publicly democrats said they wanted to fund defense department. privately what they said they would not give us single additional dollar for defense. >> garrett: you knew they were going to say that. >> publicly they were thought saying that. they wanted to defend the nation. they say democrats care as much about defense as republicans do. but when rubber meets the road they don't. they held the defense department hostage and we had to pay that ransom. >> garrett: congressman mulvaney, we vote for this? >> i'm much closer to mr. meadows who you're going to have on the show in a little bit when i was member of congress. my job as director of the office of management and budget to try to get the president's agenda passed. right now, the top priority for this president was getting the defense department the money necessary to defend the nation. >> garrett: let me ask you about your other job, acting director of consumer financial director board, it has been alleged that you have stopped that agency's investigation to equifax, have you? >> i have to gi

in themmendation is homeland defense mission of the department of defense we should stand up and move forward as we ,egin to move to another level which would be a national security task force. this committee has jurisdiction, the secretary has prerogatives. this is a homeland defense issue. >> well. i thinkld just add -- it is a defend the nation issue. >> i think you're right. >> this is as clear an attack on the country as if you lobbed a missile or if you lots of artillery sell. lobbed an artillery shell. one of you stated that it is going to morph to where the attacks are going to look more american. would you expand on that please? >> that was me. it is in part from some of the lessons we learned from the french presidential election. was ast cyber attack combination of both hacked emails from the campaign as well as made up messages. it was all mixed in between. i do notnderstand -- have access to classified breaching's -- briefings. it looked like it was coming from the united states, from u.s. organizations. some of this is tied into adaptation. they do not want it to look li

my recommendation is in the homeland defense mission of the department of defense. we should stand up and move forward as we begin to move to another level which would be a national security task force, but in the interim, this come they has jurisdiction and the secretary has prerogatives to set up a jiativ to set up homeland defense and this is a homeland defense issue. >> well, everybody's -- >> i think it's a defend the nation issue. >> i think you're right. and. >> i think this is as clear an attack on the country as if you lobbed a missile or if you lobbed an artillery shell. >> senator blumenthal wanted to ask the question, one of you had stated that it's going to morph into where the attacks are going to look more american. would you expand on that, please? >> senator, that was me and it's in part from some of the lessons we learned from the french presidential election. the last cyber attack which happened within the last 24 hours of the campaign. it was a combination of both hacked e-mails from macron's campaign as well as made up messages and it was all mi

turn to some of our key colleagues here who have joined us from the state department and the department of defense. starting with mr. rafael carland, the managing director for policy. rafael, you know, the united states state department is undertaking a review of its role and some of the efficiencies that might be gained in term of its resourcing, and in the context of that, i understand, has been undertaking reviews particularly of ssa tools as well as stabilization tools. in that process, i'd be curious to hear your thoughts on what sort of innovations and best practices the state department has identified for ssa in that context. please. >> sure, thank you very much. and thank you so much for organizing this, and i appreciate the report as well. and then, of course, just by way of introduction, the office of foreign assistance that we do overseas and coordinates the 30 billion or so in foreign assistance at the state department and usa manage every year, and we look across all these accounts of which it's object 30 billion a year, a quarter to a third of any given year is secretary assistance.

republicans haven't mentioned that this is going to ob noncrucial defense budgets, veterans, homeland security, counterterrorism and state department programs will be ignored. that's why democrats are asking for a compromise to raise the spending caps that are unreasonable. that is because we want a strong national defense and we need qual increases in our domestic budget so families can feel safe and financially secure. join us in confronting the shortfall at the v.a. so no veteran is denied. we need recovery funds for the texas, florida, puerto rico and the u.s. virgin islands and the areas impacted by wildfires. we want republicans to fight opioid and protect pensions and do what americans want us to do, pass a clean dream act. don't tell me we don't have the funds. his congress gave out a huge standout. but this resolution fails to address those needs of the people that sent us here. we must end this cycle of budgetary neglect. i urge my colleagues to vote no. and i yield back. . >> i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from panama city, florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from twhra -- the gentleman fro

