the situation today in a chemist and and what would

change that? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i make two trips there every year. on the ground i get my own personal assessment of how things are going. i was there about six weeks ago. two years into taking control of the security environment, there were mixed results in the past year. those mixed results can characterize the security environment as stalemate. left unchecked, it will deteriorate in the favor of belligerence. we had to do something very different than we have been doing in the past. let me back up just a little bit to talk about the fact that the taliban failed to meet any of their strategic objectives that they outlined during the last fighting season.

control node district centers and were able to execute high visibility attacks that caused a psychological effect in , debilitating effect maintaining their own influence on the area, controlling none of the large intercepts. having said that, the afghan national defense security forces did not meet their fourth-generation objectives and some success in training of the force, they were able to manage a crisis better than they have in the pratt -- the past. they were able to deploy forces but failed, in my opinion, to fire supportr and to make them as effective on the battlefield as possible. unless we change something where u.s. forces,either nato forces, changing the balance of forces on the ground, changing the fighting outputs on the ground, or adding additional

training and advising capability at lower levels than we do now, the situation will continue to deteriorate and we will lose the gains that we have invested in in the last several years. they have got to get more trainers below the core level, i believe. not sure how far down. or they would have to get more personnel on the ground, generating greater fire support, greater use of isr, or this will in fact deteriorate further. you, general.nk every aspect of our daily lives continues to become part of a traceable, trackable interaction in the environment, now known as the internet of things. in addition, artificial intelligence has increasingly enabled technology to become autonomous. what is the current assessment of the ever-changing capabilities of the internet of things and what it presents?

>> it represents an opportunity but from a defense perspective it represents great concern. where the ability to harness literally begins of devices that are built for very simple day to day activities can suddenly be tied together and focused and oriented to achieve a specific outcome. we have seen this with denial of service attempts. a couple of significant companies on the east coast of the united states in the last year. this will be a trend in the future as part of the in theions we are having private sector with this being a problem that is common to both of us. how can we work together to understand this technology and ask ourselves how to ensure that it's not turned around against us. sen. burr: thank you for that. rodgers, i will probably put this to you as well. of the amendments

act authorized the government to target only non-us persons, reasonably believed to be located outside the united states, for the purposes of acquiring foreign intelligence. section 702 cannot be used to target any person located inside the united states. the law prohibits the government from reverse targeting. that is targeting a non-us person outside the united states , specifically for the purpose of collecting the communications of a person inside the united states. they use the collection to identify and disrupt terrorists and other national security threats. characterize the 702 authority and its importance to the current intelligence collection pratt -- platform overall?

admiral rogers: we would be degraded into what terrorist actors and nationstates, criminal elements are doing that is of concern to our nation and our friends and allies. 702 has provided us insight focused on counterterrorism and counter proliferation, understanding what the nationstates are doing, it has given us tremendous insight into the network defense arena. highlighting much of what was in the intelligence committee's in 2016, it was informed by knowledge that we gain from 702. sen. burr: thank you for that. senator: i have got a couple of questions that hopefully will require only yes or no answers. first come for the whole panel, the assembled leadership of the intelligence committee, the believe the intelligence committee assessment accurately thatcterizes the extent

the russian intelligence agencies responsible for the hacking and leaking of information and using of this influence ours to elections? yes or no will suffice. >> i do. >> yes, senator. >> yes, i do. >> yes. that community assessment was piece of and is not a fake news or evidence of some other individual nation state other than russia, for the record. i warned you, i have to get you on the record, mr. mccabe. you have committed to informing this committee of any effort to interfere with the fbi's ongoing

investigation into links between russia and the trump campaign. dir. mccabe: i absolutely do. senator: thank you so much for that. in light of what's happened in the last 48 hours, it's critically important that we have that assurance and i hope you will relay at least, from me, to the extraordinary people that thist the fbi committee supports the efforts, professionalism, and independence. >> i will, sir, thank you. senator warner: in light of the fact that we just saw french elections that were deja vu all over again in terms of the release of a series of emails against mr. mccrone days before the election and the fact that this committee continues to investigate the type of tactics that russia has used, where do in termsas a country

of preparation to make sure that this doesn't happen again in 2018 and 2020? where have we learned -- moved in terms of working more with , in termsrm entities realw we can better assure news versus fake news. director, i know you have only been in the job for a short. while it was russia in 2016, other nationstates want similar types of assaults. >> we will continue to use all the assets that we have in terms of collection and analysis relative to the influence and what it has been have potentially could be in future. russians have spread this across the globe.

interestingly enough i met with the prime minister of .ontenegrin -- montenegrin their main topic was russian politicalce in their system. it sweeps across europe and other places and it is clear that the russians have upped their game using social media in ways we haven't seen before. so, it is a great threat to our democratic process. job here is to provide the best intelligence of the cancer the policymakers as they develop a strategy for how to best reflect a response to this. we have all expressed his concern, but since it is -- doesn't fall neatly into the jurisdiction of any one agency, who is taking the point on interacting with these platform companies? who is taking the point in terms of dhs?

i imagine that in terms of state boards of elections, if we could get a brief answer on that? i have one more question for admiral rodgers. dir. coats: there is contribution from agencies .cross the icy you might ask director pompeo to address that, others might want to address that also. each of the agencies, to the extent that they can, have had the capacity, whatever it is through, they will provide information to us that we want to use as a basis for policymakers relative to a grand strategy. i am not aware right now of any -- i think we are still .ssessing the impact

we have not but grand strategy together. we would provide the basis for the intelligence and the foundation for what that strategy would be. sen. warner: my hope would be to be proactive about this. i don't want to look back at this after another election cycle. admiral rodgers, do you have any doubt that the russians were involved in the interventions in the french elections? itiral rogers: lenny phrase this way, we are aware of some russian activity directed against the french election process, as i previously said earlier thisss week, we reach out to tell them that we had become aware of this activity -- what are you seeing? i'm not in a position to understand the extent in the french infrastructure. i'm not able to make a whole

simple declaratory statement. >> thank you. >> senator rubio? without goinge, into the specific seven individual investigation, the american people want to know, has the dismissal of mr. comey interrupted, stopped, or negatively impacted any of the work, investigation, or ongoing projects at the federal bureau of investigation? dir. mccabe: as you know, senator, the work of the fbi continues despite changes in changesance, despite are has been no effort to impede investigations. sir, you cannot stop the men and women of the fbi from doing the right thing, protecting the american people and upholding the constitution. this is for all the

members of the committee. it has been widely reported that this laboratory software is used by hundreds of thousands, millions of americans. to each of our witnesses i would ask, would any of you become trouble with this lab software on your computers? >> resounding no from me. >> no. >> no, sir. >> no, senator. pompeo, as was mentioned in the director's statements, armed civilian os, they havectiv been armed in the streets for the purposes of defending the regime. we are aware that the maduro regime has a cozy relationship with hezbollah, dedicate terrorists or -- dedicated terrorist organization.

