more than perhaps the dni. it has become a coordinating, successful coordination center for terrorist. >> that is i think everyone's view. the analytical function anyway. effusions venture. the ability to pull together the counterterrorism from nsi and of course the central intelligence agency to have the malta located, working in many cases the same room and access to other computer centers. other computer terminals around the government has enabled a better exchange of information. >> at the national analogue of the joint terrorist task force. so who is part the? >> the dni staff very clearly report to the direct or of national intelligence, although they also report to the white house for some functions for convoluted reason i can go with two. largely they report to the director of national intelligence. but they are detailed, so the idea is if you're an fbi counterterrorism analyst and you come to the end ttc, they want you to see the entire perspective of the intelligence community, not just the view from

rice supported the dni. they were scwhroored by the experience in iraq. they believed that the cia's information -- weighted too heavily against other dissending views across the intelligence community, of course, namely the department of energy's intelligence office. i think they saw that the dni and others had seen this as a benefit as well able to marshall all the intelligence. all the information from across the community and not just look at cia. i think cia still plays the most prominent role. they have among them the most brilliant analysts we have in the country and certainly in the government. i think it's one benefit of the dni is that the dni is able to bring together all the points of view so we might have a completely balanced assessment on important questions like wmd. >> right. when a national intelligence estimate is written, the dni is coordinating that? >> yes. previously it reported to cia director. now it reports to the dni. but really people with point to me and say, well, you know, the

which means that the dni is not going to have a small staff. they will have a pretty big staff, he's going to get into privacy issues. it is as you said, it comes down to how does the bureaucracy implement this and i think the question it comes down very much to how aggressive will the dni's office be? how tech that would be able to work with other agencies? will the nsa listen to it? i think it probably will. it's a winner for general clapper and company. >> go ahead. >> ring the microphone over to gary. just very quickly to say that i think one sort of comment on how they bureaucracy operates is, they bureaucrabureaucra cy is going to be under a lot of scrutiny. just to pick up on and choose point about the idea that the commercial interest will be brought into the decision-making enabling except that will be a good thing for u.s. power more generally. but it's more important in this area perhaps than others because the private sector has to be convinced that it is really happening in fact rather than just in theory but and if they don't they

i have directed the dni to develop the safeguards come which will limit the duration that we can hold personal information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is that people around the world, regardless of their nationality, should know that the united states does not spy on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders as well. given the understandable attention of this issue, i've made clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. i've instructed my national security team come as well as the intelligence community, to work with foreign counterparts to deepen our coronation and cooperation in ways that we build trust going forward. let me be clear -- our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of governments in the same way that the intelligen

i've directed the dni in consultation with the attorney general to develop these safeguards which will limit the amount of time we can hold personal information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is that people around the world, regardless of their national at, should know that the united states is not spying on ordinary people. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders, as well. given the understandable attention that this issue's received i i've made clear to the intelligent community that unless there is a compel national security purpose we will not monitor the heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. and i've instructed my national security team as well as the intelligence community to work with foreign counterparts to deepen our cooperation in ways that build trust going forward. now, let me be clear: our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of governments. as opposed to ordinary citizens, rarnd tharound the world, in t

but by the same token, i don't think the cia wants to have the dni trying to get between the cia and the national security council. as you know, the national security could council and the a have a very intimate role in every presidency virtually. of course, we're aware of all the famous stories from the eisenhower and kennedy years about what the cia was doing for those prime ministers, and that's -- those prime ministers, and that's -- presidents, and that's the source of the relationship. presidents over time wanted to affect national security policy and realized that a they didn't have enough tools to do it or at least didn't have what they wanted to be able to do in sort of a medium course of action between diplomacy and between military action. i think that's why they rely on covert action to this day, as a lever to influence national events. and i don't think the cia wanted an interloper. they don't want the dni trying to play an oversight role over what their activities are. >> you know, a couple of -- speaking of oversight, do you think, i mean, there have been a variety of

i have directed the dni to develop the safeguards come which will limit the duration that we can hold personal information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is that people around the world, regardless of their nationality, should know that the united states does not spy on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders as well. given the understandable attention of this issue, i've made clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. i've instructed my national security team come as well as the intelligence community, to work with foreign counterparts to deepen our coronation and cooperation in ways that we build trust going forward. let me be clear -- our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of governments in the same way that the intelligen

