starting with the fisa courts. my understanding that they were created in the 1970's, coming out of a recommendation which uncovered all sorts of abuses in the american intelligence program before that. the spying on martin luther king and all of that. to prevent that, they said they're going to create the special fisa court. how exactly does the fisa court work? can someone who is an intern or relatively young person like edward snowden or one of the american university students who are interning at nsa or cia, can they send an e-mail to the fisa court and say hey, i would like some data on this person? what is the process to have a fisa request? how is the request made and what is the process? >> the first thing to be said about the fisa court, it is incredibly odd. it exists. we are the only western democracy that takes these questions to the third branch of government. other countries, last time i checked that were democratic, like the united kingdom, issued these warrants within the ministries. it is a grand a

starting with the fisa courts. my understanding that they were created in the 1970's, coming out of a recommendation which uncovered all sorts of abuses in the american intelligence program before that. the spying on martin luther king and all of that. to prevent that, they said they're going to create this work -- the special fisa court. how exactly does the fisa court work? can someone who is an intern or relatively young person like edward snowden or one of the american university students who are interning at nsa or cia, can they send an e-mail to the fisa court and say hey, i would like some data on this person? what is the process to have a fisa request? how is the request made and what is the process? said aboutt thing the fisa court is incredibly odd. it exists. only western democracy that takes these questions to the third branch of government. other countries, last time i checked that were democratic, like the united kingdom, issued these warrants within the ministries. it is a grand american experiment t

was the rightre to go to fisa court on basis of reasonable suspicion to examine recordssave my phone has the test of ties and you could get my records, what the nsa has done has said they can get everybody's -- all americans e-mails, text, and telephone messages and follow them just on the basis of the law and its authorization. that is so overbroad and so disrespectful, that there is no end to what they can do. the second point is, it may be that some of the intelligence committee members had access to this information, but the american people did not have access to this information that there was this new nsa policy which essentially was authorizing a dragnet of all of our e-mails and telephone records. i think is an incredible self-serving stretch that shows an appalling disrespect to the constitution and the reasonable limits that have to be part of the balance of security and privacy. >> congress member, your bread in a letter to president obama -- you have written a letter to president obama. how is important to you and significant is it to you that you have gotten republicans

many people believe the nsa is doing the right thing under a law called fisa. >> what the nsa is doing is trying to implement something called the foreign intelligence surveillance act, fisa, which is designed to try to capture communications and information from foreigners who are believed to be trying to do harm to americans or the united states. >> i think fisa has a lot of problems. i have repeatedly, during my tenure in congress, voted to rein in and redefine the fisa courts and responsibilities. i think we have more work to do. if anything, all of the news we have all endured over these last months about the national security agency really tells us in a deep way that there are things we have to do to rein in and provide oversight as members of congress in what the responsibilities of the nsa are. >> the nsa's method is changed over time with the advancement of technology. >> the change in technology, the technology back then [indiscernible] there are occaional telegrams, but not much more than that. the nsa is pretty limited on who they can eavesdrop on. >> edward snowden release

there was no fisa debate over whether the nsa could or should gain access to the links between the data centers. that was taking place entirely outside the domestic surveillance law we have under presidential authority exclusively. that is actually an issue that i think deserves a lot more exploration because what we are seeing, one of the big benefits of the snowden disclosure over the last year is this heightened awareness of the nature of government surveillance. since 9/11, and as a result of advances in technology, we have seen a fundamental shift in approach moving from individualized warrants and other protections at the front and, to vast collection with limits on use at the back end. and at the same time there is this, because of the global nature of the networks, the communications of people like you and me are mixed in with communications of terrorists and legitimate foreign targets. so as a former directive of the nsa said, today there is no home game. there is no away game. there is just one game. and that raises questions of whether not those back and protections sufficien

i have read some fisa requests in the past.any preceding before a mutual armored or is going to be, in the long run, working better and better if there is a checking power and an advocate. hasnow that the fisa court a number of the decisions for the first time in their history. they said that certain programs were lawful. before, it was only individual warrants. we know that the first time that a judge consider that program in proceeding, ital was found to be unconstitutional. another one considered it shortly after and said that it was constitutional. that is the whole point. a contested perceiving tends to bring out the best evidence. in principle, i would before that. -- anm not in advocate advocate for individualized warrants. we do that and the criminalized system -- in the criminal system. number one, and happens less frequently. -- it happens less frequently. it has implications. you want the benefit of the avid serial process. -- adversarial process. what vice president cheney was referring to was two guys in san diego.