the stockpiled weapons, they are able to ask for this russian variant of stinger missiles. director pompeo, if you could comment on the risks that i believe exist that as these groups become more desperate, potentially operating at some point outside the majuro regime, running around -- blood to row regime, getting their hands on advanced weaponry such as i mentioned, getting transferred to the terrorist mexico, or even terrorist organizations on the black market, is that a real threat and something we should be cognizant of? admiral rogers: it is a real threat. it gets more desperate there by the hour. ivosrisk of these collect

operating without control increases as well. we have not seen any of those major arms transfers take place. we haven't had any evidence that they are taking place today, but those stockpiles exist not only in that regime but other places as well. there are plenty of weapons running around there and the risk is real, serious, and ultimately a threat to south and central america in addition to venezuela. -- staying in the western hemisphere for a moment, and directormccabe pompeo, i continue to be concerned about the potential concerted effort on the part of the cuban government to recruit and unwittingly enlist american business executives and even other local and state and business leaders in order for them to influence u.s. policymaking and cuba, particularly the lifting of the embargo. would this be similar to what we have seen in the past, including

from the regime in cuba? >> yes, of course. this is frankly consistent with the attempt to interfere in the united states being not limited to russia. the cubans have deep to take american visitors and influence them that is adverse to u.s. interests. >> i fully agree and we shared concerns about that issue. >> on all the focus on russia and what has happened in the past, is it the opinion of all of you that even as we focus on 2016 and the efforts leading up to that election, efforts to influence policymaking in the united states, the city the russian interests, are ongoing and they continue to use active measures to try to influence the political debate and decisions politics,erican

particularly as they pertain to russians interest around the world and it is an ongoing threat, not simply something in the past. >> yes, sir that is right. >> in some sense, we have to put in context this has been going on for a long time. there's nothing new, only the cost of doing it has been lessened. >> i would add that the use of significantlyedia increased the impact in the capabilities. andia has in this for years usedes, but the ability to the interconnectedness and all that that provides that it did not provide before, it literally upped their game to the point of having a significant impact. perspective, ciber is

enabling them to access information in massive quantities that were not attainable to the same level previously. that is another tool in their attempt to acquire information and misuse of the information, but at other times, actually dumping raw data, as is on this last presidential election cycle. senator: thank you, mr. chairman. is -- where there is more than one threat to our country, i would argue the greatest danger is north korea. i have been very worried in trying to follow this as close as possible. in this statement for the record, you state "north korea's nuclear weapons and missile programs will continue to pose a serious threat to u.s. interest and to the security environment in east asia into 2017."

you go on to say "there committed to developing nuclear armed vessel that is capable of posing a direct threat to the united states." these assessments, combined with north korea's behavior, recent ballistic missile launches and proximity to u.s. forces and allies in asia is deeply concerning. for the purpose of this hearing, could each of you expressed a threat posed by north korea in this public setting and address some of the specific actions we are taking as a nation? and some of it you may want to do in the closed hearing later. >> we could go into greater detail in the closed hearing, but it is clear that we have a veryd this as

significant, potentially existential threat to the united states that has to be addressed. there has been considerable discussion among the policymakers with our providing intelligence with the administration relative to steps moving forward. taken eightis has major role, as well as our secretary of state, and others. chineseraction with the , we think can play a significant role in terms of how we deal with this. have dedicated a significant amount of our intelligence resources to the issue of north korea. forward tolook going deeper into the classified session. senator: is it possible to estimate when they will have an

intercontinental missile capable of taking a nuclear warhead? >> i think it would be best if we say that for the -- if we save those kind of details for the closed session. senator: can you say how effective china has been in stopping some of the testing? >> let me try and answer that. i returned from korea. i was there last week. i was there with a great soldiers, as well as the great soldiers up the korea army. they are doing amazing work in difficult conditions. with respect to the chinese, they have made efforts in the way they have not before in an effort to close down the trade that they have and putting diplomatic pressure, as well, on the north koreans. the intelligence suggests we're going to need more to shake free goes terribly challenging problems. >> and that they could do more and they had the capacity to do more. senator: could you be specific?

have they entirely stopped coal? to what degree have they reduced it? how about oil and other commodities? the detailsto deter to the classified setting but there have been restrictions on coal that have been significant. senator: is there any other comments? korea hasuld, north declared its intent. it publicly produces propaganda images that shows their intent to develop intercontinental missiles, nuclear armed. what we have not seen them do is do a complete test with a nuclear device. and the closed session, we can talk about how close they might be to doing that. the material for nuclear warheads in developing a wide range of missile technology

, short, intermediate, long-range, technology, so they will put those together at some point but we have not seen them ,o that and tested end-to-end missile launch, intercontinental a reentry survival of vehicle, but they are on that path and there committed to doing that. general'sadd to the comments, is that they are in a race and he is pushing hard on the accelerator. this town is aware of that and we are doing everything in our power and we can give you the details enclosed to make sure that we give you and our customers the advantage to win that race. , youor: if i might say have given us very good information, solid information and it is much appreciated. i think it is time for the american people to begin to understand that as the director said, we do have an existential

threat in the pacific ocean, and we need to come to grips with it. senator: thank you. , let me welcome you back to the committee. please, take this responsibility, we will talk a little bit about two executive tting the president has been challenged on in court. i understand as the dni involved in that process, is that right? go screening process, is that something that reports up through you? @cspanwj you are talking -- you were talking about the classification? orderr: well, the first

was january 27, where they said they would suspend refugee admissions from certain countries for 90 days pending their review. there is also 120 days mentioned in that order, and since we are beyond 90 days and approaching 120 days, my question is, are we, in spite of what is happening outside of the organization, are we continuing to pursue that timeline, and are we about to get to the 120 days of having that review period behind this? dir. coats: i would like to get back to you with specifics relative to the days away on what has been done to this particular date and are we on target. this is, going forward, i do not have the details in front of me now, but i would be happy to get that information. senator: i would be interested in that. i would be concerned if we are now over close to 120 days into that timeframe to find out that

