proliferation after weapons, countries such as north korea have overcome low barriers of entry to engage in offensive cyber operations. the united states must continue to wisely maintain a decisive advantage. third, the effects of dislocation and poor governance present critical challenge and new targets and opportunities for the cia's collection and analysis. finally, the insider threat problem has grown exponentially in the digital age. the greatest threats to america have always been the c.i.a.'s top priorities. it will be the c.i.a.'s mission and my own if confirmed to make sure the agency remains the best in the world collecting what our enemies don't want us to know. in short, the cia must be the world's premier espionage organization. one emerging area for increased focus is the cyber domain. sophisticated adversary, like china and russia, as well as less environment.

the cia must continue to be at the forefront of this issue. as the president-elect has made clear, what of my top priorities if confirmed is to assist in the defeat of isis. we must maintain an aggressive counterterrorism posture and also addressed address manifesf this great threat beyond isis and al-qaeda. with respect to iran, we must be rigorously objective in assessing the progress made under the joint, hence a plan of action prayed while i opposed the iran deal as a member of congress, if confirmed my role will change. i will leave the agency to aggressively pursue collection operations and ensure analysts have the time, political space, and resources to make objective and sound judgments. similarly, if the policy decision with respect to how we will deal with russia, but it will be a unessential thing that the agencies provide accurate, timely, robust and clear intelligence and analysis of russian activities to the

greatest extent feasible. as a member of the house intelligence committee, i fully appreciate the need for transparency and support from members of congress. i've lived it. we owe it to our constituents to get to the bottom of intelligence failures. but we'll wood to the brave americans of the intelligence community not to shirk our responsibility when unauthorized exposures to media expose controversial intelligence committed bees. or when edward snowden from the comfort of his moscow safe house mislead the american people about intelligence activities. on my first visit to cia headquarters i visited an analytical targeting cell, some of you have probably dubbed this as well. i saw a woman who appeared as though she has not slept in weeks. she was pouring over data on her computer screen. i introduced myself and asked her what she was working on, and she said she was just hours away from solving a riddle to locate a particularly bad character she had been pursuing for months. she had her mission. its completion would make america safer. she was a true patriot.

in the past few years i have come to know there are countless men and women just like her at this agency working to crush our adversaries. this past weekend i took a moment and visited arlington national cemetery. i've done this many times, but on this visit i paid special attention to the markers that commemorate cia officers who have perished, ensuring our freedom. in summary places most americans will never know, agency put officers, themselves and their lives at risk. we know the sacrifices of the families of each of these cia officers from a roll performing intelligence, those families sacrificed greatly as well. as i walked among these heroes, i was reminded of the sacred trust that will be granted to me if i'm confirmed. i will never fail it. i'm honored to have been nominated to lead the finest intelligence agency the world has ever known. working to keep safe the people of the greatest nation in the history of civilization. if confirmed, i will be sworn to

defend the u.s. constitution for the third time in my life. first as a soldier, then as a member of the house of representatives, and now to work with the president and each of you to keep america safe. thank you all for the opportunity to speak with you this morning, i look forward to your questions. >> mr. pompeo, thank you for your testimony this morning. for members we will recognize based upon seniority for 5 minutes of questions, and i would know for members there is a closed session of this hearing that will start promptly at 1:00 p.m. i would remind members that we are in open session and that questions for representative pompeo today in this session should be limited to those that can be discussed and answered in open session. and i trust that if you ask something that can't come of the witness will make sure that he answers it when we get to close session.

with that, mike, i'm certain that with your experience specifically with your involvement in the house select committee, benghazi, you understand how valuable intelligence can be to oversight. if asked by the committee, will you provide the raw intelligence and sourcing behind agency finished products and assessments if, in fact, this committee needs it to complete its job? >> it senator, i have been on the other side of this and i know how central it is to make sure you have all that you need to perform at your oversight function four intelligence collection activities and all the agency does. you have my commitment that i will always do everything i can to make sure i get you the information that you need, including an expanded set of information. i understand on a handful of issues you have reached agreement, i heard director clapper testified before you i believe it was last week, and a promise to honor the commitment that director clapper made to this committee.

>> thank you for that. there has been much discussion about the role of the central intelligence agency and what it played in his detention and interrogation of terrorist suspects. these detention facilities operated by the cia have long since been closed. president obama officially ended the program seven years ago. i think the debate space on the subject has become confused, and i'm certain that the law is now very, very clear. do you agree that it would require a change in law for the cia or any government agency to lawfully employ any interrogation techniques beyond those defined in the army fieldd manual? >> i do. >> you've been an outspoken critic in the past of policy and activities of this administration that you disagreed with in line with representing the people of the fourth district of kansas. as head of the cia, you will be in a position to speak truth to power and provide the president with your agencies unbiased,

