members of congress that want to adjust their salaries for have to wait until the next election. >> c-span's q&a. director of national talks about, counterterrorism and russian interference in u.s. elections. an event hosted by the hudson institute in washington dc. efforts to protect the countries. for structure. -- country's infrastructure. this is 45 minutes. 9 clinton --

i would like to welcome the audience present as well as the c-span viewing audience and i am truly honored to welcome a remarkable public service and a friend of the hudson institute that is here with us this afternoon. dan coats served with great distinction as a member of the house and senate and indiana as well as u.s. ambassador to germany. during a long career in public service, he told me as we were coming appeared today, we of place filled retirement. he wants to return to the u.s. senate for a second time in the senate. then, becoming a director of national intelligence. he is had a long and distinguished career and intelligence.

true leadership on defense and national security issues. he is a good friend of the hudson institute and before he germany,mbassador did they found that the foundation for american renewal at the institute. administration, he has been interested with a job with deep responsibilities. he serves as the head of the u.s. intelligence community overseeing and direct and implementation of the u.s. intelligence program and at him as the principal advisor of the screening council and the homeland security council on intelligence matters related to national security. in town and when the president is in town to do the daily presidential intelligence brief with senior members of the intelligence communities. as i mentioned earlier, we are truly honored to have been with us today.

he will remark on a number of critical issues on security abroad. to do so on the eve of the historic summit in ousting the -- in our keep it president trump environment to. the lure of the business today will be that you will offer and podium and engage in discussion with the hudson institute distinguished fellow. walter also needs no introduction here. he is the director of foreign policy and in addition to being a distinguished hudson, he is a columnist for the wall street professord also the of international affairs at our college. without further do, i would like to introduce them to the podium. [applause] >> thank you very much. it is very nice to be rep. hudson:.

hudson's presence in indiana for a time. director mitch daniels became governor of indiana. to move to the, middle of the country to get a different perspective than what we had on the coast. with the there for a number of years and had the privilege of working with people there. we understand why you came back here, moving into more foreign policy stuff. the fact thatte we still value indiana. some of your employees may be missing the ease of living and cost of living in indiana relative to washington not to mention, the commute. nevertheless, it is very nice of andto be a little be here play some groundwork for what i

the top challenge that we face in terms of threats to our country, people, and processes. before you sit down and talk about a range of political facet we face, i would like to focus my initial remarks on the glowing -- growing cyber threat to our nation security. i want to put it in the context of the current cyber threat in terms of the threats we have had an industry context. and whatst responsible are they attempting to do? then, discuss the intelligence community is responsible. each morning, when i get up, given a roundtable of news. almost without fail, the longest

section of this newsroom is on cyber issues. detailing multiple reports of cyber attacks and alerts . this issue affects all of us and is increasingly affecting numerous aspects of our daily life. you only need to go back less than two decades to put the current cyber threat into proper context. r four are ability because of our intelligence and law enforcement that produced silos of information. andhe time, intelligence law enforcement communities where identifying activities as suggested that an attack was coming potentially in the united states.

it was in the months prior to september, two thousand one, when coding to then cia director , the system was looking red. here we are, nearly two decades later, and i'm here to say that the warning lights are thinking red again. today, the digital infrastructures and services country is literally under attack. every day, foreign actors in the worst offenders being russia china iran and north korea, every day, they are penetrating her digital infrastructure and conducting a range of cyber intrusions and attacks against targets in the united states. targets range from u.s. businesses, the federal government, including our military, state and local governments, academic and financial institutions, and elements of our critical infrastructure, just to name a

few. these attacks come in different , some are tailored to achieve very tangible goals but others are implemented for including,ervices the possibility of a crippling cyber attacks against our critical infrastructure. of these desperate efforts, share a common purpose to exploit america's openness in order to undermine our long-term competitive advantage. in regards to state actions, russia has been the most aggressive foreign actor, no question. they continued their efforts to undermine our democracy. in regards to the upcoming midterm elections, i think there may have been some confusion between what we perceive now compared to what we saw in 2016. because the department of homeland security noted, are not yet seen the kind of electoral