the 120 days did not get the job done because we were waiting to figure out how to order cou coue properly enforced, so i would be interested in that. , director, ifront know among other things, your organization has conducted what thons.ll hacka hollyes that bring into protect ourselves from the cyber attacks. to report to you through predominantly, historically closed systems, government owned systems, etc., they have responded clearly. ourhigh-tech reality of world and interconnectedness of the internet etc., so what we're

try to do is take that success of our experience and engages that community and engage in a way we can better leverage our data in a way to inform and more new concept -- and warn you, so i tried to tap into that community. it would be good if we can engage in academia in a way to do a job better. senator: we had a witness before and themittee on march observed that this is "the intelligence community is biased against open source information ," and that ends this quote. in terms of geospatial, whether you doing what source information? engaging and there is

an upside to this connectedness. we seek to build on that. we also need to go in eyes wide open and realize there is a risk. i do not have a bias, i have an awareness and appreciation for this open development and innovation and my commitment is to smartly engage with it to bestsure that we use the of it while we are aware there is a risk as we do so. senator: do you think it was a fair criticism that the intelligence community's pints against -- is biased against using open source information? >> i do not think that is the case today. we have an anonymous open source

enterprise that does its best to stay up with information management and get information that is not stolen secrets but open source information to the right place and at the right time to inform the intelligence we provide to you and other customers. today, i would say it is imminent and accurate. senator: thank you. chairman: senator? senator: thank you. let me ask -- let me highlight one issue and ask a question to director coats and i would invite comment from anyone who has something they want to offer. i have been increasingly concerned about foreign governments hiring lobbyists in washington and unbeknownst to members, actually lobbying congress to enact policies that may be contrary to the best interest of the american people. of course, the foreign agent registration act provides some level of transparency for that, but i highlight that issue and

we can come back to it at a later time because i want to ask you about another topic, as well. the committee on foreign investment in the united states provides an important role in determining whether there are in exchangeransfers to foreign governments and i was happy to see director coats, your comments on page four of your written statement, specifically regarding china's increasing effort to use investment as a way to improve its technological capabilities. seen, continues to use an aggressive campaign to vacuum up advanced u.s. technology however and whenever it can, whether stealing through cyber or buying it in the open market. currenteel like the city is process adequately protects against this threat vector and are all elements of the u.s. government cognizant of these vulnerabilities? dir. coats: i cannot speak to

how many agents of the u.s. government are as cognizant as perhaps they should be but i think that given china's aggressive approach, relative to gathering and all the things you mentioned, merits a review in terms of whether or not it needs to have some changes or innovations to aggressive chinese companiesainst our and across the world. they clearly have a strategy through their investments. it started a major investment bank, part of the world, the chinese are probably there looking to put investments in. we have seen this situation where they also are adding military capabilities to their

on theent strategic area horn of africa there that he would not necessarily expect in northern africa, they are active across the world. processe belt, one road opens their trade and what other interest they have to the indian ocean and different ways to that they haves had difficult to connecting with, so it is clearly an issue that we ought to take a look at. >> if i may say when comments, two comments, it mostly deals with change in transactions, purchases, and there is many ways and i think that out to be looked at. a part -- there are many vectors.

one is educational institutions, where there are many looks coming here, some in good faith alone but others send your request mobile admissions. itwith but others send to less noble admissions. i think that is also an issue of concern we are aware of. . senator: four to visiting with you and the closed session later on. senator: thank you. it is fair to say i disagree with director call me as much as anyone -- with director cm omey as much as anyone in the show, but the timing of firing is wrong. he should be here this morning testified to the american people about where the investigation he runs stance. at a public hearing in january when he refused to discuss his

investigation between russia and associates, i stated my fear that if the information did not come out before inauguration day, it might never come out. with all the recent talk and recent weeks of whether there is collusion, i fear some colleagues have forgotten donald trump urged the russians to hack his opponents. he said repeatedly that he loved wikileaks. the question is not whether donald trump actively encouraged the russians and wikileaks to attack our democracy, he did. that is an established fact. the only question is whether he or someone associated with him coordinated with the russians. mccabe, the letter asserted that on three separate occasions, the director informed

him that he was not under investigation. would it have been wrong for the director to inform him he was not under investigation? yes or no? i would not comment on any -- senator: i did not ask that, would it have been wrong for the director to inform them he was not under investigation? that is not about conversations. yes, or no? dir. mccabe: we do not typically answer that question. i will not comment on whether the director and the president of the united states had that conversation. will -- will you refrain on the status of the investigation? dir. mccabe: i will. senator: one of the unanswered questions is why the president did not fire michael flynn after acting attorney general gates warned the white house he could

be blackmailed by the russians. director pompeo, do you know about the acting attorney general's warnings to the white house or where you aware of the concerns behind them? director pompeo: i do not have any comment on that. senator: were you aware of the concerns behind the warning? this is a global threat. this is a willful threat question and hearing, -- this was a global threat question and hearing. director pompeo: i'm not sure i understand. senator: the possibility of blackmail? fight an influential military official -- by an influential military official? this is not about the policy implication, this is about the national security advisor being foldable to blackmail by the russians. the american people deserve to know that whether in these extraordinary circumstances, the cia cap them safe. dir. pompeo: yes, sir, the cia

has kept the americans safe. we are committed to that will remain committed to that and we will do that -- senator: you will not answer the question. dir. pompeo: we will do that in the face of any dangers. senator: you did not answer on whether or not you were concerned about the gates warning. dir. pompeo: i do not know what you are exactly referring to at the yates morning. i have no first-hand information with respect to the warning that was given. she did not make that warning to me. i cannot answer that question, as much as i would like to. --ator: director coates, director coats, how concerned oilyou that a russian company could end up owning a significant percentage of u.s. oil refining capacity and what are you advising the committee

on foreign investment in the united states about this? dir. coats: i do not have specific information relative to that. i think that is something that we couldentially provide intelligence on in terms buthat situation might be, -- senator: i would like you to finish that in writing. but we see the could get one other question in. mountains ofen press stories of allegations about financial connections between russia and from and associates. -- and trump and associates. my question is, when it comes to elicit russian money, particularly the potential to be laundered on its way to the united states, what should the committee be most concerned about? we hear stories about deutsche

bank, shell companies, the british virgin islands, i would like to get your sense because i am over my time, director mccabe, what should we be most concerned about with respect to elicit russian money and its potential to be laundered on its way to the united states? dir. mccabe: i am not in the position to speak about investigations in this setting. i will confirm those are issues that concern us greatly. they have traditionally and even more so far today as it becomes even easier to conceal the and the track and destination and purpose of illicit money flows as the exchange of information becomes more clouded in encryption and becomes harder to get to the bottom of those investigations that which should light on those issues. senator: thank you. chairman: thank you very much. gentlemen, the purpose of this

