so, and nationstate nationstate attempted to gain information by hacking into election campaigns or other infrastructure is not new. in fact, in my prior job as chief of staff and director of the fbi at the time i first met the obama campaign and mccain campaign in 2000 when we were informing each of them separately and in the classified setting that later became declassified that their emails have been compromised by china at the time. the assessment that was they were inside the system in order to gain strategic intelligence. they wanted to wanted to know how these individuals thought but they might try to use against those campaign individuals depending on who was elected and they may try to use it to recruit but they could do which is to make public the information in order to achieve a goal be it financial or political. switching to russia we have a long history of russia trying to run influence campaigns where in the united states, along with the rest of the world for without revealing that it sponsored by the russian government a russian intelligence will try to plant stories in ne

at the same time, you have nationstates are you find are engaged in actions designed to penetrate the networks within the commercial sector. you also find individuals sometimes and groups who are brought together under a specific ideology or focus that brings this disparate group of disconnect. it will harness the power of the world wide web to bring together people with little previous common interaction knowledge of awareness in each other. it will bring this wide group of geographically dispersed individuals who will coalesce around a particular issue. they will harness the interest with a specific outcome. there's a wide range of actors out there. want to ask the ceo's out there a polling question and i will also ask the admiral as well. do you trust the government enough to work with your information to work with it during a cyber attack, a, absolutely, b, only if my company is attacked, and c, never. a public-private partnership that has not gotten off the ground may be the way it should. admiral rogers: clearly we will have to wait and see what the future holds. on the other ha

we are trying to deal directly with a host of nationstates around the world and engaging with them in terms of what's acceptable from our perspective, what is not. we are using the legal tool. we have used indictments against prc and irawith them in terms 's acceptable from our perspective, what is not. nian individuals. we are prepared to use multiple tools and capabilities within our toolkit, if you will, to design, to drive you to change your behavior. on the chinese peace, the conversation that led to the presidential summit in september of 2015, where the two preside nts, xi jinping and president obama, came out and said we agree we will not use cyber as a tool of a nationstate to gain economic advantage. that had been one of our biggest issues with our chinese counterparts. you acknowledge nationstates will use ciber as a tool to gain insight and knowledge about what is going on in the world around them, but in the u.s. system we do not then take some of that knowledge that we acquire from intelligence purposes and turn it to the private sector and say, this is what you will hav

we are trying to deal directly with a host of nationstates around the world, and engaging with them in terms of what's accept the law from our perspective. we are using the legal tool for the disabled we have used indictment against both the prc and we are trying to send you a message we are prepared to use multiple tools and support capabilities that we found in our toolkit if you will be designed tdesign to drive you te her behavior. you've seen i would have to say on the chinese peace, the conversation that led to the presidential summit in september 15 out over a year ago where the presidents came out and said we agree that we will not use cyber as a tool of the nationstate to gain economic advantage. that had been one of our biggest issues with our chinese counterparts and we acknowledged we will use cyber as a school to generate knowledge about what is going on in the world around them than the u.s. system, we do not then take some of that knowledge that we require for intelligence purposes and turned private sector to say here's what the fifth generation fighter is building and

you acknowledge nationstates will use ciber as a tool to gain insight and knowledge about what is going on in the world around them, but in the u.s. system we do not then take some of that knowledge that we acquire from intelligence purposes and turn it to the private sector and say, this is what you will have to compete against. we don't do that. that is the way in some nations, though, and we raise this with the chinese saying, this is totally unacceptable. you've seen the actions i mentioned with the iranians. we indicated, we publicly acknowledge the activity. we publicly attributed the activity to a particular nation, in this case the north koreans. we talked about, we will take an initial response to this in the form of an economic piece. we put sanctions against

the world order which i studied at university and in which i grew up was based on the nationstate. and it developed in europe as the end of the 30 years' war in ofch the doctrine sovereignty emerged as a ideas of and international law that laid down certain rules of conduct. at that time, at the end of the war that had been taught in part about the religious beliefs within societies, it andtacitly agreed explicitly agreed that intervention of the domestic affairs of other states was not a subject of international -- ont international aggressi consisted of the crossing of borders, as a violation of borders of established dates. -- states. there were periods in which this was violated such as during the french revolution. but the basic structure of the international order when i was heath came into office was essentially based on the nationstate. and the principal elements of security were still, the state of europe plus at the which had been center of the international order through all of its existence. , was only beginning to emerge in the 1970's. were justlike india beginning the