unvarnished, and best assessment of threats facing our nation. assessments that will inform his approach to those very policies and activities that you may have criticized in the past. will you be able to set politics aside and provide the president with clear eyed assessments, free of political interference? >> senator, i appreciate the question, and when i say that i understand deeply the question that you are asking. i have spent my life telling the truth, sometimes in very, very difficult situations. as a lieutenant, as a member of congress, in fact as a member of the oversight committee, where sometimes we get placed in difficult situations talking to our constituents about things that matter an awful lot for american national security, and sometimes we just can't reveal them. do you have my commitment that every day i will not only speak truth to power, but i will demand that the men and women who i have come to know well over these past few years, who live their lives doing just that, will be willing, able, and

follow my instructions to do that each and every day. >> thank you for that advice chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and again, congressman it is great to see you. to ensure that we don't end up with a light turnout again, i won't redo my second half of my statement. but i do want to get you on the record, mike, on a couple of issues that we have discussed, particularly about this inquiry into russian active measures. and i wanted to also reiterate the chairman's comments of the absolute necessity to make sure that you bring forward this analysis in an unvarnished way a man i think you've made that clear to the chairman, i know you've made that clear to me on a private basis. so if we can go through some of these questions vary fairly quickly. do you expect the conclusions of

the ic regarding russia's actions? >> i do. i have had one briefing, i attended the meeting which the president-elect was briefed, everything i have seen suggests to me that the report has an analytical product that is soun sound. >> do you pledge to cooperate with the russia inquiry and to provide if possible all necessary materials and access to personnel? >> senator, i do it, i think that is incredibly rude important. >> do you pledge to continue to pursue your own investigation into ongoing russian active measures and any attempts they or others may have two undermine the united states, our political system, or our position in the world? >> i do, and i would expect the president-elect would demand that of me. it is fully my intention, i should share, that is my view with respect to all the product that is the central intelligence agency produces. we learn we continue to develop intelligence that if we are worth our salt we will continue

to gain insights that are valuable to policymakers, both to the president-elect and you all. i will continue to pursue foreign intelligible action with vigor no matter where the facts lead. >> congress men, i have been critical of the tenor of some of the president-elect's comments about the workforce and professionalism of the ic. in your opening statement you were very open about the woman that had been without sleep for some time. in light of some of those comments, i have concerns about the morale throughout the ic, but particularly with the cia at this point. what plans what you have to go in and reinsure reassure the people that work at the cia, how do we make sure we're in a world where it is increasingly challenging to get people to step up and serve both in true terms of recruitment and retention, that you can reaffirm that you will have the cia employees backs? >> senator, let me begin by

saying i am confident that the central intelligence agency will play a role for this administration, it has for every previous administration, as providing powerful intelligence that shapes policy and decision-making inside this administration. i'm confident that president-elect trump will not only accept that but demand that from the men and women not only at the cia but throughout all of the 17 intelligence communities. with respect to me personally, i have come to understand the value of the central intelligence agency. i have seen the morale through tough times where they have been challenged before, and i watch them walk through fire to make sure that they did their jobs in a professional way. and that they always were aimed at getting the truth in depth and in a robust way to policymakers. i have every confidence that not only will i demand that, but they will continue to do that under my leadership if i'm confirmed. >> i thick it's going to be an ongoing challenge, and if you're confirmed we have a say wish you the best, i think that is incredibly critically important.

i see some of these cia employees have the opportunity to represent them, they work in this region, and it's been a challenging time for them. i also want to get to, in light of some of the comments during the campaign, the president-elect made, i think a subset of that of this issue as well as making sure going forward the cia represents the diversity of the world, particularly in terms of muslims americans being engaged, how do we reassure them in light of some of the comments made? and alsr with you that the challenge with isis is an enormous one. how would you go forward to make sure that our muslim allies and our fight against isil, that they are going to continue to have a strong partner in the united states and not one that is in any way going to discriminate based upon faith? >> senator, it is absolutely imperative, we have a workforce out of the agency that is incredibly diverse, as you all well know, to achieve the mission we have to have folks from a broad background set as

well as with language skills that represent all parts of the world so that we can perform our intelligence operations properly. and we have partners in the muslim world that provide us intelligence and who we share with in ways that are incredibly important to keeping america safe. i am counting on, and i know you are as well, that these liaison partnerships will continue to be additive to american national security, and you have my commitment that our workforce will continue to be diverse, i hope we can even expand that further, so that we can perform our incredibly important intelligence collection operations all around the world. >> mr. chairman, i have had a considerable amount of time with mike over the years and recently. i'm and we are on a short string here, i'm going to reserve my questions until we get to the closed hearing portion of the hearing. >> thank you very much, mr. mr. chairman i just want to begin by saying i really appreciate the private meeting we had an opportunity to have.