hearing is to give the american people some insight into what we all do, which is what they do not see at all, and so i think that what i want to do is make an observation and then i went on it, anybodye who wants to volunteer, and i will start with you, director coats. committeen on this all the time i have been in the senate and last administration and i have been greatly impressed by the current administration's hitting the ground running during the first 100 days, as far as engagement on intelligence matters and engagements with foreign countries. the national media here is focused on domestic issues, ,hich is a great interest

personal issues in the the media is not as focused on this fast, and in my judgment, robust engagement with the intelligence communities around the world and with other governments. good andsion is it is aggressive, and i would like of where we are going now. all of you had real engagement in the last administration and all administrations are different. director coats, do you want to take that? would be happy. i think most presidents come with an agenda in mind in terms of what issues they would like to pursue. many issues affect infrastructure, education, only to find that this is a dangerous

world, that the threats that exist out there need to be given attention to. thinkresident, who i perception was not interested in that, i think director pompeo and i can certify the fact that we had spent far more hours in the oval office than anticipated. is a voracious consumer of information, asking questions and asking this provide intelligence. we are both part of the process run through the national security council, all through the deputies committee's and the principal committees, consuming hours and hours of time, looking at the threat and how do we address them and what is the intelligence that informs the

policy makers in terms of how they put a strategy in place, so what i initially thought would two time a week, quick brief, has turned into an every day, sometimes exceeding 45 minutes to one hour, or more, just inracing gas -- briefing the president. i have brought along our directors to show the president what their agencies do and how important it is that the information they provide, for the basis of making policy decisions, i would like to turn to my colleague to let him give you, and others, to give you their impression. senator: i appreciate that. sitctor pompeo, you kind of in the same spot we all sit in the last several years and i like your observation on the line of director codes.

dir. pompeo: director coats had it right. we briefed the president every questions asks hard to make sure we are doing a work in the right way. second, you asked about engagement in the world. this administration as we entered the battle stage that the previous administration was absent in. you will hear that when you travel. i have taken two trips in the welcome american leadership. they are not looking for american soldiers or boots on the ground, you are looking for american leadership around the globe and this president has reentered that space in the way i think was of america's interest well. could not agree more, and they come here regularly. the fact that the president has pulled the trigger twice in the first -- and then it in a fashion that did not started world war and was watched by our friends and our enemies, has

made a significant and huge difference as far as our standing in the world. thank you. mccabe, youector have several decades of law enforcement experience. is it your experience that people who are innocent of wrongdoing typically need to be reassured they are not the subject of an investigation? dir. mccabe: no, sir. senator: i ask that because i am trying to make heads or tails of the dismissal letter from earlier this week from the president, where he writes -- while i greatly appreciate you informing me on three separate occasions that i am not under investigation, and i am trying that wouldut why make it into a dismissal letter, but director, has anyone in the white house spoken to you directly about the russian investigation?

dir. mccabe: no, sir. --when did you last meet with the president, director mccabe? i do not think i can issue the comments on that. senator: was it earlier this week? dir. mccabe: i met with the president this week -- senator: but russia did not come up? dir. mccabe: that is right, it did not. senator: we have heard claims that director comey had lost the confidence of rank-and-file fbi employees. you have been there for 21 years. it accurateion, is at the rank and file no longer supported director comey?

no, sir.be: that is not accurate are you, sir, that i worked very closely with director comey from the moment he started at the fbi. executive assistant director of national security at that time and worked for him running the washington field office and i served as deputy for the last year. i can tell you i hold director comey in the highest regard. i have the highest respect for his considerable release and and dashes consider abilities -- abilities and it has been an honor to work with them. director comey enjoyed broad support within the fbi and still there is to this day. we are a large organization, 36,500 people across this globe. we have a diversity of opinions

about many things. i can tell you that the majority, the vast majority of fbi employees enjoyed a deep and positive connection to director comey. senator: thank you for your candor. do you feel like you have the adequate resources for the existing investigations that the bureau is invested in right now to follow them wherever they may lead? dir. mccabe: sir, if you are referring to the russian investigation, i do. i believe we have the adequate resources to do it and i know we have resourced that investigation adequately. if you are referring to the many constantly multiplying counterintelligence threat to the base across the spectrum, they get bigger and more challenging every day, and resources become an issue over time. in terms of that investigation, sir, i can assure you we are

covered. senator: thank you. director coats, welcome back. we do agree that it is a national security risk to provide classified information to an individual who has been compromised a foreign government? as a broad matter? dir. coats: as a broad matter, yes. senator: if the attorney general came to you and said one of your employees was compromised, what action would you take? i would take the action as prescribed in our procedures, relative to how we report this and how it is processed, it is a serious issue. i would be consulting with their legal counsel and inspector general and others as to how best proceed with this, but we would take action.

senator: with one of the options be this missile? dir. coats: that potentially could be a dismissal, yes. senator: thank you. chairman: senator? senator: thank you. agent who iss the in charge of this very important investigation into russian attempts to influence our elections last fall still in charge? dir. mccabe: we have many agents involved in the investigation at many levels, so i am not sure who. senator: the lead agent overseeing the investigation. dir. mccabe: certainly. almost all of the agents involved in the investigation are still in their position. senator: has there been any curtailment of the fbi's activities in this important investigation since director

comey was fired? dir. mccabe: ma'am, we do not curtail our activities. as you know. our people experiencing questions and are reacting to the developments this week, absolutely. does that get the weight of our ability to pursue this or any other investigation? no, ma'am. we continue to focus on a mission and get that job done. senator: i want to follow up on the question of resources that asked your opinion on, press reports yesterday indicated that comey requested additional resources for the bureau's ongoing investigation into russian active measure. are you aware of that request? can you confirm that request was made? dir. mccabe: i cannot confirm that request was made.