the defense department has instructed him to stop releasing public unclassified data about what we'reoing in afghanistan and how well or poorly it's working. quote, this quarter is department of defense instructed the special inspector general to not release data on the number of districts controlled or influenced by the afghanistan government or insurgents. they were informed the defense department has determined that although the most recent numbers are unclassified, they're not releasable to the public. this is troubling for a lot of reasons. this is the first time their office has been specifically instructed not to release information marked as unclassified to the american taxpay taxpayer. if you go to the bottom of the nearly 300-page report, on page 251 you'll see a number of redactions. these are 'dxs requested by the defense department. it's unclassified information, information that until now you as an american taxpayer had a right to see but you can't see it anymore. trump scandals and trump administration failures. they really are different from most recent administrations

we won't ever reach the defense department. but parity in the increases that were successful and priorities in the bill. man hope the speaker will up and say we in the house can have a mitch mcconnell guarantee in the senate, a vote on the floor. -- the fact is that was well, it's about infrastructure. it's not about that. it's trying to get votes from that caucus and much smaller piece than they wanted to do in the meantime. we honored our commitment, opioids, veterans, national institutes of health, issues of higher education and child care, separate from that -- the disaster assistance doesn't come under the caps, but issues related to the health provisions, which on do not come under the cap. it's a different agenda because there are pay-fors for them. i'm pleased with the product, i'm not pleased with the process. reporter: will you vote for it? ms. pelosi: no, i won't. reporter: going to take that as a compliment. what did your speech accomplish yesterday? ms. pelosi: i didn't go out to be there for eight hours but when i

blumenauer: the defense department has been in the forefront of it. they have any number of studies they have analyzed. our military leaders think climate change is a national security threat and looking at their facilities that are at risk. they want to invest in alternative energy because that protects their flexibility in the field. we spent billions of dollars in the middle east transporting fossil fuel in trucks that might as well have bull's eyes on them. so the department of defense and democratic and republican administrations has been on top of it. what hasn't happened here is the administration has not embraced the need and followed through on the opportunities. rep. pallone: we on the energy and commerce committee have been trying to have hearings on climate change, sea level rise. they will not do it. no hearings, no discussion of it whatsoever. so we had a minority hearing, which was our right. and i figured let's go to annapolis because they were having major problems with sea level rise. i called up the superintendent and told him this

creative diplomacy to make progress in those areas but then there are certain steps that the defense. department takes i would like you to interpret them for me because maybe i'm not understanding i think according to the defense strategy the great power competition with russia and china is outlined as number one concern for the united states not terrorism anymore and that's a that's a judgment that they make and they stated i don't agree with that but it is i understand where they're coming from what do you understand where they're coming from yes they have convinced themselves that. the actions taken by china and russia and in terms of building up their own nuclear forces are seen as a threat to the united states. that's a judgment they make which i don't share but it's i don't understand why they do what they're saying and why they why they think they need to respond that way but is it not is not a difference interpretation of facts it's a difference in how you respond to those facts how you interpret the facts i don't see russia as posing a threat to the united states which is the threatenin

compare that to the $80 billion per year in funding, increased funding the defense department just received and it's pretty obvious that this is not really a priority for this president. from kathy is up first mesh again, a democrat, good morning. caller: good morning john and dan. was born and raised in flint in 1957. gm business being there, there were a lot of roads built and sidewalks. you could get anywhere really by walking or riding your bike. there was a lot of driving. the roads are in poor condition in the state of michigan and that's a long story but i think we need to encourage the building of paths for people to walk or fixing the roots of people can safely travel. there is nothing wrong with that. when people see someone walking, they think they have a mental health issue when really, we should be like denmark, modern, extensive infrastructure. people should be encouraged to walk, it's a lifestyle. they have rails. flint has the capacity to do that. >> you can find this online at c-span.org. we leave it now to return live to the floor of the house working today on fighting onl

creative diplomacy to make progress in those areas but then there are certain steps that the defense. department takes i would like you to interpret them for me because maybe i'm not understanding i think according to the defense strategy the great power competition with russia and china is outlined as number one concern for the united states not terrorism anymore and i think that's a judgment that they make and they stated i don't agree with that but it is i understand where they're coming from what do you understand where they're coming from yes they have convinced themselves that. the actions taken by china and russia and turning to building up their own nuclear forces are seen as a threat to the united states. that's a judgment they make which i don't share but it's i don't understand why they are. what they're seeing and why they why they think they need to respond that way but is it not is not a difference in interpretation of facts it's a difference in how you respond to those facts how you interpret the facts i don't see russia as posing a threat to the united states which is threatening