i have directed the dni in consultation with the attorney general to develop these safeguards, whichwill limit the duration that we can hold personal information, while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is that people around the world, regardless of their nationality, should know that the united states is not spying on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. and we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders, as well. given the understandable attention that this issue has received, i've made clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. and i've instructed my national security team, as well as the intelligence community, to work with foreign counterparts to deepen our coordination and cooperation in ways that rebuild trust going forward. now, let me be clear. our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about

i've directed the dni in consultation with the attorney general to develop these safeguards which will limit the duration we can hold personal information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is that people around the world regardless of their nationality, should know that the united states is not spying on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders as well. given the understandable attention that this issue received, i made clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. and i've instructed my national security team as well as the intelligence community to work with foreign counterparts to deepen cooperation in ways that rebuild trust going forward. now let me be clear. our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of governments as opposed to or

that goes to the big themes of your book and that is the dni and national counter-terrorism was supposed to make sure that didn't surface. they dropped a dime on his son. there was a secondary list of people to go into there. if you got to detroit, he would have been gone to the secondary for additional screening. that was an example where the apparatus didn't work or maybe that is an unfair critique of the apparatus. >> it is down to what you think the mission of intelligence is. are you going to prevent every little event? the answer is no, you will not be able to always operate perfectly. but i think the intelligence community is doing a better job on counter terrorism and we are safer from a large-scale attack. the question that peter raises is that because of the constitutional reform, or because we were spending double what we did before 9-11. so increased money, focused and lessens learned from 9-11, or rather overtime whether the commission is leading to increased national security down the road. the institutional reforms are open questions and being debated but the intelligence

i have directed the dni in consultation with the attorney general to develop these safeguards, whiche duration that we can hold personal information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom-line is that people around the world, regardless of their nationality, should know that the united states is not spying on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders as well. given the understandable attention that this issue has received, i have made clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies, and i have instructed my national security team, as well as the intelligence community, to work with foreign caliper -- foreign counterparts to deepen our operation in ways that we build -- deepen our core operation in ways that we bill trust further. let me be clear, we will continue to gather information abo

i have directed the dni to develop these safeguards which will limit the duration we can hold personalnformation while also restricting the use of this information. >> reporter: this is in keeping with the u.s. government's view that the rest of the world has no constitutional protections. it's up to foreign governments to protect their own citizen's information, and as edward snowden's documents have shown it's foreign governments that are king atively helping the u.s. government snoop threw the records with no restrictions. >> patty cullhane joins us now. what did you make of the speech? >> it was surprising how few changes the president is actually recommends. the review panel produced a 300-page report. there were 46 recommendations. they were very detailed he is basically take half measures for each one of them. one thing a this is not talked about very much overseas is for years now the fbi has been able to use these national security letters. they send a letter to let's say a credit card company and say i need information on every transaction from patty cullhane. they have to ha

prior to the dni, he served with the national investment service of the cia and is the author of a very good book. i read that book and doing the research and cited quite a bit for my own book. his am a inceived international studies and is a regiment of the crane language did histy and undergraduate at university of maryland so it's a pleasure to have you with us today. we will proceed as follows. the doctor will have some comments to start us off and we will have a bit of discussion and we will open it for a couple of questions. in spite of this terrible weather, the rest of us will probably go home after this, he is going back to work. he has a full day. over to you. >> thank you for that kind introduction. i thought i would take the opportunity to go on some of the excellent discussions we had this morning to kind of look at the alliance going forward. within the context of two broad areas -- what we see with the evolving north korea threat, implications were the alliance, in its next 60 years, and we -- and what we have already begun to do to meet that threat and deal with that thr

i have directed the dni in consultation with the attorney general to develop the safeguards which will limit duration we can hold personal information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is, that people around the world, regardless of their nationality should know that the united states is not spying on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders as well. given the understandable attention that this issue has received, i made clear to the intelligence community that, unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and ally. and i have instructedded my national security team as well as the intelligence community to work with foreign counterparts to work with cooperation in ways to rebuild trust going forward. now let me be clear, our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of government as opposed