as you know, man, when we need resources, we make this request tear, so i'm not -- request here, so i'm not aware. that said, we do not typically request resources for an individual case. as i mentioned, i believe that the russian investigation is adequately resourced. you have also been target question about letters. it is my understanding that when an individual is the target of an investigation, at some points, a letter is sent out notifying the individual that he is a target. is that correct? dir. mccabe: no, ma'am, i do not believe that is correct. senator: so before there is going to be an indictment, there is not a target letter sent out by the justice department? dir. mccabe: not that i am aware

of. senator: that is contrary to my understanding, but let me ask you the reverse. dir. mccabe: again, i am looking at the perspective of the investigators, so it is not part of our normal case investigative practice. senator: that would be the justice department. dir. mccabe: i see. senator: i am asking you, isn't it standard practice when someone is the target of an investigation and is on the verge of being indicted, that the justice department sense that individual what is known as the target letter? dir. mccabe: i will have to do for that question -- i will have to defer that question to the department of justice. senator: let me ask you to flip side, and perhaps you do not know, but is it standard fbitice for that fbi -- the to inform someone they are not the target of an investigation?

dir. mccabe: it is not. senator: so it would be unusual fornot standard practice there to have in a notification from the fbi director to president trump or anyone else involved in this investigation, informing him or her, that individual is not a target, correct? dir. mccabe: i will not comment on what director comey may or may not have done. senator: i have not asking you to comment on the facts of the case. i am trying to find out what standard practices and what is not. dir. mccabe: i am not aware of that being a standard act is. rodgers, i want to follow-up on senator warner's question about the attempted interference and the election. -- in the french election. some researchers claim that apt

28 is the group that was behind the stealing and the leaking of the information about the president-elect of france, the tied d ths have publicly intelligencesian services after the group's involvement in stealing data that was leaked in the run-up to the was elections in november. c in a position to attribute the stealing and the leaking that took place prior to the french election to be the result of activities by this group, which is linked to russian cyber activity? >> i do not think i have a complete picture of all things

associated with friends, but we are aware of russian activity directed against the french election cycle to the point where we felt it was important enough we reached out to our french counterparts to inform them and make sure they have orders and what we were aware of and we asked them if there was something missing. senator: thank you. senator: mr. mccabe, thank you for being here today under somewhat difficult circumstances. we appreciate your testimony. a march 20, director comey -- then director comey testified, as i have been authorized part of the fbi's counterintelligence mission is investigating the russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 residential election, and that includes the nature of any links between individuals associated with the trump campaign manager russian government and whether there was any coordination between the russian court nation and efforts.

this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes are committed. is that statement accurate? dir. mccabe: yes, sir. senator: how many agents are assigned to this project? how many personnel within the fbi, roughly? dir. mccabe: i cannot really answer those sorts of questions in this forum. senator: yesterday, a white said thiss spokesman is one of the smallest things on the plate of the fbi, is that accurate? uh, -- abe: senator: is it small in relation to all the other work you are doing? dir. mccabe: sir, we consider it to be a highly significant investigation. senator: so you would not characterize it as one of the smallest? dir. mccabe: i would not. senator: thank you. let me change the subject briefly. we have been talking about russia and their involvement in

this election. one of the issues of concern to me, and perhaps i can direct -- i will direct it to anyone in the panel, the allegation of russian involvement in our electoral systems, is that an issue that is of concern, and what do we know about that and is it the and followed up on by this investigation? mr. mccabe, is that part of your investigation? dir. mccabe: i am not talking -- senator: i am talking about state-level infrastructure. dir. mccabe: yes, sir, so obviously, not discussing any specific investigation in detail, but the issue of brush and interference in the u.s. -democratic process is one that causes us concern. it is something we spent a lot of time working on over the last months. to reflect comments made in response to an earlier question that director codes handled, i

think part of that product -- director coats and don't come i think part of that is to understand foreign adversaries to interfere in those areas, so we have seen this one's and we are better position to see it the next time. we are able to improve our coordination with primarily to dhs,epartment of homeland, their expensive network into the state and local election but to interact with those folks and put them in a better position to defend against, whether it is cyber attacks or any influence-driven interaction. senator: i think that is in important part of this issue. rodgers, yesterday, a camera crew from task was allowed into the oval office. there was no american press allowed. was there any consultation with you with regard to that action in terms of the risk of some penetration or

communications in that incident? admiral rodgers: no. senator: your agency was not consulted? admiral rodgers: not that i am aware of. senator: did it raise concerns when you saw those pictures that they were in the oval office? admiral rodgers: al i was not aware of where the images came from. senator: thank you. coats,tes, director you leave the intelligence trinity, where you consulted at all with regard to the firing of director comey? dir. coats: i was not. senator: there were no discussions with the, even though the fbi is an important part of the committee question mark -- committee? dir. coats: there are no discussions. senator: thank you. chairman: sen. lankford: senator: let me run -- senator

lankford. senator: let me have some high , you have theirm resources you need for the russian investigation, correct? limitations,not you have what you need? the actions about james comey has not curtailed the investigation from the fbi, it is moving forward? dir. mccabe: absolutely. senator: no agents have been removed that are the folks doing the investigation? dir. mccabe: no, sir. senator: visit your impression the fbi is unable to complete the investigation in a fair and expeditious way because of the removal of james comey? dir. mccabe: it is my opinion and belief the fbi will continue to pursue this investigation vigorously and completely. senator: do you need someone else to do it? dir. mccabe: no, sir. senator: as i go through the report in tracking the worldwide threats that was put out, there

is a section on the products and the movement of illegal drugs -- section on narcotics and illegal drugs, and there are tens of thousands of illegal pharmacies online is to be day. 18 to 20 go online a day still, can you help me understand what the fbi is doing to be able to engage how many are american, international, and what we can do to stop the movement of narcotics to our mail system? dir. mccabe: yes, sir, great question. it is one we spend a great deal of time on. the traffic of illegal narcotics is something that we, along with our partners at the dea and other federal state and law enforcement officers have focused on for years. we have had great success, but the threat continues to change and develop, and confront us in different ways. the perfusion of illegal online pharmacies is one of those ways,

and it is something we are learning more about, spending more time on every day. senator: i am glad it is highlighted radar tens of thousands of the pharmacies and it is no longer the drug dealer on the corner, they deliver it to your house. there are different issues we need to aggressively address. director codes, we had talked off -- director coats, we had talked about a cyber doctrine and it is one thing that other actors need to understand what our boundaries are and this seemed to be talked to death. everyone says, it needs to occur. outhas the ball on meeting to make sure when you from now, we are not talking about we need to get a cyber doctorine? who should we hold accountable if we do not have a cyber doctrine? all of us: i think would agree we need a cyber doctrine because it is one of the top, if not the number one threat today that we are dealing