interference in specific states in voter databases that we experienced and 60. however, we fully realize that we are just one click of the keyboard overlay from a similar situation itself. sayingre, we are aggressive attempts to manipulate social and spent focusing on hot button issues that are intended to exasperate social and political divisions. despite public statements by the continue to see individuals affiliated with the st. petersburg-based internet agency creating new social media accounts, masquerading as americans and using these to draw attention to divisive issues. we have learned just before this meeting, the indictment of 12 russian military intelligence

officials relative to their role in 2016. focusing on the potential impact of these actions, honor midterm elections, this is the more important part. these actions are persistent, they are per se evasive, and they are meant to undermine american democracy on a daily basis. regardless, of whether it is election time. russian actors and others are exploiting all possibilities in our critical infrastructure as well. the fbi, in coordination with international partners, detect russian government actors and theg government energy, nuclear, water, and aviation, and manufacturing sectors. the warning signs are there. and it is is blinking why i believe you are at eight.

the status of the intelligence community in 2001, we are much more embedded in ensuring better information between agencies. the evolving cyber threat is illuminating new daily challenges of how we treat information. we are dealing with information silos of a different kind, including between the private and public sectors. here's the good news, as i previously just mentioned, intelligence community today, is more integrated than it has ever been. we are sharing information across agencies at all levels. in regards to the midterms, we are partnering with the dhs and fbi to provide support, information, and grants to officials to all 50 states and we will continue to support this effort. and regarding the larger cyber threat issue, the president has

signed a executive order the cyber security of networks and critical infrastructure which, the president has a hold on government resulting in a number of actions that we are not taking to strengthen defense against i.t. guidelines. the president has also authorize the use of all available tools of state power including attribution, criminal indictments, economic levers, to punish malicious cyber actors. at the national security council consider this is a top priority. we are continuously pursuing actions on this issue. you do not want a transition. talkshave had numerous with our new national security adviser and members of the nsc relative to the importance of

raising this to a top issue. within the government, we are working continuously to the tent -- the ted cyber threats. threat a cyber intelligence center that builds the understanding of cyber threats to inform decision-makers. the department of homeland security and the fbi are demonstrating leadership rather than applying a more assertive federal response. my former colleagues in the house and senate are bringing significant attention to the threat of cyber and have expressed strong support for legislative action. having said that, we have to do better in what we deliver to our customers, how we get it to them, and the speed by which it received. today, those that have been illuminated.

how rigidly still at what it comes to public discourse. of the in sales interest government and the private sector, have created company lines of awareness. as a result, we need to think differently about our customers. in many ways the nature of the threat and we in the national community sector, treat the american people as customers. that is why you will see us talking about this the more vocally and what he will continue to see us classified to inform the american people. everyone, if we are to succeed, dealing with this threat, must take ownership of the challenge and it will take the government, the private sector, and the american people all during their parts to better positioned our country for the future. as a government, we are having a

more open dialogue about this threat. we need toar, provide the information available to us to the private sector into the public to better inform their decision-making. we need the private sector to see the private good and develop greater protections in the software information systems and applications in the market. we also need the american people to verify the credibility of the sources of information upon which they base their decisions. whether those sources are social media reports, cable news, or newspapers, it is essential that we all apply critical thinking to all sources of information.

this evolution is part of the transformation which we are driving throughout the icy in coming years. we have brought together experts and leaders from across the intelligence community's to take stock of where we are and what we must do to reach the next level of effectiveness. the results of this effort which brought together the heads and deputies of all the intelligence community agencies, all 17 is a new vision for the future of the intelligence community. we collect, "intelligence community 2025." where do we need to be? do weind of capabilities need to have? in terms of the threats that we face. we are putting together significant efforts to stay ahead of the game, head of the curve, to deliver to our customers starting with the president, working through his policymakers for both the private and government sector. so with lack, what i would like to do at this particular time -- thank you for the invitation. i know that we will have