now pou important to nationstate attack.e only one that has the capacity to do that is to government and defense department but they are not trained to do that, they don't have the authority and we haven't allowed the industry and government to work together. the first thing people would jump to is we don't want them going around serving sweeney to come back to a system that does it with the date of everybody could agree to be shared and the way that they actually put it into the legislation is a good way. that way everybody knows they are doing the right job, homeland security can attest to it. if you don't do that then you are in the alternative. wait for something to happen and then dictate how we are going to stop it. >> i'm imagining that i'm the ceo of a company and there were systems that place, everybody in the cyber command, dhs, everybody is averted and the clients are running for the hills. how do you address that? schenectady intention would be to do the opposite to say companies are going to have certain levels

nation any of us want to live in but a functioning nationstate, wanted to go back to the negotiationcess and we took our eyes off the ball, diver resources to iraq and we will rue that decision. >> host: any place else in the world the us is nationbuilding? >> we are in libya, we served a long serving dictator, qaddafi, for decades, we have been working closely along with our allies, a traditional counsel made of various rebel forces so we are part of this process. >> then we are involved in nationbuilding doesn't mean military occupation, we are part of this process and if nationbuilding failed in libya our military operation will have been a failure because if a new qaddafi arrives we have wasted ÷ our time and access. if we can contribute to a more participatory and peaceful society that will lead to our benefit and the people of the region how can we not do nationbuilding? be change marklive inshow.com provides a list of books he deems required reading. here are some he recommends. ben shapiro's novel true allegiance looking at america's downturn in the war in afghanistan the wal

i'm not in favor of abolishing nationstate nonsense.ut i am opposed to the kind of tariffs, the kind of laws being built between countries so people, citizens are and are heavily regulated when they want to engage in peaceful capitalist acts between consenting adults. basically trade, exchange, and the end, all those things, which is something you can do even though you have nations face if they are open to individual freedom and economic freedom. the frat. >> edward had a chance. peter demanders who founded the x prize as well as their excellent book called abundance. this points to my question concerns the audience or the kind of information. we have an audience of achievers, bio hackers, all of these sorts of folks who love their work, who are leaving the progress he won enough political and economic freedom to do what they love doing it big time on "good day" to be soft leftists be soft leftists. they see donald trump and so one of those words. would this be a community to answer the question how we get it wrong country and around f

and howard markets at the expense of government, 1970's globalization allowed nationstates to manage their own economies. in holds the deconstruction of the post war welfare states in its various iterations, whether it be in the united states or western europe or japan. to use a phrase coined by some political scientists in the 1970's, between a variety of state and nonstate actors, rather than cold war style superpower politics increasingly shaped the contours of the international system. the state, of course, did not disappear in this new territory lies era of globalization, as it did to reinvent itself. it became a more disaggregated state. they began to form cross national horizontal linkages as well as vertical linkages around common concerns, trade, finance, environment, or sometimes with human rights. the end of empire was another crucial structural shift in the 1970's. by the mid-1970's, almost all of the colonized world had become independent, territorially based nationstates. with the end of empire, the migratory patterns that had characterized the first decade after 1945,

again, the intensity and philosophy of global networks i think began to remake the nationstate. morgan portly, it unbundled moreionships -- importantly, it unbundled relationships between government and state power. if these structural changes provided in undergirding for these new globalization's best social-- globalization's, then the main part of this argument has to do with affect rather than structure. i argue that a new global sensibility about power came about to entirely reshape the kinds of political claims made by nonstate actors in the 1970's and beyond. thehis new global affect of 1970's, leaf in the authenticity of the interior world of individual suffering rather than the external structures that might've produced the suffering in the first place was central to the kind of clinical claims that were being made by activists including human rights activist. individual consciousness, lived experience, moral witness, in a testimonial turn became key in this era. it began to reshape the contours of global politics and morality. the rise in the emerging holocaust survivor