for me it was a clarification. i do appreciate your apology. i take it with the sincerity with which you gave it. i want to ask one follow-up question to what the chairman asked, and that is dealing with those enhanced interrogation techniques. and that is that if you were ordered by the president to restart the cia's use of enhanced interrogation techniques that fall outside of the army field manual, would you comply? >> senator, absolutely not. moreover i can't imagine that i would be asked that by the president-elect or then-president. but it's very clear, i voted for the change up with the army field manual in place as a member of congress, i understand that law very, very quickly, and am also deeply aware that any changes to that will come through congress and the president. and regular order.

yes, ma'am, absolutely, with respect to the outlines of what is in the field manual, there is no doubt in my mind about the limitations of places not only on the dod but on the central intelligence agency, and i will always comply with the law. >> another question, how will you handle the president-elect's reputation of the intelligence communities highest assessments that russian intelligence units, namely the gr you and the fsb did, in fact, haack and spearfish into the campaigns and parties of both political parties this past campaign season? >> senator, as with i think i answered senator warner the same way, my assessment is to tell every policymaker the facts as best they intelligence agency has developed them, with respect to this report in particular, it's pretty clear about what took place here. about russian involvement in efforts to hack information and to have an impact on american democracy. i am very clear right about what that intelligence report says.

and i have every expectation is we continue to develop the facts that will relay those not only to the president, but the team around him, and to you all, so that we all can have a robust discussion about how to take on what is an enormous threat from cyber. i think you all know that you all have lived it, this is very real, it is growing, it is not new in that sense. but this was an aggressive action taken by the senior leadership inside of russia, and america has an obligation in the cia has a part of that obligation to protect that information. >> thank you very much, i appreciate that. >> thank you, senator, and if i may say thank you for coming back and i hope your recovery is speedy. >> thank you, i appreciate that. you and i discussed director brennan's beginning efforts on modernization of the cia and trying to set up a different mechanism which would make it more effective. what can you tell us today about how you would proceed in that direction?

>> senator, there was a major modernization program that frankly is still in the shakeout cruise at the agency. it has been going on for a while, but still a lot of things to work through. my observations for my time as a member of congress are that the goals were noble and they were trying to get to the right place and that in fact many of the changes that were made may well end up making sense. but i think i have an obligation as i go into evaluate that, share those evaluations with you. i have heard from a number of you about your observations about its effectiveness. some of you have a set of views that are opposed, you may not even know that about each other just yet. but i'm going to take a look. my expectation is that from my time as a small business person, when you make a change of this scope and scale, that you don't get everything right in that. and my obligation is to try to make sure that we've got everything right, that there are clear lines of decision-making and authority, and that the analytic product that is coming out is true and clear and real. >> just one last question.

you mentioned the iranian, what we call the jay toa. i think whatever one thinks of the settlement in its entirety under this, iran has shipped some 25,000 pounds of enriched uranium out of the country. it's dismantled and removed two-thirds of its centrifuges. it has removed the color laundry from its heavy water reactor and filled it with concrete, and it's provided unprecedented access to its nuclear facilities and supply chains. iran's estimated breakout time has moved from two to three months to a year or more. in november, on fox news, you said you can't think of a single good thing that has come from the iran nuclear deal, not one. now, thus far, the cia has

provided oversight to this committee with very solid analysis of what the level of compliance is. and thus far, it has been extraordinarily positive. i'd like you to comment on this, because in particularly your comments, because this nuclear deal is, in effect, just that. it doesn't include other things that are bad things that iran has done, it is just the nuclear agreement. and they have, in fact, conformed thus far. so would you comment please? >> yes, senator. first, you have my commitment that we, if i'm confirmed at the agency, we will continue to evaluate their compliance with the agreement in a way that you have just described to the agency has been doing today. i concur with you that that work has been good and robust and that intelligence is important to policymakers as they make decisions. i think my comments were referring to the post-

post-january 2016 rampage of irani and increased activity, and i know you share my concern about that as well. so when i was speaking to the risk that iran presents, it was certainly from those activities, whether it's the fact that they've now had missiles that we've had to fire back at into yemen, the list is long, they are still holding americans in iran. those were the concerns that i was addressing that day. you have my commitment as a director of the cia if i'm confirmed that we will continue to provide you the intelligence to understand both what is taking place in the nuclear arena with respect to the move and its compliance as well as to the activities. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. pompeo, think you first of all for your service to our country repeatedly in the army and congress, and now here in this new role. i know we are going to have a closed hearing later today, so the questions i'm about to ask

you i ask that you answer based on open source information available to the general public, and also your understanding of the law of war is a graduate of west point and your service as an officer in the u.s. army. first of all, your understanding of the officer in a u.s. army, is military targeting of civilians a violation of the law of war? >> senator, intentional targeting of civilians is absolutely a violation of law of war. >> based on open sources and information available to the american public, in a conflict of aleppo, syria, have russian forces conducted repeated attacks against civilian targets? >> based on open source reporting it appears they have. >> do believe, based on your knowledge again acquired through open sources and your general knowledge of geopolitics, that russian military forces could conduct a repeated attack against targets in aleppo, syria, without the express direction of vladimir putin? >> it seems intensely unlikely