with. president taske and efforts under the direction of former mayor giuliani with this. to a conclusion at this particular point in time. i do not have the details on that. i would agree with you that this is a threat that are policymakers need to address and i'm hoping that when we are here next to, you will have a solid response to your question. at this point in time, given the proliferation of issues we are trying to deal with, it is almost overwhelming. senator: it is. there are so many things flying around that keep getting left and it has been for years left and we need to figure out how do we find that to has got the ball

under to behold be hold accountable to help us work through this, or is this something we need to be able to work through? which wasyour report, excellent, on worldwide threats, every section of the report, every section, had a section on iran. every part of it. in one section, you wrote -- iran continues to be the foremost state-sponsored terrorism. whether it was cyber, act of terrorism, involvement in every different nefarious action, it circles back to iran in some way of facilitating this, so this is one of those areas that we have got to be able to figure out how to deal with. it, in a broad question on and maybe general stuart would be the right one to -- general steward would be the right one, but my concern is we seem to be concerned with isis in syria we are losing track of movement of iran through iraq into syria,

using track of what is happening in yemen and other places. what is your perception of iran's goal through the middle east? or goigne for yemen into syria and iraq and to occupy and stay? is it the perception that russia wants to stay there or iran wants to remain the dominant force? dir. lt. general steward: iran fused themselves as the dominant regional power. -- use themselves as the dominant regional power and they aim to control large parts of the region. if they cannot control them physically, they tend to influence them politically. syria becomes a strategic point for them and allows them to leverage the syrian forces, the lebanese, hezbollah, and move across the region. they will be in competition at some point with russia. russia views itself as a

regional power, at least the dominant regional power today. i'm not sure russia and iran's influence will remain aligned in the long-term. in the near term, they are closely aligned when it comes to securing the syrian regime. senator: thank you. senator: i think all of you for being here. all of you for being here. we are going to look forward to really hearing from all of you so we can get more detail. i have one question for mr. mccabe, it is the morale of the agency in the fbi and the morale started back from july 5, july 7, and election day, did you all ever think you would be involved in an election process such as this and what did it do to morale? dir. mccabe: i do not know that anyone envision exactly the way these things would develop.

as i said earlier, senator, we are a large organization. we have a lot of diversity of opinions and viewpoints on things. we are also a their slick independent group. senator: before -- and we are an independent group. are two prior to it comey got involved in, did you see a change in a row? more anxious, more concerned? dir. mccabe: i think morale has always been good. there were folks within our agency who are frustrated with the outcome of the hillary clinton case and some of those folks were vocal about that concern. senator: i'm sure we will have more questions in the closed hearing. lab.lked about this kl hasn't risen to your level being the head of our intelligence agencies and people most concerned about the security of our country of having a russian

connection as for reaching as kl labs? have you gone to your eye to people making sure you have no -- to your i.t. people making to have no interaction with the more contractors you do business with the line? >> recounts on the expertise of the fbi -- we pounce on the expertise of the fbi. senator: but you have i.t. people. >> absolutely. senator: has it come to concern that might be a problem? this lab isere that a challenge or threat. senator: more than a challenge. i hope that all of the, we are concerned about this, very much concerned about security of our country and their involvement. >> we share that. >> we are tracking them and their software. as well as i know, and i have checked recently, there's nooks software on our networks --

there is no software on our networks. at this point, we see no keyection to casper connections. senator: yes, sir. >> it was not that long ago i was talking, raising issues position.rsky and its that continues in this new job. >> it has risen to the director of the cia, as well. >> we are focused on closer. senator: if you can give us a to make sure your contractors understand you have concern about this and making sure that they can verify to all that they are not involved with any of their hardware. i went to switch different things because of national security, but the games we have in the united states, you talk about how you have ms 13, the

crips, aryan brotherhood, it goes on. what are we doing and what is it to your level or brought to level of concern that we have with these gangs within our country, every part of our country? anybody on the gangland? >> we spend a lot of time talking about that at the fbi. senator: two resources go to each of these because they are dispersed over the country? dir. mccabe: we have been focused on the gang threat for many years. it is like the online pharmacy threat. it continues to change and develop harried we think it is having an impact on elevated crime rates across the country, so we're spending a lot of time focused on that. questionbasically the is on the rarest elements. ever since the closure of the california, which is the last mine we had that was giving a

restless of elements, that has rare source ofa elements, that has been closed and now we are dependent on foreign purchases for what we need to run this country. we do not do any of it in this country anymore. most of the comes from china. do any of you have a concern about that? >> yes, we are concerned. we do a lot of work to help the intelligence and policy community shape how we ought to treat this issue, but the real concern depends on the elements. we use them for important technologies to keep us safe. that has been told to me the department has about 800 tons of rare elements per year. west virginia has the opportunity to provide this country with the rarest elements it has because of our mining process and all we have

extracted. we are happy to come to your aid, sir. senator: thank you, senator. chairman: the vice chair and i have to step out for a meeting that we cannot push off. i would ask senator harris, senator cotton, to conclude their first-round questions. any member that seeks additional questions will be recognized by the chair. i would ask you to limit those questions, if you can, but the chair will ask -- will say we are not going over five minutes for the second round of questions. it is my hope he will give sufficient time to these six gentlemen to have nutrition before we reconvene at 1:30 into 19.there will be a -- in 219. there will be a boat circa 2:00, but the closed hearings, we like to make sure nobody misses anything, so we might slightly

adjust what we are doing. >> i appreciate your thoughts on this, a new departure, as we work through it, it is acceptable to begin another five-minute round. chairman: up to five minutes. senator cotton. senator: inmates are running the asylum. [laughter] >> speak for yourself. [laughter] senator: i think everyone in this room and most americans have come to appreciate the aggressiveness with with -- which would russia uses covert influence, propaganda, call them what you will, and in 2016 and andacking to those emails in the french election last week, which is what i sought to revive the acting measures working group and the intelligence authorization act. these activities go far beyond

elections, as most of our witnesses no. the former director of the cia, bob gates, detailed soviet covert influence campaigns designed to slow reports of the and development of nuclear missile-defense systems and employment of intermediate nuclear range systems to europe, specifically on page 260, he writes -- during the period the soviets mounted a massive covert -- we operation, aimed at devoted tremendous resources to an effort at the time to uncover this soviet covert campaign. director casey summarized the efforts in the paper he said to bush on january 18, 1983.we later published it and circulated widely within the government and finally provided an unclassified version of the public to use, .nd quotes -- end quote

i would like to thank you cia for providing this to the committee. i have asked unanimous consent that it be included in the hearing transcript and since the asylum,are running the hearing objection, -- hearing no objection, we will include it in the transcript. we heard that there were efforts to undermine our nuclear modernization efforts, our mis-sold appointments and more in keeping with past practices. -- missile appointments and more in keeping with past practices. would you agree? mr. mccabe: yes. >> thank you. there were two unclassified

provisions i authored. requirend would additional scrutiny of russian embassy officials who travel more than the prescribed distance from the duty station, whether it is the embassy or a consulate around the united states. , when the bill was on the verge of passing, i personally received calls from high-ranking officials to withdraw them. i did not. the bill did not pass. i did not receive any objection administration officials. are you aware of any objection be trump administration had to my two provisions? >> no. >> to rector pompeo? like snow -- pompeo?tor papag