nationstates sponsored intrusion. characters, china, russia, north korea, iran. we're deal with multinational information for sale to the highest bidder. hackers are motivated by different things whether political, financial or harassment. we still consider the cyber terrorist perspective. arenow that terrorists highly proficient at using the internet for recruiting, propaganda and executing attacks. we know they aspired to gain access to our systems. we know is they are not there yet or we do not think they are there but it is a concern. how do these groups operated? increasingly complex attacks combining multiple techniques and insight knowledge. using social generic to target us and develop human vectors to get into your system. they are using social media to target employees. i would be remiss if i did not mention the insider threat. not just limited to hackers on the outside but insider threat is a significant problem, disgruntled employees, employees who are targeted and employees willing to sell to the highest bidder. what are they after? pretty much anyth

we've seen activities against nationstates and individuals. there's a wide range of actors out there. so given this i want to ask the ceos out there as we call it out there and i'll ask the admiral, do you trust the government enough to work with your information to work with it during a cyber attack, absolutely, for never? >> . . the ultimate solution in my mind is how you bring this public-private partnership. as theirector of nsa and commander of cybercommand the agreement i always reach with whoever we are working with tradable night use the data we gave for anything other then the ext purpose i communicate to you. not doing this as a vehicle to gain access to data for some other purpose. it just doesn't work and we won't do that. it doesn't work that way. don't get me wrong i certainly understand the concern and that fits into a broader historic narrative. traditionally as aation we have been frigid between the role of the government and what is the role of -- that has stood us as a country in 241 years of history. my comment though would

whether it is stopping a nationstate from shutting down your power grid to personal privacy -- when i talk about personal privacy from the silent circle and the black phone perspective, most of them kind of gloss over and say we do not understand the problem. they are very distant from the personal privacy conversation, but they are definitely engaged in what i will call the cyber security. they understand that. because it is dollars and cents. stephen: that is the part of the issue that we are focused more on, cyber security issues. we have seen high-profile hacks of sony and yahoo! our companies dealing with these, and what do they knew that whether they need to do to protect themselves? >> the monetary damage as well as a reputation damage that you are seeing happening from yahoo! and some of the others, both in europe as well as north america and south america, as increased literally 200%. so hospitals that are being held with rent somewhere, people are voting with their feet. consumers are voting with their feet, but we are seeing it in the cyber security world. new startups,ms,

specifying the nationstate as russia but us intelligence does say they believe that russia gave the hacked emails to wiki leaks after they were stolen from servers and personal emails from hillary clinton's campaign managers. at least two hackers were found inside dnc neck works?networks over the they spied on whether once released. >>> let's check in with mark johnson who has a big helping of sunshine. >> the sun is out today and we will see more on friday and check out these temperatures, summer link, 61 in cleveland, 60 acrid and over and new philly the coolest aired closest to pennsylvania near the 50s and down to youngstown, mainly clear and starry skies beginning the evening and overnight hours. there will be some clouds but all in all it should pm here in the 50s and 10 pm you are still in the 50s. tomorrow we should set record high temperatures in the 70s but then it goes away. winter for the weekend makes its return. >>> breaking news at 5 pm, a live look at the westbound lanes of i-90 near west 1 17th st. and is down to one lane after someone was hit by an rta during the afternoo

and conveying those messages is much easier with nationstates because everyone recognizes that there are mutual vulnerabilities. the greater challenge for my part is the non-nation state entities which over time are going to develop more capabilities in the cyber realm to commit to render attacks. so i think the notion of building a sense of deterrence, the psychology of deterrence is going to be difficult. i think there are is certainly progress with the chinese as a result of the agreement struck in september of 2015. and we will have to see whether that is continued. but i think the greater challenge is non-nation state entities. >> with things moving as quickly as they do with technology and cyber, how has your experience been for recruiting the best talent in the world to make sure we are a step ahead? dir. clapper: we have sustained a level of recruitment and we continue to be able to bring great, young people into the community. the greater challenge is retention. they will come to us either as young civilians or as military and then they become very attractive and appealing t