to me, senator. >> again, all of the answers you just gave are based on open source is unclassified. >> yes, sir. >> the second question i have, and i think you've artie said that you accept this as a fact, that there is indeed an effort by russian intelligence and others associated with the russian government to so, to conduct a campaign of active measures in the united states designed to so doubt about the credibility of our elections and our democracy, to sew divisions and chaos in our politics, to undermine the credibility of political leaders and the like. you agree with that assessment, that we are in the throes of an active measures campaign that probably predates this campaign but has certainly ratcheted up? >> yes, senator, it is a long-standing effort on the russians and frankly there are others out there engaged in similar set of activities. it is something america needs to take seriously throughout that we are vulnerable to today. >> and in fact it is the exact activity they have undertaken, for example, in europe and in other countries as well.

that we have seen the same sort of pattern and other places, correct question mike >> yes, senator, and i will add to that we have important elections taking place in the year ahead in europe and around the world and we need to be deeply cognizant of all of the foreign actors with malign intent who are attempting to impact those elections as well, and i think the cia has a role in trying to understand that threaten a defense on a mental way and sharing that with each and every member of the policymaking community. >> i am not asking you to rely on any intelligence or classified information, but in your judgment as you see the state of american politics and the political discourse, president-elect who has questioned at times the judgments of our intelligence agencies, opponents to our president-elect, who continuously bust in the legitimacy his election, the shameful leak in the media regarding unsubstantiated, unsourced information designed to smear the president-elect, the fact that russia and vladimir putin have become a dominant theme in political coverage in this country for the better part of three months if

not longer. as you look at all of that, in your personal opinion, is vladimir putin and the russians looking at all of this and saying, we have done a really good job of creating chaos, division, instability in the american political process? >> senator, you put a lot into that but let me try to unpack it just a touch. i certainly want to make sure i talk only about my observations and judgments based on unclassified information, but i have no doubt that the discourse that has been taking place is something that vladimir putin would look at and say, wow, that was among the objectives that i had to so doubt among the american political community to suggest somehow that american democracy was not unique. i believe it is fundamentally unique and special around the world. it shouldn't surprise any of us at all that the leadership inside of russia views this as something that might well redound to their benefit. >> and my last question involves

an area that you might not be asked by anybody else in the community, you might, but it regards the western hemisphere, and i just ask if you will pledge to work with the agency to ensure the collection and coverage of the western hemisphere, in particular nations like cuba, venezuela, nick wood nicaragua, ecuador, bolivia, that we focus on threats that may emanate from those places? >> yes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you congressman for coming up to visit. at a time when the president-elect is on record as supporting torture, blocking americans ability to protect themselves with strong encryption, and has encouraged the outsourcing of intelligence gathering to the russians, it is my view you are going to have an enormous challenge to be an advocate for honorable policies. it's already clear that several key members of the president-elect's national

security team advocate illegal policies. so this morning, my view is we need to find out what you are for. and i'm just going to text through some of the issues that we talked about in the office. let's start with surveillance, if we could. you recently wrote an op-ed article saying that congress ought to pass a new law reestablishing collection of all metadata. those are your words. so you would basically get the congress and the country back into the business of collecting millions and millions of phone records on law-abiding people. you go on in this op-ed article to say that these phone records ought to be combined with publicly available financial and lifestyle information into a comprehensive, searchable

database. so you would be in favor of a new law collecting all of this data about the personal lives of our people. and i think it would be helpful if you could start by saying, are there any boundaries in your view to something this weeping? >> senator, you and i did have a chance to discuss that there are, of course, boundaries to this. first and foremost they begin with legal boundaries that exist today. nappies that i was referring to was talking about u.s. government's obligation to do all they can in a lawful, constitutional manner to collect foreign intelligence important to keeping america safe. >> congressman, that is not what we were talking about. collecting all metadata is what you said. >> senator, if i might, let me continue.

yes, i still continue to stand behind the commitment to keep americans safe, and by conducting lawful intelligence collection. when i was referring to metadata i was talking about the metadata program that the usa freedom act has now changed in fundamental ways. you should recall i voted for the usa freedom act, and i understand its restrictions, its restrictions on efforts by all of the u.s. government to collect information. >> but you wrote this op-ed since the passage of the law, so after the law passed you said let's get back into the business of collecting all of this metadata, and i'm curious, what kind of information about finances and lifestyles would you not enter into your idea of this giant database? >> senator, first of all i have