>> no. >> do you have any idea why obama administration officials would object? >> that would be pure speculation. i cannot read the president mind. section 702.ned director rogers, it's my understanding that your agency is undertaking an effort to release an estimate of the number of incidental persons who might have been collected using 702 techniques. would that require you going in and conducting searches of incidental collection that had previously been unexamined? >> that's cross -- that's part of the challenge. you are trying to produce an estimate designed to protect

privacy rights and in order to do that you are going to have to violate privacy rights? >> that is part of the challenge. that is why we are having a dialogue. going to be possible to produce that estimate without some degree of inaccuracy or infringing on privacy rights of americans? >> probably not. in your agency believes there is misconduct or privacy rights not being protected, they could, i believe, under current law, come to your inspector general or your general counsel. i assume you have open-door policies. >> whistleblower protection. yes. >> and i have at least four different avenues if they believe there are abuses in the section 702 process. >> and anyone in their chain of command. we proceed with

caution before producing a report that might infringe on americans privacy rights needlessly and might mike it -- might make it that much harder programsorize critical that your predecessor described as must-have not nice to have. acting director mccabe, welcome. i know you have been in this position for about 48 hours and i appreciate your candor. until this point, what was your role in to the investigation of russian hacking of the 2016 election? >> i have had an oversight role of all fbi activity, including that investigation. ms. harris: and now that you are acting director, what will your role be? mr. mccabe: to understand what

our folks are doing and make sure they have the resources they need and that they are getting the direction and guidance they need to go forward. you supportis: do the idea of a special prosecutor taking over the investigation in addition to your role? a question that is for the department of justice and it would not be proper for me to comment on that. senator harris: from your understanding, who at the department of justice is in charge of the investigation? mr. mccabe: the deputy attorney general. hadtor harris: and have you conversations with him about the investigation since you have been in this role? mr. mccabe: i have. directorarris: when comey was fired, he was in california, so who was in charge of securing his files? ourmccabe: that is responsibility. senator harris: and are you

confident his files have been secured so that you can maintain the investigation? mr. mccabe: i am. senator harris: it has been widely reported that director comey asked rosenstein for additional resources. i understand you are saying you do not need additional resources. mr. mccabe: for the russia investigation, i believe we are adequately resourced. senator harris: will you commit to this committee that if you need additional resources you will come to us? will.cabe: i absolutely senator harris: i understand you have not talked to the white house about the investigation. mr. mccabe: correct. senator harris: have you talked to jeff sessions? mr. mccabe: no. have you talked to rod rosenstein? mr. mccabe: not recently, not since i have been in this position. senator harris: what is in place

to assure members of the fbi that they will not he fired if they aggressively pursue this investigation? mr. mccabe: we have an active line of communication with the team working on this issue. exemplary and incredibly effective leaders and i am directly for, confident they understand and are confident in their position moving forward on this investigation, as my investigators, analysts, and professional staff are in everything we do every day. senator harris: i understand there is no question about the commitment the men and women of the fbi have to pursue their mission, but will you commit to you will to wreck lake communicate in some way now that these -- you will directly communicate in some way, now that director comey has been fired, that you will directly communicate to those men and women to assure them they will

not be fired for aggressively pursuing this investigation? mr. mccabe: yes, ma'am. senator harris: thank you. go forward with confidence and leadership -- in leadership now that director comey has been fired? mr. mccabe: i don't believe there is a crisis of confidence. that is somewhat self-serving now that i am in the position i am in. [laughter] it was within the president's right to do what he did. we understand he will work to find a permanent replacement. we look forward to supporting whoever that person is, whether they begin as an interim --ector or personally permanently selected director. this organization and its entirety will be completely committed to helping that person get off to a great start and do what they need to do. senator harris: do you believe

there will be any cause during pause during this investigation while we find a person in acting authority? mr. mccabe: no, it is my job to make sure the people at the fbi continue to protect america and uphold the constitution and i will ensure that happens. senator harris: thank you. >> thank you, mr. mckay. second round, five minutes each. back to ato go question i asked director pompeo. i want to review a response you gave. i am concerned about the sally yates warning to the white house that michael flynn could be blackmailed by the russians. you said you did not have any first-hand indication of that. did you have any secondhand indication or any sense at all that the national security

adviser might be vulnerable to blackmail by the russians? it's a yes or no question. mr. mccabe: it is actually not. i cannot answer yes or no and i regret that i am not able to do so. this is a counterintelligence investigation mostly done by the fbi, not the cia. i'm not attempting to be clever. i had no secondhand or third knowledge. mr. wyden: with respect to the cia, were there any discussions with general flynn at all? >> he was for a time the national security adviser. mr. wyden: topics that could have put it risked the security and well-being of the american people? i am finding it very hard to swallow that you had no with the national security adviser. >> i spoke with the national security adviser. he was the national security

adviser. he was present for the daily briefings and all topics we spoke to the president about. mr. wyden: but nothing relating to matters that could have compromised the security of the united states? >> i cannot recall conversations i had with general flynn during that time. mr. wyden: admiral rodgers, let me ask you a technical question i think is particularly troubling, and that is the technology threat. there is a lengthy study on the of mobile phone security flaws on the u.s. government. the report confirmed what i have been warning about for quite some time, which is the significance of cyber security vulnerabilities associated with system seven. the report says that the department believes that all u.s. carriers are vulnerable to these exploits resulting in risks to national security and security, --

autonomy, and the federal government's ability to provide national security functions. these owner abilities can be exploited by criminals, terrorists, test vulnerabilities -- these vulnerabilities can be exploited by criminals, terrorists, and enemy states. are you concerned about these vulnerabilities, and what should be done right now to get the government and private sector to clearlyng together more and in a coherent plan to deal with these monumental risks? these are risks we are going to face with terrorist, hackers, threats, and i think the federal communications commission has been treading water on this, and i would like to see what you would like to do to take charge of this and deal with what is an enormous vulnerability to the this country.