to 50 years for is that lots of national security is not primarily about the interplay of 200 nationstates that have a monopoly on violence in their own territory. if you spin the globe, look at the borders, and treat them like we are equal in terms of being nation states, you make a mistake, because only two thirds of those countries control their territory. countriesthird of the on the globe are more like afghanistan, syria, libya, or lots of places in north africa where there might be some entity that has more power than anyone else -- think the taliban on the eve of 9/11 -- but we were not attacked by the taliban. .e were attacked by al qaeda all a lot of what is coming in the world, which is tom friedman's world is flat, is accelerating every year with miniaturized nuclear technology, and the kind of global and i.t. technologies we have, and how rapid and easy transport systems are, and how easy it is to have forged documents. we are headed toward a world -- where the distinction between al is a and the taliban distinction all americans understand. a lot of people will self radicalize

50 years for us is that lots of national security is not primarily about the interplay of 200 nationstates that have a monopoly on violence in their own territory. if you spin the globe, look at the borders, and treat them like we are equal in terms of being nation states, you make a mistake, because only two thirds of those countries control their territory. about one-third of the countries on the globe are more like afghanistan, syria, libya, or lots of places in north africa where there might be some entity that has more power than anyone else -- think the taliban on the eve of 9/11 -- but we were not attacked by the taliban. we were attacked by al qaeda. all a lot of what is coming in the world, which is tom friedman's world is flat, is accelerating every year with miniaturized nuclear technology, and the kind of global and i.t. technologies we have, and how rapid and easy transport systems are, and how easy it is to have forged documents. we are headed toward a world -- where the distinction between al qaeda and the taliban is a distinction all americans understand. a lot of people wi

it's not a nationstate.if individuals looking to access systems for access to personally identifiable information about social security numbers, credit card information because they sell it and they used it to generate revenue. criminal activity could intellectual property. we see criminal groups and nationstates doing this, the criminal groups to steal information. >> we will leave this conversation at this point as the u.s. senate is about to trade to and on the agenda, legislation that would require hhs to expand health care programs in rural areas. a vote on passage is that her 11:30 a.m. this morning. live now to the floor of the u.s. senate here on the stand to you. -- c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black , will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o god, our help in ages past, our hope for years to come, thank you for the spirit of contentment we can receive from you, bringing quietness and faith to our hearts.

addresses a different set of issues in addition to what we are dealing with when we are dealing with nationstate actors. although i might add with russia and china, with ill have to deal with those issues -- we still have to deal with those issues. hanker: at this point, i would like to invite the audience. keep your question short. i do remind everybody, this is on the record. >> i am going to start with a little bit of an obnoxious question. we've of heard some great ideas teamsonight about sending into the communities after an incident, out reach to community to make them feel, to make the youth feel part of the fabric of american culture. in eight years of the obama administration, what is the main obstacle from keeping this happening? is it all right to jump in? shanker:art: -- mr. please. ms. pandith: we are at the end of the obama administration, where there is a process. it is run out of dhs and that is where it should be run. you have an a report for secretary johnson that talks about fighting isis. that's 100 million dollars we're asking for in the next fiscal year. it's a time to get

the future president respectuped >> divide with fall color unite we stand, this happened to our nationst. please block downtown straits as protesters marched with her message before returning to public squareh. >> is that he said last 18 just watched in horror and cannot believe it is true. >> kevin freeman fox 8 news. donald trump will continue to meet with potential cabinet members at his new jersey golf clubet. on friday announcing he is nominated senator jeff sessions to be the attorney general, mike appel has been selected as cia director andnd retired army lieutenant general michael flyn will serve as national security advisor ha. >> what e-mails and can acacias were m constituents and we have a majo military post in my district,m people are really quite pleased with the announcements that hav been made today. he has great to pay $25 million to settlele three lawsuits against trump university, with a police warning people to be on alert after multipleeng carjackings t from tremont to west 152 lesser rate has more.o west 152 lesser allowed the house and eliciting my car and getting

these are not things that only ththe purview of nationstates -- are computer systems are so vulnerablet even amateurs can in some case do it. amy: bruce schneier, thank for being with us, security tetechnologistst. we will link to your piece in the "new york times" is headlined "american elections will be hacked." he's the author of "data and goliath: the hidden battles to collect your data and control your world." that does it for our broroadcas. we hope if you're in the area december 5 in new york city for our 20 the anniversary celebration. you can visit democracynow.org for details. we have a job opening, democracy now! hiring a senior tv producer and looking for interns and f ellows. go to democracynow.org. democracy now! is looking for feedback from people who appreciate the closed captioning. e-mail your comments to outreach@democracynow.org or mail them to democracy now! p.o. box 693 new york, new york 10013. [captioning made possible by democracy now!]