hopefully a good discussion about this, looking at the larger threats, whatever questions that might need to be addressed. i would much rather do that then continue to talk up here, even though is a former senator, we love to talk. [laughter] so, thank you very much. [applause] i have to say, that is one of the most dramatic comparisons i have heard a senior government official make, saying that the warning indicators now are comparable to what they were in the months leading up to 9/11. different threat, but it's there. presumably we are looking at anything from major attacks on infrastructure to massive

attacks on the electronic communications and all? >> we're . and it is not just from the states that i identified, we see this from criminal organizations that for nefarious purposes are using cyber. we see this from nonstate actors , from terrorist groups and criminal groups. we see this from hackers around the world. we see this as a game, or just for the hell of it -- take something done, break into the defense community, break into on, to kids on and in the basement, or sitting in a dorm. it is pervasive. but the real threats, the

sophisticated threats of course, come from the states that have the capability and the resources to be able to really create great damage. gapo there is a significant between the capabilities of these states and other various criminal terrorists that are out, there? >> well, in terms of having the resources to develop the new tools, to have the ability to adapt with agility, to up their game, in a sense of the game of -- in a sense, it is a game of whack a mole or chess , where you see a threat and you put in a prevention, but the threat then moves over. the source moves over here, you stop it there, and you try to get it over here, and you see that across the board. it is a day-to-day effort in

terms of protecting your people. >> when you read the news and listen to what people say, it's one story after another one sensitive american database getting some of the real crown jewels of our community being taken over. a, that makes a wonder, how defensive army and is that going to change? , it makes me wonder, are we defensive, or is the cyber universe simply a story of american secrets being stolen on basis to make its broader than that. -- we have capabilities? dugger we have the resources and capabilities. >> we have the resources and capabilities. i don't think anybody's better than we are, nevertheless, the range of vulnerabilities is out there because the technology is

advancing so rapidly, and as i said, this game of chess, we us or move to protect identify, and they make a move to go around. andave to be aware of that never be complacent about what we have now, where we are, because our people out there trying to jump over us. >> and does seem like a domain where the offense enjoys benefits over the defense, is it that? >> yes, it has been frustrating for me because i have a lifetime ,f watching nfl football games -- into prevent defense, a field goal, you are on point and you go in to prevent defense, and it opens up all kinds of holes. next in go, the other team makes the goal. it is so frustrating if you just rely on defense to win.

i was ins why, when the senate and now, i continue isdoes of course, my job different now, i don't do policy -- i continue to support and encourage any offensive capability. if in any way knows what punch trump,, more than donald we need to approach punch back in the right way, if we are going to send the right signal priceple -- "there was a to pay. you come after us and there is a price to pay your code pay." the less you do that, the more people are encouraged to staff got nothing to lose. i think combining offensive measures with defensive measures is necessary to deal with this issue. >> the constitution does expressly provide for letters of reprisal.

of these four countries that you mentioned, russia, china, north korea and iran, where you given that in order of their capabilities? >> yes, but maybe from different perspectives. china has different capabilities , resources that perhaps russia doesn't have. but, they don't have the same intent. what is serious about the russians, is their intent. they have capabilities, but it is their intent to undermine our basic values, undermine democracy, create wedges between us and our allies and we've seen this area had in fact, the indictment today shows exactly what they were trying to do, or what they have done, through their military intelligence, relative to elections. and as i was mentioning in my statement, we see the ongoing efforts, it is not just the elections. it is a strategy. the intent that comes out of russia is different from the intent -- china wants to steal

our stuff. they want to build technology, intellectual property, trynology -- they want to to change our vision of china and its intentions, but not through the same kind of means that the russians use. so you have to put those two in context. now, iran and north korea -- so, north korea, we are not at a pause, but we are at a point where -- let us see where these negotiations go relative to our relationship with north korea. they just take all kinds of malicious activities against us, from ballistic missiles, feeding terrorism, on and on. cyber, they potentially are somewhat limited, because their economy