at the point where now where they're going to get a fisa order or warrant to look at this stuff, americans want to know just how many, how much of our information is looked at, how many americans are caught up in that. i think that's something that americans are entitled to know so they can decide for themselves if this is the right thing to do. i voted against both the 215 and 702 reauthorizations because i felt there wasn't enough transparency. i had co-sponsored transparency amendments to each of those. when they didn't pass, i voted against them. in the 702, that's getting, capturing the internet traffic of people, of nonamericans overseas who we are known to have some tie to terrorism. that is very, very important that we do that. i think it's absolutely crucial. but the statute says you're not supposed to take americans -- now, obviously, if a known bomb maker like in the subway bombing case is doing traffic with somebody in colorado and that guy is talking about bombing the new york subway, that's when it's good to be able to get his phone data, and that's when it's good -- so the f

my fisa to the white house says you need a strategic campaign to explain to the american public how the law has done it even going back to 2009 it is not that complicated. and we save pretty clearly fit to self-inflicted wounds that were a problem as a comprehensive communications strategy never executed of the law to the best of our abilities. >> i know that you have a day job. >> i vice president of global initiatives with medical ethics and health policy at university of pennsylvania. >> host: but just fantasizing would you go back if you were called to help tie up the loose ends? >> filled with those cnn air rose and slanderous attacks on dr. death to create a death panel. all of which were shown to be totally false. to improve the system for the american public how frustrating it is when you are a doctor you're frustrated given the skills that one of the things i could do was think of policies that have the likelihood of people think my skills that could help and no wings the down sides of the government servant even when they are false. that is minor and improving the system that

has a lot that fisa of problems. i have repeatedly during my voted to raipress fisad redefine the responsibilities. and i think we have more work to do. think if anything all the news that we've all endured over these last months about the national security agency really way thatin a deep there are things that we have to do to reign in and provide oversight as members of congress in what the responsibilities of n.s.a. are. >> the n.s.a.'s message has with thever time technology.of thehe change in technology, when --gy back (inaudible) they have a lot of gullies eves dropping on hard wired telephones in people's houses, technology was in favor days.vacy back in those it's easy to access internet and satellites community cases. >> snowden released thousands of documents that revealed the true the n.s.a. to everybody, not just the american public. >> i don't think with a he's done is ethical and right. i don't consider him to be a trait or because i don't think his purpose was to harm this country, i don't think that wa

there was no fisa debate about whether nsa should or could be given access. that has taken place entirely outside the domestic surveillance laws that we have under presidential authority exclusively. i mean, that is actually something that i think deserves a lot more explanation because, what we are seeing, one of the big benefits of the snowden disclosures over the past year is there is a heightened awareness of the nature of government surveillance. so sense 9/11, and as a result of advances in technology, we have seen a fundamental shift in approach moving from protections at the front-end to a vast collection with limits on use at the back end. at the same time there is this -- you know, because of a global nature of the networks, the communications of people like you and i are mixed in with communications of terrorists and legitimate foreign targets. so as the former deputy director of the nsa said, today there is no home game, no way game. there is just one game which raises questions of whether or not the back and protection sufficiently protect our pr

here, this was not the result of any public debate, there was no fisa debate over whether the nsa could or should gain access to the links between these data centers. taking placewas entirely outside the domestic surveillance walls we had under presidential authority exclusively. that deserves a lot more exploration, because what we are seeing, one of the big benefits of the snowden disclosures over the last year of theightened awareness nature of government surveillance. ofce 9/11, and as a result advances in technology, we have seen a fundamental shift in approach, moving from individualized warrants and other protections at the front end to vast collection with limits on use at the backend. because of thee, global nature of the networks, of you and me are mixed in with those of terrorists and foreign targets. the former director of the nsa said there is no home game or wait gain -- or away game, there is just the game. >> of course the companies have lose concerning the reputation. >> one additional thing the hislosures helped motivate investment in security, both on the back and fro

there's no fisa court to oversee it. them to break into data centers? americansot targeting for specific pieces of legislation, they are not targeting us, but incidentally, there collecting substantially all of -- they are passing through their collection systems all of the content of our internet. what we were trying to explain before is that google, yahoo!, some of the other companies, they have these giant facilities all over the world. they have biometric locks and guards. they look like giant factories filled with computer servers. there's one in ireland and hong kong and singapore. they are across the north american continent. if you sit on the cable that synchronizes the data centers, it is the same thing as if you reached into the data center. it is ok with us to say that the nsa will collect that will from all of our communications in the service of its foreign intelligence mission. that is a big public policy question that needs to be debated. that is what we are looking to do. >> just to touch on public policy. there's also this disconnect be