admiral rogers: i share the concern. the department of homeland security in their role is the lead federal agency associated support for the private sector is part of the overall responsibility. we are trying to help generate insights about the nature of the vulnerability, the nature of the partnering with dhs, partnering with the private sector. there are a couple of things we are looking at. i am not smart, i apologize, about all of the specifics of the dhs effort. i can take that for the record if you'd like. mr. wyden: i just want to say before we break, i am glad to e my tax reform partner back in this role. you know, mr. director, that i think it is critical that the american people know how many

innocent, law-abiding programs are being swept up in this program. the number in itself is a violation of privacy. a the argument that it is violation of privacy is a far-fetched argument. i among others who believe we can have security and liberty. they are not mutually exclusive. that you are going to be invading peoples privacy does not add up. we have to have the number. are we going to get it in time to have a debate that shows that those of us who understand there are threats coming from overseas support the effort to deal with ,hose threats as part of 702 that we are not going to have americans privacy rights indiscriminately swept up. we need that number. when will we get it? at will rogers: if you recall, during my confirmation hearing, we had this discussion. i promise to you that if i was confirmed, and i was, i would

meet with admiral rogers and try to better understand why it was so difficult to come to a specific number. . did go to nsa timeent significant talking about that, and i learned about the complexity of reaching that number. a statement had been made by senator cotton, very relevant statements as to that. what i had learned is itt a breach of privacy -- may have to be made in order to determine whether or not they breached privacy. there are issues of duplication. way in terms under of setting up a time with this committee. i believe as early as june.

to address or get into that , to address that an talk through the complexity of why it is so difficult to say. this is specifically when we can get you the number and what the number is. we are committed to the meeting with the committee to go through this particular issue, but i and a give you a date number because i understand the complexity of it now and why it is so difficult for admiral rogers to say this specific number. i am well over my time. the point is privacy advocates and tech -- in technology say it's possible to get the number. they say it and the government says it.

something is out of sync. a way to workd with you and we have to know that liberty and security are not mutually exclusive. we have to have that number. >> if this hearing had been held two weeks ago, we would have spent the two hours talking about north korea. could you give us an update on the north korea situation, the andre of the threat, whether some of the pressure we were feeling 2, 3, four weeks ago has relieved or if there is anything going on that should make us feel better about that situation? director pompeo: there is nothing that should make us feel any better about this threat. coulde a threat that spark a conventional war. adversary.ell armed

we work hard to make sure we mitigate those risks. to developcontinues weapons. they have many launches that have failed, but they learn from each one. their software improves day by day. this threat is very real. we should not focus simply on icbms. american interests are at risk today by shorter range missiles in the american theater. we have a norm is american interests in and around the region in seoul, south korea. it haspite the fact that fallen out of the headlines for the moment, i would not say there is a decreased risk. discussionhere was a two weeks ago about entering discussions with the north koreans. can you report anything on that front? of related toware

trying to talk in general and away from his nuclear missile program. we have taken ash and's -- taken action to set up a north korean center and i am sure we will have others join in from across the intelligence agency to focus this effort so that we can get back on our front foot. mr. king: on the latter point, would you agree the path to influence is through china? among our mosts productive paths and one the president is committed to, as his secretary tillerson. >> i was enclosed session with you a few weeks ago and given great detail about the threat you just highlighted. this threat has not only been sustained, it has continued to grow. >> because it has fallen out of

the headlines -- >> that is correct. it is our highest priority. >> it is the highest priority of the intelligence community at this time. a great deal of effort is being spent relative to how we can even better assess the situation and provide all the relevant intelligence to our policy majors -- makers. we had a very informative hearing this morning in armed services on cyber. the upshot of that hearing was a doctrine.'t have we still don't have a policy. we still don't fully understand. concur, iwould assume, that cyber is one of the most serious threats we face. >> yes, sir. mr. king: do we need something further than what we have now which is kind of an ad hoc response. >> yes, it tends to be on a case-by-case basis.

king: what is the impediment? why can't we get there? is it the government? what is it going to take to get us to the point of having a doctrine that will get us to this incredibly important area customer clicks i don't have the answer for you. important area? i don't have the answer for you. mr. king: i hope from your , you would do everything you can think of. i do not want to go home to maine and say we talked about this but we didn't do everything, and when the electric system went down, we might've been able to prevent it.

final question. do you think russian activity in the 20 16th election was a one-off? >> no, sir. this is a continuing threat, is it not? >> yes, sir. >> and things they learned in this election, they will apply a and 2018 and beyond question or >> yes, and more effectively. -- they will apply a 2018 and beyond? >> yes, and more effectively. if i could just add to that, we should make this as transparent as possible not only to our own public but to the democratic nations facing this threat. the more we inform our people of what the russians are trying to do and how they are trying to impact our thinking and our decisions relative to how we want to be governed and what ic institutions,

the -- we want to preserve, the better. we absolutely have to do something about it. we have to do something to prevent determined efforts in put deterrent efforts in place as well. you and i were in ukraine and poland about a year ago, and what they told us was that the best defense -- they can't shut down the tv. they can't turn off the internet. the best offenses if the public knows what it's happening and isy say oh, -- best defense if the public knows what is happening and can say it's just the russians again. >> thank you so much. thank you all for your service. andk you to all the men women of all 17 agencies for the incredible service they provide to the people of the united states, keeping them safe, doing

things most people in america will never know or be able to f fully appreciate. mr. mccabe, thank you for stepping up to the battlefield of promotion and conducting yourself well here. meeting will be adjourned and we will meet in the other room in about an hour and 16 minutes. thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017]

>> bit of news, you may have leaving thechairman hearing. deputy attorney general rod rosenstein has requested to meet with the senate intelligence committee chairmen and ranking democrat, senators burr and warner. we want to let you know that coming up in about an hour, 1:30 p.m. eastern, we will be live at the white house for a briefing with sarah huckabee sanders. we will re-air this hearing this evening at 8:00 eastern so you can see it there and online at

c-span.org. one more piece of news from the committee, the chairman, senator arr, yesterday issuing subpoena to force michael flynn to turn over documents related russianrobe related to interference in the u.s. elections. house democrats are eyeing plans to force a vote on the creation of an independent panel to investigate president trumps alleged ties to russia following the dismissal of james comey. coming upmore on that at 1:30 p.m. in the briefing. politico also reporting that jason j fitz has asked for the -- jason chaffetz has asked for the attorney general to expand its scope of investigation to include the firing of james comey.