i think it's -- if james clapper who is at dni now, under congress, who did this, was asked is the nsa collected on the american people and he says no, then a few weeks later, snowden comes out with documents that proves they are, if they have that happen in the bush administration they would've been screaming for an impeachment right now but really you haven't heard that much in the media or from the left. i think it's important to not trade these americans, especially in philadelphia, the capital of american liberty, let's stop trading freedom for the dilution of security because we're never going to live in a country that's free of risk. if we keep saying to the government yes, we trust you and they keep collecting, keep collecting, and every time an incident happens, the liberty erodes a little bit more. i think it's time to reevaluate some of those policies. >> another question. >> it seems that we are facing a significant threat from violent terrorists -- with bio terrorists, and al qaeda calling for new recruits to a microbiologist to genetic engineers. d. have any thoughts on h

most brutal politics are behind the scenes institutional politics between the white house and nsa and dni and cia, a massive entity. >> it was also interesting congressman, you have the president saying on a number of occasions he's going to call on congress to act, no offense to present company, but that is not an institution over the past few years has become renowned for acting. >> that's right. i think on this occasion there is basis to believe -- >> really? >> i do because there have been people on both the republican and democratic sides who have raised questions about this and here's the other thing as chuck todd mentioned, there's people on the republican and democratic side who do believe that the state should have a lot of power and be able to do -- there are people on both sides on both sides of the issue so i think that may be a path forward. >> this is one of the more interesting parts of the speech i found at least. this is the president talking about how we got here. take a listen. >> in the long twilight struggle against communism, we have been reminded the very liberties

the dni, director of national intelligence testified if they passed that it would undermine the negotiation. >> if that is undermined and the reason why undermined because the iran hardliners out there can we trust iran to work with the international atomic energy agency for verification and confirmation and its limits to enrichment capacity? >> that is the critical question. i'm all about verification and all about actions and not words. one of the great things about this interim agreement is the sanctions relief they are getting is doled out a month at a time. their onbligations start day on, stopping that 20% enriched uranium. the iaea is on the ground. they used to issue reports every three months. now they'll issue a report every month. i think we'll have a clear idea whether they are following through. >> you're indicating something new a lot of people were not aware of and privy to. what about the transparency of all this? can we read the fine print between the united states and all the plus five nations that agree to this in the first place? >> there was a sort of bit of controversy

i should point out to folks at home, to the moment when ron wyden questioned james clap every, the dnind asked him if there was any broad reach program that was collecting the phone data of americans and he said not wittingly were his words. so, katy, what do you make of the comments of peter king over the weekend? >> i think it's a little ridiculous for peter king to suggest that essentially the blood of americans would be on the hands of rand paul simply because rand paul is addressing an issue that polling shows many americans are concerned about. an independent review showed that, you know, in the sa doesn't necessarily need to be collecting all data from every single american cell phone to prevent terrorist attacks. not to mention a federal judge a couple weeks ago saying he thinks it is unconstitutional and the government hasn't given enough proof to show they need the program and mass collection of data to prevent terrorist attacks. peter king wants to run for president. if he is going to tell americans that their privacy concerns shouldn't be addressed when it comes to the nsa,

i've directed the dni in consultation with the attorney general to develop these safe xwards which canl information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is that people around the world, regardless of their nationality, should know that the united states is not spying on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedure procedures. this applies to foreign leaders as well. given the understandable attention that this issue received i made clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. i've instructed my national security team, as well as intelligence community, to work with foreign counterparts to deepen our coordination and cooperation in ways that rebuild trust going forward. let me be clear. our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of governments as opposed to ordinary citizens, a

prior to the dni, he serves with the national investment service at the cia and is the author of a verygood book, kim ilsung the building of a regime. i regret that during the research for my own book and decided quite a bit in that book. dr. seiler received his ma from youngstown graduate school of international studies and is a graduate of the language program at the university and got his undergraduate at the university of maryland. so, syd and is a pleasure to have you with us today. we will proceed as follows. dr. seiler will have some comments to start us off and then we will have a discussion and open up for just a couple of questions. while the rest of us will be going home after this he has to go back to work. he has a full day. syd, back to you. >> thank you for those kind interruptions. i thought i'd take an opportunity to build on the excellent discussions we had this morning to look at the alliance going forward. with the context of a largely the to broaden areas. first of all, what we see with the evolving north korean threat implications for the alliance in the next six y