is not doing well. they may be spread too thin or -- probably in that order. but the top two, russia and china, they are there every day. in cyber and in other things, speaking of north korea, have you observed any difference in north korea's behavior since the singapore summit? um, i cannot get into the classified part of what we see, but it has always been a hard target. we have significantly upped our game for this purpose. "trust and verify," that is what i came to congress with. right now, i am the "verify" guy. the intelligence community is a verify community. we are focusing on what is

nowening, both before and current -- subsequent to the talks. but, we are at the beginning of this and we will continue to evaluate it. obviously, north korea is probably trying to figure out, ok, i mean, we are at the iginning of negotiations, so am not going to give up the ship right now. so, we will see how that plays out, but it is too early to determine definitively i think, that this is where they are going to and up. -- where they are going to end up. >> nothing really dramatic. >> it has been some reporting, some of it accurate and some of it inaccurate. there are some continuing activities, but some of those that have been reported have not been verified. >> let us get back to the election and disinformation operations. it seems to me that social media

of the places, at least if a look at 2016, where big.formation is very is that the case now? -- >> i think i know that in my remarks, it's very prevailing in and sophisticated. who would've thought that isis, using the seventh century barbarian measures of imposing physical harm and death on tactics, would be so sophisticated in also using cyber early on in social media, to recruit and train, and still, .till, inspire the defeat in the desert has not resulted in the defeat of terrorist organizations like isis and al qaeda. we see them spread around the world and it still remains a threats to us, and social media is one of the ways

in which they continue to raise money recruit, train, inspire , and we have to be aware of that. >> when you go to the social media companies and you say, your platform is being targeted and used in a very, very specific way by these different hostile groups, do you get the cooperation you think you need from these companies? >> we have the obligation to learn and warm, and we do. and warn, and we do. we are in the process of working with social media companies in terms of taking responsibility to what they put out, we've had some success. we've had some interactions which haven't been as successful as we would like. we will continue to do that, but there's a lot of brand protection, a lot of -- well,

listen, if we do that and our competitors don't, then we are at a disadvantage -- we try to talk about the responsibility relative to their commitment to help us address these threats to keep our people safe. >> so there a real range in risk wants, pretty solid and positive to, well, i don't think we can -- >> what's interesting to me, we only collect against foreign intelligence. so we know a lot less about the american people than our adversaries. and we know a lot less than some of our social media outlets know about their customers. -- >> google knows as better than the federal government. >> absolutely. >> i am not sure if i feel good, feel bad, i did know how i feel about that. [laughter] so you are saying that they were trying to polarize us and magnify differences. this reminds us of what the communists used to do with the

cold war, the soviet union with their propaganda technique. i think maybe some of our younger members of the audience may not know what this is all about, if you could explain to them. >> when the wall came out, without -- when the wall came down, we thought that this would be a new country, a reset. and for a while, it was a different relationship. doubt andia which said, you know, maybe we have gone too far. why don't we ask the guy who ran the kgb, he is a pretty savvy everythingducting that the kgb did and still does, under a different acronym. and, that was a game changer. as the russianit bear after the fall of the wall , went into the cave into hibernation. he's out of the cave and hungry.

clawing more territory, more influence and using the same tactics that we saw in the cold war and more. the more results in a lot of that in cyber. >> it is interesting that during the cold war, they had the advantage of communist parties and networks of supporters around the world. they don't quite have that , although they seem to be loyal to rebuild parties and factions, but it thes like on balance with cyber tools, they can actually do a better job than the soviet union could have with this kind of information and propaganda. the ago they are good at lying, seedingda, deception, dissension among adversaries. the president made some comments

about nato and closing comments -- they were ones i really thought were important because if nato comes unglued, vladimir putin wins. he's trying to seize that potential opportunity and i think we need to stand up against that. >> so the pattern is not so much that the russians are supporting one side or another in a political battle, sometimes it they may do that, but they were trying to get both sides more divided, is that one other methods? theirther that was a method, that is what they succeeded in doing. it really was designed as a strategy, and they have had some success. >> will can we do to counter this? transparency? >> transparency.