creative diplomacy to make progress in those areas the been there are certain steps that the defense. department takes i would like you to interpret them for me because maybe i'm not understanding i think according to the defense strategy the great power competition with russia and china is outlined as number one concern for the united states not terrorism anymore and that's a that's a judgment that they make and they stated i don't agree with that but it is i understand where they're coming from what do you understand where they're coming from yes they have convinced themselves that. the actions taken by china and russia and turned to building up their own nuclear forces are seen as a threat to the united states. that's a judgment they make which i don't share but it's i don't understand why they. what they're seeing and why they why they think they need to respond that way but is it not is not a different interpretation of facts it's a difference in how you respond to those facts how you interpret the facts i don't see russia as posing a threat to the united states which is threatening war wit

creative diplomacy to make progress in those areas but then there are certain steps that the defense. department takes i would like you to interpret them for me because maybe i'm not understanding i think according to the defense strategy the great power competition with russia and china is outlined as number one concern for the united states not terrorism anymore and that's a that's a judgment today make and they stated i don't agree with that but it is i understand where they're coming from what do you understand where they're coming from yes they have convinced themselves that. the actions taken by china and russia and in terms of building up their own nuclear forces are seen as a threat to the united states. that's a judgment they make which i don't share but it's i don't understand why they do what they're seeing and why they why they think they need to respond that way but is it not is not a difference in interpretation of facts it's a difference in how you respond to those facts how you interpret the facts i don't see russia as posing a threat to the united states which is the threatening

. >> and is it true that the president gave a directive to the defense department that it must happen? >> moshgs the president asked them for different ways to explore and find different options as the secretary said. one more question. >> sarah, in to follow up on the text message, buzz the president belief that former president obama was ininvolvolved in the russian investigation between the peter strzok and lisa page te text texts? >> i am not sure of the specific, but there is some in those text messages that is going to give americans cause

we haven't had a budget in the defense department for at least two years and it's been under a sequester so there's been a cut off and that's now been lifted at least for two more years and so there's going to have to be reloading the contingency funding that went in and on top of all that we've lost one point eight billion dollars here in recent days and we don't know where it went and when you when you invest in afghanistan a lot of that gets filtered away there's a lot of corruption in the country so and there's been studies by the by the inspector general of a specialized special inspector general on this he says the money's gone nobody knows where it went and this isn't a problem you know i want to follow up on that one so last question i'll go about thirty seconds michael so the president said seven trillion dollars is stupid that we spend all that much you're saying no you actually need that to protect our security and more but what is the president done his budget request that's out today he asked for more to that seven trillion that stupid or less well the seven trillion is goin

today, the senate armed services committee is going to be holding a hearing on the department of defense's weapons of mass destruction live here at 3:30 on c-span3. >>> tonight, a house subcommittee on the military leaders misconduct investigations. >>> saturday, american history tv on c-span3 is live beginning at 9:00 a.m. eastern with all-day coverage with the new museum of the bible in washington, d.c., with the symposium of historians exploring the bible and the founding of america. the speakers include baylor university

it's not going to be place holding numbers or the budget will be relevant to what the defense department actually wants to get out of that top line? dana: yes, they will be rel vanlt. reporter: will we get justification on that level of detail? dana: let me take that and i will come back to you. reporter: on the syria strike. the syrian government called the strike a war crime and the russian army said that the u.s. goal is to capture economic assets. with such a strong reaction like this are you concerned about the safety of other u.s. advisors that are imbedded with s.d.f. troops? and do you believe the strike was a proportionate response to the attack? dana: we have the inherent right to defend ourselves. and we had seen a buildup for over a week. it was unprovoked. we are comfortable and the secretary's comfortable with the judgment of our commanders on the ground. with respect to syria, we are there, our mission hasn't changed. we are there to defeat isis. they are on the run. but it's not finished. and so there's still work to be done. reporter: a quick follow-up on the parade. usu

but the largest employer on planet earth is the united states department of defense, with more than 3illion employees. it's the largest single organization on earth. with all those workers and all those many agencies within it, all part of the gigantic u.s. department of defense they have a lot to keep track of at the pentagon. but last year in september it made for particularly bracing headlines when the director of one pentagon agency said quote i have got murderers who have access to classified information, i have rapists. i have pedophiles, i have people involved in child porn. i have all these things at the interim clearance level, and i'm pulling their clearances on a weekly basis. january of this year, nbc news obtained a report from the defense department showing that 165 contractors to the department of defense had had interim security clearances revoked because of illicit activity of some kind, things like questionable financial transactions or being influenced by a foreign government or, one person who got an interim security clearance clearance in 2015 was discovered in 20