to begin by saying today in most instances what you referred today, that would be unlawful under current law. and so as a director of the cia you have my assurance we will not engage in unlawful activity. but i think this committee, the american people, demand that if there is publicly available information, someone has out there on a public, available site, i think we have an obligation to use that information to keep americans safe. if someone is out there on their facebook page talking about an attack or plotting an attack against america, i think you would find the director of the cia of the intelligence community grossly negligent if they didn't pursue that information. pick out congressman, i don't take a backseat to anybody in terms of protecting this country when our securities on the line. i wrote the section of the freedom act that gives the government emergency authority to move when it's critical to protect the country. that is not what we are talking about here. you are talking about your interest in setting up a whole

new metadata collection system, which is far more sweeping than anything the congress has been looking at, and if you would before we vote, i would like you to furnish in writing what kind of limits you think there ought to be on something like this. let me see if i can get in one more question. the president-elect had indicated on the apple issue that, in effect, he thought that there shouldn't be strong encryption and that he basically would consider pushing for mandated backdoors into encrypted products. and that has been the position of fbi, some very influential members of congress. now, you have notcheerleader asl for weakening strong encryption, which is something i think that sounds constructive. if you are confirmed as cia director, are you willing to

take the president, the fbi, and influential members of congress on on this issue, because i think it's clear weakening strong encryption will leave us less safe, and i would like to hear your views with respect to strong encryption and would you be willing to take the president, the fbi, influential members of congress on when they advocate because they are going to. >> senator, first of all, i did not mean at all to suggest you are second to anyone with respect to keeping america safe, if i implied that i did not intend that. you should know i take a backseat to no one with respect to protecting americans privacy, either. i think that is incredibly, incredibly important. with respect to encryption, it is a collocated issue. i know enough about it to begin to form judgments, but i want to talk to you about the process, the framework i will use.

i think this applies across a broad range of issues we will discuss. when we are dealing about an issue like encryption that has commercial applications, national security applications, privacy implications, i will do my best to understand what he means to the central intelligence agency and what it means to our capacity to keep america safe, and i will represent its interest as my part of a larger effort to make sure that we get that policy decision right. and if, in fact, it is the conclusion of folks out of the agency and our team and i concur in that assessment, i can assure you i will present that rigorously whatever the views of the president are or any of the members of his team. i will do my best to get that right and represent and do my role as the director of cia if i'm confirmed. >> thank you, chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. pompeo, first let me say that i was very heartened by our meeting and our telephone call, in which you showed that you fully understood the role that

you have as cia director to keep this committee well informed. i expressed to you my frustration of questioning members of the intelligence committee, and then finding that there was more to the story, and that there were omissions at times. not deception, but omissions. and even more frustrating, reading in the papers the next day leaks that have come from the administration, not necessarily the cia. and i think that he erodes the trust that is essential for us to perform our oversight function, which is absolutely critical since you don't have the regular oversight mechanism mechanisms. and just for the record, if you could reassure me again on your willingness to be very forthright with this committee, i would appreciate it.

>> yes, ma'am, i can assure you that we talked about the fact that i have lived that life a bit as well. and i understand it is not only come of that interest is so broad. we spoke and you mentioned it here, this is a unique space where we operate in places where the american public doesn't always get a chance to see everything, and so the willingness to make sure that we share this information to policymakers who we trust will keep this information safe and secure and handle this information appropriately is absolutely critical. you have my assurance, i will do everything to make sure that this committee has a relationship with the agency that is forthright each and every day. >> thank you. i want to turn to the issue of cyber threats and cybersecurity, which has been an obsession of mine for many years, since joe lieberman and i tried to bring a cybersecurity bill to the floor in 2012 only to have it filibustered.

i believe that the recent focus on the cyber intrusion from the campaign has greatly increased the public's awareness of this problem. but the fact is that the cyber intrusions go far beyond the political space, troubling and appalling though that is. there was a 2015 memo by the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the secretary of defense that said that the department of defense is subjective, this was a public memo, is subjected to 100,000 attempted cyber attacks each da day. now those are attempts, not all of them go through, they are from nationstates, they are from terrorist groups, there from hackers, international criminal, you name it.

that is 3 million per month. how would you assess our preparedness in the cyber domain? >> senator, we've got lots of work to do, may be the best way to summarize that. not only is the government that is protecting our systems, and we talked a lot the last few days about the systems that belong to private entities, political private entities, but i know you have done a great deal of work and making sure that the national infrastructure, including its private sector infrastructure, has a capacity to do what it needs to keep not only business issues in the place that they need to be. a lot of these folks are subcontractors to the united states government as well, private companies that have important information about american national security activities. and so we have an awful lot of work to do. there is no reason to expect that this threat is going to diminish, and that will take a whole of government effort to do that. shared by the executive branch and the legislative branch to

achieve better cybersecurity for national infrastructure as well. >> let me very quickly stressed to concerns about iran. one, there are increasing reports that iran is using its civilian air fleet for illicit purposes, including the transfer of arms to terrorist groups. if confirmed, would you make a priority to provide an assessment to congress of whether or not iran is using its civilian air fleet for such purposes? >> senator, i am happy to share with you, too, i have read about this as well, i am happy to share in closed session the knowledge i have. it concerns me greatly the activities of iran air that are taking place today. >> and finally, do you believe that the monitoring and verification regime in our agreement with iran's jp coa as