i talked my colleagues in different nations, particularly in europe. the more we provide our people with what we know the russians are doing, the more we can inform our public, not to just believe, take for granted what's put out in the media is truth, , but we need to have more critical thinking. we are barraged by media, by breaking news, by news outlets rushing to be the first because if we don't do it, three others are going to do it, and our ratings will go down and their ratings will go up. so there is no filter between information that comes into the system, there's no editor as we used to have in the paper. there is nobody sitting in an office upstairs saying, we have to run this by the boss before reprinted. it will be too late to do that. -- before we print it. it'll be too late to do that. we want the news now.

we want to access it on our iphone right away so we have to inform our people just don't believe everything you hear out there. we are agencies that seek the truth. we cannot politicize it, we cannot shade it. the truth is what it is, just the facts. i think our public needs to gain some ability to ask questions and seek verification before we jump to conclusions and rush to the camera to say, "i just heard and "well!" and the next day, on page 13, that was not exactly what should've been done. >> if you had a chance to speak with mr.

vladimir putin at this sort of crucial period in u.s. russian relations, what would you say? >> my message would be, "we know what you are doing, and we know doingou know what you are , and look, if your goal is to strengthen russia and the proper way, we can cooperate with you." but if your goal is to strengthen russia at a cost to us, if you will be a paranoid nation thinking, any time in the next 24 hours, we are going to take over russia, this paranoia about democracy, we are not going to get anywhere. isn't it best for both sides here to basically say, instead of taking down, what we build up? putin,u know, president the decision is up to you. we know you run the shots.

we know you're making the decision. you can't pass it off to some hacker down somewhere where we don't know. we know what you do. so, you make the choice. this, you want to stay in tit-for-tat, we will beat you. that ronald reagan, basically saying, hey, you want to take us on? ok, we will thorough everything we've got into it, you through everything you've got into it, then you make a decision. they made a decision and outdid us. we have the capacity to do that. >> to get from the sort of , and with the elections coming up, you hear a lot of anxiety about the american, you know, -- whether it is the voting machines or other elements of the voting

process in the midterms, how that we aren we be defending the security of our political system? >> we have to be confident because if we can have -- if we don't have confidence when you walk into the polls and next in a candidate or party that you support, when that becomes questioned, it undermines our democracy. >> which sounds like somebody's strategic goal, to undermine that. right. it has to be solid 50 state, little what happen down -- look what happened down in florida, in one area of one that through us into a constitutional crisis. threw us into a u

constitutional crisis. think what happened today if we find out one state that might've been the critical state. >> in control of the senate and the house. >> we are providing grants, we are looking at those who provide the machines, were trying to back it up with paper so we have redundancy on it. we have talked to all 50 state officials, governors. we just need to throw everything at it to ensure the american people that we are doing -- to assure the american people that we are doing everything possible to make it a fair election and not massaged by anybody from the outside. >> as you look at the progress and of theng obstacles that remain, do you feel that on the whole, we are on track to have a safe and secure election? i think we can see in a bipartisan way in the house and senate, we see the executive branch stepping up in time, we

see the states reaching out for help. we have to do everything we can to assure our public that their vote counts area >> i know that there have been some reports of different independent groups monitoring states'readiness for the election and there seem to be a wide gap in some states pretty good, and some other states including the state of the hanging chad seem to be a bit behind. >> we got to get them up-to-date before the election. we need to ensure that every state is ready. >> are the laggards doing better at this point? >> i think they are. nobody was to be the one that takes a down because they did not have their act together. we are hearing that. we work with fbi, dhs, our intelligence community, warnings and so on and so forth. we have worked with all 50 states.

it's ongoing, it's going to have to keep on going right up until the day of the auction. >> and what you are hearing back from congress and others is a bipartisan basis, people in washington think the work you guys are doing is sufficient and proper? >> i think you are seeing that. republicans are teaming up with democrats both in the senate and the house to ensure that everyone is on board. this would certainly be a key if one party or the other party said -- they are not doing the right thing, that would be terrible. >> well, we have been witnessing this on another subject, and we have seen the impact of it. >> what, really worries you must, when you think about it scenarios that might unfold based on the kind of unrivaled exposure you have to the threats that the country faces?