but the largest employer on planet earth is the united states department of defense, with more than 3oyees. it's the largest single organization on earth. with all those workers and all those many agencies within it, all part of the gigantic u.s. department of defense they have a lot to keep track of at the pentagon. but last year n september, it made for particularly bracing headlines when the director of one pentagon agency said quote i have got murderers who have access to classified information, i have rapists. i have pedophiles, i have people involved in child porn. i have all these things at the interim clearance level, and i'm pulling their clearances on a weekly basis. january of this year, nbc news obtained a report from the defense department showing that 165 contractors to the department of defense had had interim security clearances revoked because of illicit activity at some time, thing like questionable financial transactions or being influenced by a foreign government or, one person who got an interim security clearance clearance in 2015 was discovered in 2017 to have b

followed by a subcommittee hearing on the defense department's role in protecting u.s. elections from foreign influences. >> attorney general jeff sessions spoke to the national sheriffs association in washington. he discussed the opioid epidemic, gangs and sanctuary cities. this is 45 minutes. -- 35 minutes. >> please be seated. you know, there are few times in a person's life they have such an honor to do what i'm about to do, and it has been the start on me two times. we have the united states attorney general, and perhaps

by ours, i means all of the leaders at the department of defense. a lot of work obviously goes into the execution and quality of the training. you can count on us. we will earn your trust. we will spend the money wisely. >> if i could ask you about the recently released nuclear posture review, calling on more nuclear weapons to be added to the arsenal. you are quoted saying every time a nuke is used, it is a strategic game changer. how will this posture review add to global stability? many believe you might be more inclined to use them. sec. mattis: we are talking about the nuclear determined. in that nuclear deterrent, we believe some nations could miscalculate, one in particular, if that nation could assumesec: they used in a conventional fight, a small yield bomb, we would not respond with a very large yield bomb. our response to this is to make a small yield bomb and say, don't miscalculate, it is a deterrent. deterrence is dynamic. it changes from decade to decade. we have to address deterrence in its current construct. the idea is to raise the

the department of defense has been on top of it. what has not happened is that the interest -- administration has not embraced the need and follow through on the opportunity. >> one thing to follow up -- we committeeand commerce are trying to have hearings on climate change, sea level rise. they won't do it. no hearing, no discussion. at the naval academy, they were having major problems with sea level rise. i called up the superintendent. i told them this is a partisan hearing. there are not going to be any republicans. i fully expected he was going to say, no way. he said, please come down. room, the hearing in this looking out on where the flooding was. you could see all the flooding at annapolis. as you testified, because -- he was so concerned this was affecting the military. this is the reality. >> it was included in the defense authorization bill, the challenges climate change presents the military. speaker, my as concern was climate and energy under president bush's leadership. in a bipartisan way, we passed the largest ener

while it's evolved, the three mission areas the first priority is the defense of the department of defense information network. second, enable other commanders by delivering effects in and through cyberspace. finally, defend against cyber threats who support others when directed to do so by the secretary defense and in concert with the national defense strategy we are churning the path to sustain cyberspace superiority and give up her operational advantage and increased options for combatant commanders and policy makers. without cyberspace we are into n today'are intothese battles thek commission increase across all domains that endanger the security. since my last update almost a year ago they've achieved a number of significant mileston milestones. first joint force headquarters are responsible for securing them operating at defending the complex infrastructure as the chief operational capability. second, the joint task force organization that we created to lead the fight against cyber and isis into the broad military campaign. we will continue to pursue isis in support of the objectives

kennedy: the defense department is failing to account for hundreds of millions spent by the military.efense logistics agency has $800 million in construction projects that were not properly documented or accounted for. the department of defense has an annual budget of nearly $700 billion this year. the president look topic crease that spending for next year. he promised to beef up the military while eliminating government waste. how can we cut spending and make government more efficient if we don't know where the money is going. joining me, my friend bryan suits. welcome back, suits. how do you lose that much money? >> defense logistics agency is a civilian-run agency but part of the pentagon. they have their own inspector general. here is the thing about the pentagon. afghanistan says hold my beer. $700 million would be a relief when you cop pair that to the inspector january in afghanistan and iraq. kennedy: didn't when find the department of defense miss appropriated $125 billion. >> you say misappropriate, they say lost. the pentagon does try. i had to account for he round of arti