currently constructed is adequate to ensure that iran is fully complying with the agreement? do you think that the iaea has sufficient access to detect any irony in cheating >> senator, the iranians are professionals at cheating, so while i think while we have a very sound inspection regime, i have to tell you that i worry about the fact of a thing that we do not know we do not know. and so you have my commitment that i will continue to improve and enhance our capacity to understand that and do everything i can to diminish the risk that if we are missing something. >> thank you. >> thank you, chairman. and thank you, congressman pompeo, for taking the time to sit down with me earlier this week, and for your willingness to answer the prehearing questions that a number of us submitted to you. i hope your responsiveness to

committee inquiries continues unabated should you be confirmed. that was certainly the tone that you've sat with me in the office, and i appreciate that. as i told you in our conversation i have had serious concerns over the last few years that that has not always been the lay of the land between the director and this committee, and i understand that the cia has a mandate to be fully supportive of the men and women who work there, that is critical, however i also hope that if you are lucky enough to fill that very important position, that we will have a new approach of being open in hearings and with regard to congressional oversight. i want to start on an issue that was central in some of the prehearing questions and in our conversation. you indicated that you would

seek the counsel of experts at the cia to determine whether adhering to the army field manual in conducting interrogations was an impediment to gathering vital intelligence. you've been supportive of the use of enhanced interrogation techniques in the past, saying back in september of 2014 that president obama has continually refused to take the war on radical islamic terrorism seriously, and cited ending our interrogation program in 2009 as an example. can you commit to this committee that under current law, which limits interrogation to the army field manual, that you will comply with the law and that the cia is out of the enhanced interrogation business? >> yes, you have my full commitment to that, senator heinrich. >> thank you. let me jump to another issue, senator wyden had touched on this earlier, but i want to

follow up a little bit. as the director, and as somebody who sat on the house intelligence committee over the last couple of years, you are very familiar with the changes in law that have been made under current law of the usa freedom act that was passed recently. what changes to that law would you encourage the administration to seek if any? >> senator, i currently have no intention of seeking such changes. but as i think we discussed when we met, i am certain that if i'm confirmed learn a great deal about the program. and develop a deeper understanding and hear lots of views with inside the agency, and i will. i will look to experts there and experts outside. and if, in fact, i conclude that there needed to be changes to the usa freedom act that protect america, i will bring them to you and have the full expectation that you will all consider them fairly as well. >> i know we were recently

briefed on basically the status of being able to collect important information under that law. i would assume that there was probably a similar briefing on the house side. review a part of that, and do you feel like at least with what you know today, that the surveillance needs to be done is happening under that structure while protecting innocent americans from unnecessary intrusion? >> senator, i have not had a chance to have a complete briefing on that but i can say that i have not heard anything that suggests that there is a need for change today. >> jumping once again over to the jc poa, i know that the day before you are nominated to be the director you said that you look forward to "rolling back the iran deal. how would you characterize your position on that today, and would you stand by that statement?

>> senator, the record can reflect that the communications was approved before i was aware that i was going to be the nomination to the central intelligence agency. having said that, look, i spoke to this a great deal. it was my view that the jcpoa was a mistake for american national security, i believe that. but it's also the case that after that i came to an understanding that that was the arrangement this president that was in the best interest of america, and i worked to make sure that it was fully implemented. now if i am confirmed i will continue to do that in my role as director of the cia. i will endeavor to provide strange information to you all about the progress that the jcpoa has made toward reducing the threat from iranian nuclear activity and share when you with you and that is not happening. >> thank you, chairman. congress meant, i know we were all pleased, we had the chance to visit with you privately, you quickly reached out to members of this committee and had met with us, and we will have a chance to visit later today in

classified setting. i would go back a little bit to your discussion with senator senator wyden. one of your last comments you made there was that you gave ground to no one in respecting america's privacy, and if you want to give any examples of that in your house career, that would be fine. but as i understand, as i understood what i thought was that discussion about a more expanded collection effort, it was collecting things that people had chose to no longer keep private. collecting things on social media that people had put out there. and i believe at some point you mentioned that if somebody was talking about an activity that could be terrorist or other related, that the director of the cia should have some

interest in that. in my right in that you see a different privacy standard if someone is trying to maintain their privacy as opposed to someone who's putting information out there that anyone can see? >> i may not have added there that the primary responsibility for that in the united states is not the cia, it would be other agencies inside the federal government, so in the first instance, the focus of the central intelligence agency's foreign intelligence collection, make no mistake about that. but yes, i was referring to things that were in the public space. that the u.s. government ought to make sure that we understood fully and that we didn't leave publicly available information off of things that we were using to prevent all kinds of bad and terrorist activity here in the