fbi, dni. >> a lot of people say he doesn't have the same skills as other people who have had this skillsne art cal in one newspaper and it was. and there was one woman walking down the street. >> who was that woman? have you tracked her down yet? >> strangely inspectors picked her up and treated her to a power point and then dropped her off around my home. if you find her today, she says very nice things. i'm kidding. not really charlie. stay with me. >> i know you're kidding. >> there was one story in the "daily news" that said the qualifications between you and your predecessor, the gap, was staggering, that your predecessor has four decades -- >> you can look at resumes. i have certain value on paper or you can look at deeds. what "the new york times" did when they wrote the same story is they talked to those who i worked with as a senior national intelligence officer in washington and what you got was a very different story there about the effectiveness of those operations. so outside of saying you know, okay i'm human, it hurt my feelings there's no there there. >> and one of the th

as you pointed out, i'm on the defense policy board, the state department foreign policy board, the dnird, and recently joined the homeland security board will i, hopefully, will advise jay in the new role. i care intensely about the policies here, and getting them right. so in true bipartisan fashion, let me start with something not in any testimony, but that is an endorsement of some of the things you said, comairm mccaul and some of the things you said ramping member thompson in the opening statements. ic they are both true. as are many of the things this my dear friend joe lieberman said. chairman, you said that the terror threat is growing, and some are not paying adequate attention to that. the terror threat has changed from the 9/11 days. the core al qaeda, as i think you said, and i know senator lieberman said has been substantially destroyed by the efforts of two administrations. one a republican, one a democrat. and i think most people would agree that president obama not only continued the effort of president bush but increased those efforts against core al qaeda and most of

as he pointed out, i'm on the policy board, state department foreign policy board, dni board recently joined the homeland charity board where i will be hopefully if i jay johnson and his new role. i carrington lay about the policies here and getting them right. so at your bipartisan fashion, let me start with an anonymous testimony, but an endorsement of some of the things he's had, chairman mccaul and ranking member thompson in your defense because they are altered as are many of the things my good friend, joe lieberman, joe said. chairman mccaul, you said at the terror threat is growing and some are not paying adequate attention to that, the terror threat has changed from the 9/11 days. corelle qaeda as you said and i know senator lieberman said has been substantially destroyed by the efforts of two administrations. one a republican and white democrat. most people would agree that president obama not only continued the efforts of president bush, but he increased those against al qaeda and most high-value targets have been removed so it's less of a force. the terror threat is now a l

prior to the dni, he served with the national contest in service of the cia. he's the author of a very good book, kim il-sung, the creation of a legend, the building of regime. i read that book doing the research for doing my own book and site it quite bit in that book. he received his in a from graduate school of international studies. is a graduate of korean link which program at young state university and did his undergraduate at the university of maryland. sid, it's a pleasure to have you with us today. we will proceed as follows. he will have some comments to start a soft and then we'll have a bit of discussion and then we'll open it just for a couple of questions, in spite of the terrible weather while the rest of us will be going home after this, he goes back to work. he has a full day. sid, over to you. >> thank you for that kind introduction, victor. i thought i would take an opportunity to build some of the excellent discussions we had this morning to kind of look at the alliance going forward within context of largely to broad areas. first of all, w

so when you have a dni sitting in front of congress saying this is only affecting american citizens, however, factually accurate that might be, over six billion people around the world today -- and, actually, i'm not one of those. i think the way in which the president came out and directly confronted these issues is helpful to sort of taking this forward. >> yeah. so on the question of profiling, one of the principles that the presidential policy directive has made explicit and made universal is that the united states shall not collect signals intelligence for disadvantaging persons based on their ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation or religion. and i think that along with many of the other things here i go to the point that ian made. we have here the president speaking out on these issues. when this, you know, when the snowden disclosures came up, the president said he wanted to have a national and a global conversation about sr. vail lance -- surveillance and about privacy. it's a conversation that he wanted to be very engaged in, and i think that's reflected in the choice