the first time the defense department inspected him to stop releasing public unclassified data aboutt we're doing in afghanistan and how well or poorly its working. quote, this quarter the department of defense instructed the special inspector general to not release to the public data on the number of districts controlled or influenced by the afghan government or by the insurgent or contested by both. the inspector general's office was informed that the defense department determined the most recent numbers are unclassified, nevertheless not releasable to the public. this development is troubling for a number of reasons, that is not the first time the inspector general's office was instructed not to release information and if you make your way to the bomb to the of the report on page 251 you'll se e in fact a number of reda redactions and you had a right to see but you can't see anywhere. trump scandal and trump administration failures really are different from most recent administrations. he really is a different kind of president. but after president george w. bush started the war i

have is a military that set up the power project overseas so we should call the department of defense department of often through the department of defense of other countries because in the in the few times during our history that the military has been asked to defend the country it doesn't fit hasn't done a very good job in a war of eight hundred twelve we got the capital burned before they managed to fight the british to a drive to declaring war on the superpower at the time in world war two they didn't think the japanese were capable of attacking pro harbor so the military failed there and of course on nine eleven the fighter jets went out to sea so we need to increase our defenses and quit you know meddling in other countries business you know you know early that through the thing that i find again i think daniel really hit it here because i'm very disappointed to and that's why i have my own program because i can talk about things that i think are interesting because when i look at the literal of corporate media there's almost nothing of interest to me whatsoever it's tragic stories it's sa

and also have the department of defense does its job -- how the department of defense does its job. will start by agreeing with the last point the chairman made, whatever we do in our military, this is what we expect you to do. it is our paramount obligation to make sure that we fund that. to make sure that we don't have a situation where we give them so many tasks, but not enough resources to train for them. that is the definition of a hollow force, when we send them into battle unprepared for what we told them to do. unfortunately due to budgetary challenges in the last six and seven years, that has happened far too often. we have lurched from continuing resolution to government shutdown to continuing resolution it's very difficult , for both of you and your predecessors to plan what you are going to do when you don't know how much money you are going to have one week to the next. i think that is a very significant problem, so i appreciate the strategies put together. my biggest concern is, does it match the likely resources we will have to fund it? we are $21 trillion in debt and

the coming weeks this committee was a drug from secretary mattis and senior leaders at the defense department i have national defense strategy will address the threats facing our nation. as we begin a review of national defense committee it would benefit this committee to get our witnesses assessment of the new strategy and whether it strikes the appropriate balance between great power competition and ongoing threats posed by rogue regimes, terrorist organizations and other nonstate actors and criminal organizations. the new strategy emphasizes the civil that key fact. the importance of allies and partners. the esteemed panel before us knows betteref than most that robust international alliances are essential to keep our country safe. the national defense strategy unveiled last week puts a premium on both alliances while pursuing new partners. as i stated many times i am deeply concerned about statement on the president that of undercut america's leadership position in the world, alienated our long-time allies and dismissed the global order of the united states helped establish following worl

turn to some of our key colleagues here who have joined us from the state department, the department of defense. starting with mr. rafael carland who's the managing director for policy in the office of u.s. foreign assistance resources. rafael, the united states state department is undertaking a review of its role and some of the efficiencies that might be gained in terms of its resourcing and in the context of that, i understand has been undertaking reviews, particularly of ssa tools as well as stabilization tools, and in that process, i'd be curious to hear your thoughts on what sort of innovations and best practices the state department has identified for ssa in that context. >> sure. thank you very much. thank you so much for organizing this. appreciate the report as well. and that, of course, just by way of introduction, the office of foreign assistance that we do oversees and coordinates the $30 billion or so in foreign assistance that the state department and usa manage every year. we look across all of these a accounts, $30 billion a year, quart toreer to a third in any year is security