united states. as a member of congress i voted repeatedly on pieces of legislation that were important for protection of american privacy it is something that if you come from south-central kansas, people know. you know that being from missouri, if people are deeply cognizant of the need for space for themselves to live away from the government, and that is something that i hold dear and treasure myself as well. >> on the issue of encryption, i for some time on this committee, and even public hearings, and specifically at public hearings, have had both the director of the fbi and nsa. i can recall on both of them saying encryption is the best thing out there and maybe in some cases the worst thing out there. but there seems to be a real sense that encryption is more

often a cyber protection then something that we should create a way around. what is your view of encryption in an ongoing way, and what the government could or should do to permeate encryption that is already out there in equipment? >> senator, i always start on this topic. it reminded of my role as the director of the cia, it is first to comply with the law, so as you all develop policies around encryption you have my assurance that i will always direct the people that work for me to comply with the law with respect to private communications. second, i think we need to acknowledge that encryption is out there. and that not all encryption takes place here in the united states, so the rules and policies we put in place here in america are things that intelligence community is going to have to figure out a way to perform its function, knowing that that encryption will continue to be out there. and then finally, we spent a lot

of time talking about how we handle encrypted devices for americans and for encryption here in the united states. my effort will be to understand it more fully, to make sure that i understand its impact on my role to keep america safe. and to work alongside you to develop a set of policies that achieve that goal while still achieving all of the goals that we have here in america. >> and spending some time in the house intelligence, seeing the relationship between the dni and the cia, what do you think you can do to advance the ability of the dni to do their originally stated job of coordinating information, making sure everybody has access to the information that is out there in a better way than we have currently seen? >> so the statute is pretty clear about our respective roles and responsibilities. i have had a chance to reread that a couple of times since my nomination. i'm excited about snomination, .

i look forward to working alongside of him. i have also read the histories, i know that there have been conflicts before between a director of national intelligence and the director of the central intelligence agency. in my role as a small business owner i saw that, too. you have different people with different roles, and you see conflict. my effort every day was to work hard to make sure that we were additive, that we each found our own space, that we worked across those borders, not only individually, but that we directed that our organizations would accomplish that as well. so it's not just the two senior officials that have had conflict before, we need to have our organizations each understanding that there is a place for the director of national intelligence to ensure that there is good communication among the dozen-plus intelligence agencies and that that information is shared in a timely fashion and at that director of the cia has his plateful performing his primary functions as well. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. congressman pompeo, welcome.

as we discussed, i always believe that an outside view in an agency that tends to be not tends to be, but is secretive, is an important point of view, so i appreciate your willingness to serve. the larger question. the great foreign policy mistakes of my lifetime, vietnam, the bay of pigs, and iraq, all were based on my in one way or another, on bad intelligence. or, more accurately, intelligence that was tailored to fit the demands of the policymakers. you can't read the history of those decisions without coming to that conclusion. there is no more intimidating spot on the face of this earth than the oval office. will you commit to giving the commander-in-chief, the president, unpleasant news that may be inconsistent with his policy preferences based upon the best intelligence that the cia can develop? >> senator, you have my

commitment. and while today i am going to avoid talking about conversations at the president and i have with as much energy and effort as i can, i can tell you that i have assured the president-elect that i will do that as well. i have shared with him that my role is central to him performing his function and important, and critical, only when i perform i function in that way. when i take the great work that these men and women put their lives at risk to develop and i deliver that to every policymaker in a way that is straight up and forward, and i commit to doing that with you and with the president-elect. >> if he doesn't say at some point, my, i am disappointed in you, is that the best you can do, you fail. the president-elect's national security advisor, general flynn, has been quoted as saying the cia has become a very political organization. in your written response to our questions you said there is a sense of a more politicized intelligence environment. that is sort of like people are

saying there is a more politicized intelligence environment. what do you mean by it? is there a sense of that, do you agree with general flannery do you not? >> so i have had us chance as an overseer to observe the central intelligence agencies, and when i have a chance to sit with them have watch watched them fight h fire to get the real facts. i have seen, however, i have seen political actors from all stripes attempt to try and shape that, and i don't mean and hard ways, there is no demand, but i'm -- >> i'm not talking about outside actors, this allegation is at the agency itself has become politicized, do you believe that? >> mike's parents is that i have not seen that. because i appreciate that. >> there are unsubstantiated media reports that there were contacts between the trump campaign and the russians. if confirmed, will you commit to exploring those questions, and if you find there is validity to those allegations, refer the information that you've discovered to the fbi?