and conveying those messages is much easier with nationstates because everyone recognizes that there are mutual vulnerabilities. the greater challenge for my part is the non-nation state entities which over time are going to develop more capabilities in the cyber realm to commit to render a tax. so i think the notion of building a sense of deterrence, the psychology of deterrence is going to be difficult. i think there are is certainly progress with the chinese as a result of the agreement struck in september of 2015. and we will have to see whether that is continued. but i think the greater challenge is non-nation state entities. >> with things moving as quickly as they do with technology and cyber, how has your experience been for recruiting the best talent in the world to make sure we are a step ahead? dir. clapper: we have sustained a level of recruitment and we continue to be able to bring great, young people into the community. the greater challenge is retention. they will come to us either as young civilians or as military and then they become very attractive and appealing to

happening -- if you think about, for instance, the scale resources that are available to typical nationstatectors, the chinese might say tomorrow, "let's hire 10,000 people to just have them submit a revision to wikipedia, right up new pages , and so on." if you have a hearty band of 3000 to 5000 people trying to cover all knowledge, and you have 10,000 chinese going after what they care about. maybe the iranians wake up two days later and say, "we are going to do this, too." you seeing evidence of that? what effort do you imagine yourself making to deal with it? mr. wales: here is what i think about this. we have not seen any large scale efforts or state level efforts to flood wikipedia with hundreds of editors. that is not something we have seen. it is something we worry about in the abstract, but it is not something we have actually seen. i had a conversation once that i think will help illustrate the problem. actually, two conversations, and they both happen to involve russia. but it could be other places. i was in russia, and i had dinner with an editor of a popular magazine, not a poli

and conveying those messages is much easier with nationstates because everyone recognizes that there are mutual vulnerabilities. the greater challenge for my part is the non-nation state entities which over time are going to develop more capabilities in the cyber realm to commit to render a tax. so i think the notion of building a sense of deterrence, the psychology of deterrence is going to be difficult. i think there are is certainly progress with the chinese as a result of the agreement struck in september of 2015. and we will have to see whether that is continued. but i think the greater challenge is non-nation state entities. >> with things moving as quickly as they do with technology and cyber, how has your experience been for recruiting the best talent in the world to make sure we are a step ahead? dir. clapper: we have sustained a level of recruitment and we continue to be able to bring great, young people into the community. the greater challenge is retention. they will come to us either as young civilians or as military and then they become very attractive and appealing to

we have to take seriously threats from nationstates like iran and russia.been one of the only members of our delegation to forget -- vote against automatic cuts for our military. we need the support and resources if we are going to stay safe. >> you recently signed an cyberive order for a center. what exactly does the center do and what should we be doing at the federal level to contract cyber terrorism? >> thank you for moderating, thank you to senator ayotte for being here. my first job as governor is keeping our state secure in our community safe. my first priority will always be keeping our country safe. among the things i have worked on as governor in addition to adding troopers on to our roadways, making sure we have active training for law enforcement and enhancing school safety plans, is cyber security. state sure all of our employees have cyber security standardsestablishing , getting rid of outdated software that makes us vulnerable. the next step is making sure that all of the stakeholders and cyber security at a state level are working together

next big security challenge and it addresses a different set of issues traditionally dealing with nationstates although i might add between russia and china we had to do with those issues. so at this point i am by council members to join the discussion. there are microphones on both sides. i ask you to identify yourself, speak into the microphone and there are so many here and i do remind you that this is on the record. >> kim does share with "the daily beast." i am going to start with a little bit of an obnoxious question. we've heard some great ideas here tonight about sending the community -- sending the teams that communities after an incident with outreach to communities to make them feel, to make you feel part of the fabric of american culture. it spent eight years of an obama administration. what has been the main obstacles for keeping this from happening? >> do you want me to jump in? a couple things. one is silas tart with really good. we are now at the end of the obama administration where there is a process within their interagency to actually look at the ideological piece and it's