coming weeks, this committee will hear directly from secretary mattis and senior leaders at the defense department on how the national defense strategies will address the threats facing our nation. review, it would benefit this committee to begin with our witnesses' assessment of the new strategy and whether it strikes the appropriate palette between great power, a petition, and the threat posed by rogue regimes, terrorist or nations, and other actors. the importance of allies and partners. the esteemed panel before us knows better than most that robust international alliances are essential to keeping our country safe. the national defense strategy unveiled last week puts a premium on bolstering current alliances while pursuing new partners. as i have stated many times, i am deeply concerned about statements from the president to -- that have undercut america's position in the world, and dismissed the position in the world the united states has established following world war ii. these actions isolate the united states and reduce our influence in the world, leading to uncertainty. at the same time

i have no doubt that the professionals at the department of energy department of defense in the state department who analyze those threats in developing the nuclear posture review had very good and important information where i differ with the final product that was rolled out the south after noon isn't. the case that low yield nuclear weapons have any stabilizing or valuable role to play in today's today's threat context in fact i would make the opposite case that there is no real such thing as a surgical nuclear strike on a potential enemy i also have observed that over the last ten to twenty years there is some very strong and compelling can conventional alternatives to a potential nuclear strike so this renewed emphasis on these types of weapons is troubling and does not leave our allies i think in a very strong position and i don't see how it compels china whose threat i think is somewhat overstated and certainly russia to alter their calculus or russian warplanes have renewed as strikes on the rebel held areas of it lived province in syria at least seven people were killed when

which is going to be, what you need from the department of defense and/or the congress to do this? we just mentioned that two years ago, the congress further expanded the ability of the department of defense to use other transactional authority for those of you that do not follow this day in and day out. it basically allows you to circumvent a lot of the traditional requirements on paperwork and on laying out detailed ways of complying with a lot of complex standards and get commercial off-the-shelf technology or otherwise to move faster. if i did not summarize that what you can correct me. but my question really is again, what you need from the department of defense or the congress that you have not yet received? that will allow the rest of washington or the rest of the country to support you in what you are trying to do? >> repeatedly have been hedging in public on what i say. we may need legislation. depended upon the force of action that the secretary and the chief picked here in the early march timeframe. it may require legislation. but we may also want to codify and institutio

military and defense department are concerned, they welcome this bipartisan agreement.retty extraordinary stuff going on right now. will it get through the house of representatives? >> chris was saying earlier in the hour, that the far left and the far right will be hard to corra lch cor corral on this. we'll see if they'll be able to do it especially when pelosi seems to be siding with the left of her caucus. >> making the case she does not support the senate agreement unless they get a hard, firm commitment from the speaker, paul ryan, that there will be an up and down vote, full debate on the floor of the house of representatives for the dreamers. >> that's right. i think what we need fleshed out more is what does she mean by a hard and fast commitment? we're slicing the onion pretty thin but -- >> she says she wants a commitment from paul ryan that schumer got from mitch mcconnell. >> so my guess is he will be willing to give her something like that. my guess is pure politicizing. some republicans simply will not vote for a bill that adds to the debt in this way. >>

it is a national level effort in the department of defense. investments are vast. ve outstanding people, the army has made tremendous strides in this over the last six years in particular. but, really, we look at it as a national issue in the department. >> nuclear affect what are you concerned about that? or something disabling a large fraction of your command control systems? absolutely. and concerned about -- >> absolutely. i'm concerned about all of those things. we have not tested it except on land. we have had some challenges in cyber, we have been able to isolate and fight through it. as the secretary mentioned, we are attacked every day and are data networks. folks looking and probing and prodding. a whole lot of covert, clandestine activity going on in cyberspace. as the secretary mentioned, we have invested heavily and we are constantly getting better and better. i don't believe we have been contested in a way, and we have to work your way through that and make sure we continue to harden our postures. the same with electronic warfare. spectrum, we have not

. >> according to the hill, budget requests for the defense department say, quote, major power competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in u.s. national security. long-term strategic competitions with china and russia are the principal priorities for the department. does that reflect -- this is an interesting topic because you and i talked about both of these things about these threats. does this reflect the global threat scene as you see it? >> i believe it does. you're also going to see a short disconnect between what the department of defense feels are the global threats. the white house agrees that china itself is probably our largest strategic adversary. i think underground -- you certainly see this reflected in some of the commentary you hear from the national security staff. that russia is a secondary threat. certainly when the president is directing that the national security apparatus ignore the russia hacking attack that occurred in 2016. you're going to have that disconnect. but the russian armed forces are increasing in quality. there are areas of operation certai