>> i want to make clear that i share your view that these are unsubstantiated allegations. i understand, want to make sure, these are very serious. look, there are a number of very serious things that have taken place. the leaks that occurred i consider to be intensely serious, and i think director clapper statement from last night or this morning about his concern about these leaks is worthy, as well. but to your question more directly, i promise i will pursue the facts wherever they take us, that central intelligence agency has that is one of its singular functions and you have my commitment that i will do that with respect to this issue, and each and every issue as well. >> thank you. on july 24th, 2016, you sent the following twitter. "need further proof that the fix was in from president obama on down. busted, 19,252 emails from dnc leaked by wikileaks. "do you think wikileaks is

reliable source of information? >> i do not. >> and the fact that you used the word "proof," that would indicate that you did think it was a credible source of information. >> i have never believed that wikileaks is a credible source of information. >> how do you explain your twitter? your tweet, sorry, i don't want to be accused of the wrong turn. >> i would have to go back and take a look at that, senator. but i can assure you, i have some deep understanding of wikileaks, and i have never viewed it as a credible source of information for the united states or for anyone else. >> i appreciate that, thank you, and i appreciate your candor here today. and look forward to further discussions and i just hope that you will hold on to the commitment that you've made today, because it's not going to be easy. but your primary role is to speak truth. to the highest level of power in

this country. i appreciate again your willingness to serve. >> thank you very much, senator king. >> with the indulgence of all members, i made a promise to all members on the committee that were they in other confirmation hearings and they showed up i would share them preferential treatment on recognition, and if there is no objection i would like to recognize senator mccain for 5 minutes of questions. because i think you, mr. chairman, and i apologize to the chair in the committee for the hearing on general matus. first of all, i am here to support the congressman pompeo's nomination, despite that he is overcome a very poor education and he's been able to surmount that handicap, which has been a burden for him throughout his career. as you know, we conducted, we passed legislation that only

treatment of prisoners would only be in accordance with the army field manual, and that law was passed, the vote was 93-7 in the united states senate on that particular amendment. will you continue to support that and enforce that law? >> senator mccain, i voted for that, and i will. >> thank you. and do you have any recommendations for changing the army field manual or other rules governing interrogation, you will share those with congress question rick >> yes. >> and i don't want to take the time of the committee, but obviously the russians have been hacking, there is no doubt about that. and whether they intended, and what their intentions were, wet whether they actually succeeded and not, there is certainly no evidence. what do you think it is going to take to deter vladimir putin's continued interference, not just

in our elections, but attempts to have access to our most sensitive and classified materials, secrets, it is a long, long list of offenses in cyber that vladimir putin and the russians have basically compromised our national security. what do you think it takes to deter him? >> senator, i don't know that i can answer that question comprehensively today. but i can tell you it is going to require an incredibly robust american response, a response that is a security-related response, that is we have to get better about defending against these, and then the response that holds actors accountable who commit these kind of actions against the united states of america, the form, the nature, the depth, the severity of those responses will be decisions of policymakers that will be beyond me as a director of the central intelligence agency, but i do

view my role there as central in providing you with a deep understanding of what has taken place, how that took place, and a set of options surrounding the kinds of things in the intelligence world, at least, that one might take action on so we can successfully push back against it. >> wouldn't the first step to be to establish a policy as to how we treat cyber attacks, and therefore from which we could develop a strategy? and right now we have no policy. >> senator, i would agree with that. it is very important that america, come all of governmen, develop the policy with respect to this. and if confirmed, i promise i will work alongside you to help in developing such a policy with good intelligence. >> right now we are treating these attacks on a case-by-case basis, which is not a productive, nor, i believe, enterprise that would lead to success. >> i would agree with that, senator. >> do we have the capabilities

in your review to adequately respond to cyber attacks? i'm talking about the capabilities, not the policy. >> senator, i want to be a little careful in open session talking about the full scope of american capabilities, but this is an amazing nation with incredibly smart people. and if given policy directive to achieve the objectives you are describing, i am confident america can do that. >> i think the chairman and the indulgence of the committee, and congressman, i'm sure you will do an outstanding job, we look forward to working with you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mike, it is great to see you. you and i served together in the house, i saw up close and personal the tenacity of your work and how seriously you took the task there. they you engaged immediately in policy issues. and your passion was to be able to come and help. >> over the last hour you've been watching the hearings for congressman mike pompeo, he's

the nominee to head our cia, a very important role, as i'm sure you know. the scenes that have been covered over the last hour-plus have been torture, data collection, russia, iran, wikileaks, a whole slew of things have been tackled, but the hearing started in an interesting way with the lights dimming in the original room where the hearing was supposed to take place. and they had to move rooms, and here they continue in the open session, there will be a close session a little bit later for more sensitive material. but other hearings happening as well. >> dr. ben carson, the hud nominee is being questioned as well, and ober ross, the commerce secretary nominee is also facing some questions, so we are following it all, and "outnumbered" is coming up next, we will be back here in an hour. >> we will see you back here then. >> harris: the breaking news continues with this fox news alert, a triple effect of cabinet confirmation hearings on capitol hill, president-elect donald trump's choice for cia director, congressman mike pompeo, who you see