addresses a different set of issues in addition to what we are dealing with when we are dealing with nationstate actors. although i might add with russia and china, we still have to deal with those issues, too. mr. schhanker: at this point, i would like to invite the audience. keep your question short. there are so many here. i do remind everybody, this is on the record. >> i am with the daily beast. so i am going to start with a little bit of an obnoxious question. we've of heard some great ideas here tonight about sending teams into the communities after an incident, and outreach to communities to make them feel at least part of the fabric of the american culture. in eight years of the obama administration, what is the main obstacle from keeping this from happening? ms. pandith: is it all right to jump in? we are at the end of the obama administration, where there is a process. it is run out of dhs and that is where it should be run. you have an a report for secretary johnson that talks about how much money we need to have a domestic plan about fighting isis. that's 100 million dollars we're a

so whether it is the nationstate challenges posed by the likes of russia, china, north korea, and iran or transnational concerns like counterterrorism, like proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, which is personally a growing concern for me. the challenges posed in the cyber dimension. approach hasnd our been to try to maintain a balance so that we can protect and to address the full range of threats. so i am hesitant to try to pick one and say -- this is the one that is going to confront us or say this will be the worst in the next 5-10 years. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am pleased to hear that things are better at centcom. i served on that investigation and clearly we have concerns about what went on in 2050. i know that has been addressed to some degree. what are the root causes in your opinion of the unacceptable climate -- command climate that was existing at centcom at the time? >> this is something that secretary carter and i have discussed. we want to know what happened and why it happened. we have been looking to director klapper and undersecretary thiss

addresses a different set of issues in addition to what we are dealing with when we are dealing with nationstate actors. although, i might add, with russia and china, we still have to deal with those issues, too. thom: at this point, i would like to invite the audience. keep your question short. there are so many here. i do remind everybody, this is on the record. kim: kim dozier with "the daily beast." so i am going to start with a little bit of an obnoxious question. we've of heard some great ideas here tonight about sending teams into the communities after an incident, and outreach to communities to make them feel at least part of the fabric of the american culture. in eight years of the obama administration, what is the main obstacle from keeping this from happening? ms. pandith: is it all right to jump in? we are at the end of the obama administration, where there is a process. process within the interagency to actually look at the ideological peace, and it is run out of dhs, and that is where it should be run. you have an a report for secretary johnson that talks about how much money we ne

country can step up to a new global role in which alongside the traditional trading block, agile nationstatesike britain can trade freely with others according to what is in their own best interest and those of their people. this is a new direction. a new approach to managing the forces of globalization so that they work for all. it is a course in which the government tightly have embarked. for over six centuries this very banquet has celebrated the pioneering brilliance of our nation as a global champion of free trade. now, as we leave the european union i believe we we can show the way forward again. for as long as we are members of the e.u. we will continue to lead the way in pressing for an ambitious e.u. trade agenda, just as we have done in supporting the very welcome recent e.u. canada deal. second, as we we leave the european union will also lead use this strength and size of our economy to lead the way in getting out of the world into a new business with old allies and partners alike. we will use their freedom, that come from negotiated with partners directly to be flexible, to set o

we have to take this seriously, from threats from nationstates like iran and russia.ilitary. i was the only member of our military to vote against automatic cuts to our military because cyber command, which i support, establishing a separate command for cyber command within our armed services needs the support and resources if we are going to stay safe in a dangerous world. moderator: senator, thank you. , you establish the cyber security integration center. i want to ask you what exactly this center does and what you think we should be doing at the federal level to counteract cyber terrorism. josh foran: thank you, moderating tonight and thank you to the panelists, and to all the viewers tuning in tonight. my first job as governor is keeping our state secure and our community safe. in the senate by first priority will always be keeping our country safe. among the things i have worked on as governor, in addition to adding troopers to our roadways, making sure we have active shooter training for our law enforcement and enhancing school safety plans, is cyber security.