what are the things that really keep you up at night? do you ever sleep? >> [laughter] restlessly, sometimes. when you think about it and 9/11, two planes flying into one another, if either one of those planes or all three of them had any kind of weapon of mass destruction we would be talking about deaths in the 300,000 or 3 million or more. so, preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, particularly in terrorist groups that are not under any state control, have a theology or an [captioningt performed by the national captioning institute,

-- that victory is killing the opposition, whether by beheading or through nuclear device, that's one. the second is frankly in cyber , a cyber 9/11. think about new england, in january, the grid going down for three days. a lot of people are going to suffer and die. think about taking away a hit on the banks, that wipes people's lifetime savings, and we don't know where it came from. we don't know where the money is, and on and on. so, you do toss and turn at night about scenarios that you hope will never happen. >> in your view, is the intelligence community as a

whole getting the kind of resources and support that it needs to do the job it needs to be done? >> we are. thanks to this administration and the congress, we have really ante, and we have been provided the resources we need to do what we need to do. we have some terrific capabilities. we have some innovative people, we have some young people who -- i am a liberal arts major, i should not be in the operational success of cyber or technology. fortunately, we've hired a lot of really capable smart people, a lot of young people coming in that have technological and stem capabilities that i never even dreamed of. so, every visit and make, and i make a lot of them to our various agencies and their components, i so impressed with

the technical capabilities would have. we are an innovative country, democracy and freedom produces some great stuff if it is done a right way. >> thank you director. and of a chicago senator, and director, investor, thank you for the work we did been doing. the work you're doing is important. i think everybody here and on watching us on television, appreciates the importance of what you do and wishes you every possible success. >> i would like to say something -- i came across this article couple of days ago about what people may be thinking about donald trump's unorthodox foreign policy, and it says with -- we should brace ourselves for a wild ride." guess who wrote that? walter russell mead, wall street journal a couple days ago. i highlighted it and cut it out. it's a pleasure to be with you. great to be back and hudson. -- great to be back in hudson.

thank you for asking me to be here. >> i know the director has to get out quickly as you can imagine his schedule is packed , so if the audience could sit well he leaves quickly to get onto whatever he's doing next -- i don't think you can tell us what he is doing next -- but, thank you again for coming. we really appreciate it. [applause] and, as he leaves, i just want to thank everybody in hudson. meeting together, it's a terrific opportunity and an honor for us, and i hope that the folks who are watching this in streaming enjoyed it. we are sorry we couldn't take questions from the audience, but i did my best to channel what i hope other questions on most people's minds here. thank you, very much. [applause]

>> this weekend on american c-span3, saturday at 8 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, the university of connecticut professor on the reconstruction era after the civil war. the0:00 on rell america, 1918 simon french film dedicated to america's efforts in world war i. sunday at 2 p.m. eastern, the toional world war we museum symposium. at 6american artifacts p.m., the u.s. army heritage and education center with a history event featuring french world war i soldiers. watch american history tv this weekend on c-span3.

afterwards,ght on cnn political commentator discusses her book "gas letting america, why we love it when trump lies to us your car she is interviewed by columnist s.e.cupp. >> evenness if that stuff -- he suggested there was a video coming, so, that generates more media interest -- well, let us see what he has to say. guess what, spoiler, it never comes out! it never comes out. >> and then he selects a detractor. >> at this point, two poster to come at an say, we think donald well, i am not-- lying, other people are just looking into this.

and anybody that pops up -- loser, crazy, hack. if you can have a scapegoat and have a us versus them five, he creates a dynamic. >> and finally, he declares victory. >> right like he did at the press conference at the trump hotel in washington. you can now look at my beautiful grand hotel, if you wantp then he says, right. i cleared it up. i am the winner. hillary clinton is the person who started it, i finished it. >> watch on sunday at 9 p.m. eastern on book tv. c-span'sest on newsmakers this week is nan a ron. horgan i say show in opposes the nomination of judge brett kavanaugh to the supreme