. >> fisa i will limit my term. six years. i did not want to become a part of it. you know, which is not a career you already counted yourself house a you can see the finish line to give it everything you have got you don't think intel after the next election when they said the republican congress i said paid to do it now. >> what is the heritage position and/or your position? >> i don't condemn folks you don't limit their own terms. for me it's was important for my own peace of mind to decide will not become a permanent fixture in washington. but i still think it is the best reform that could happen. the past to happen at the state level and i can tell you from visiting legislatures where they have term limits while it is not a perfect scenario it is much better than those who are tied in with so bobby community. you don't get marco rubio pushing their way to the senate. he was the the term limit out and wanted to continue to serve. it pushes the bright people in to federal officers and inmates at a harder for the old guys to defend themselves use steve brand paul

there's no fisa court to oversee it. is it ok for them to break into data centers? they are not targeting americans for specific pieces of legislation, they are not targeting us, but incidentally, there collecting substantially all of -- they are passing through their collection systems all of the content of our internet. what we were trying to explain before is that google, yahoo!, some of the other companies, they have these giant facilities all over the world. they have biometric locks and guards. they look like giant factories filled with computer servers. there's one in ireland and hong kong and singapore. they are across the north american continent. if you sit on the cable that synchronizes the data centers, it is the same thing as if you reached into the data center. it is ok with us to say that the nsa will collect that will from all of our communications in the service of its foreign intelligence mission. that is a big public policy question that needs to be debated. that is what we are looking to do. >> just to touch on public policy. there's also this di

voted to reindly in and redefine the fisa court responsibility. i think we have more work to do. news weing, all of the have endured about the national usurity agency really tells in a deep way that there are things we have to do to rein in and provide oversight, as members of congress, what the responsibilities of the nsa are. method has changed over time with the advancement of technology. >> it has changed enormously because of the change in technology. the technology what i wrote my first book was simply telephones that hung from wires in people's houses, and that was about it. there were occasional telegrams, but not much more than that. so -- the nsae was limited in what they could eavesdrop on. technology was in favor of privacy back in those days. technology favors eavesdropping because it is very easy to access internet communications, satellite communications, micro communications. >> edward snowden release thousands of documents that revealed the true nature of nsa to everyone, not the american public. >> i do not think what he is done is ethical and right. i do not co

section 215 records program and section 702 with fisa, part of which is called prism. and the head of nsa last year on the hill came out and said that the program contributed to forging over 50 attacks, terrorist attacks. then senators pushed back on that. the clarified, seven of two, prison, was responsible for thwarting most of -- a lot that or overseas. section 215, which obama said he wants to end, was responsible or would have had a role in may be only 12 of those domestically and also may be only one in which it actually yielded some information that was useful to an investigation, and that one case involved a san diego cabdriver material support of terrorism for sending money to somalia which did not involve an attack on the u.s. and all or any attack that was ever carried out, which led not only to surveillance review boards to conclude that the program was not essential to preventing terrorist attacks, but also the privacy, civil liberties and an oversight board said it had not contributed in one case of preventing an attack. >> clearly from time to time the g

the proof is in the pudding and that there is been 30 years of fisa court decisions in an humiliatinglymall number of demands by the u.s. government to be surveilled that every been rejected by the court. it is purely fictitious it exerts any oversight over the surveillance regime. >> what is in your latest to medication with edward snowden? -- what is your latest communication with edward snowden? >> i don't think it is any secret that i talk to him regularly. i feel like a lot of what we do has an impact on him. choices that we make can have an influence on how he's perceived or even what his legal situation is. we certainly talked about our plans to come back, and he was very supportive of that. russia the situation in is what it is basically been for the last eight months, which is in a country that he did not choose to be in, that he was was forced to be in by u.s. taking his passport. but at the same time, the alternative, as imperfect as it may be, is preferable to the alternative of not being in russia, which is being put into a super max prison in the u.s. for the next 30 years

i face the same question rise in the white house in 1978 when we passed the so-called fisa act. that prevented any intelligence agency of the united states from into think with one single telephone call of one q. mutation of an american citizen unless an objective jury said this was a threat to our security. that prevailed pretty much until 9/11 and then they begin to liberalize this, and laws were passed by the u.s. congress, most of which were not even read by anybody who didn't should in the intelligence committees, and the rest of the congress didn't know what was there. when it passed the law that still had some restrictions in it, there's no doubt in my mind that nsa went much further than the law permitted, and now i think we are making some -- >> said ask you the question i think a lot of people wonder, if he were president today and it was within your power as president to issue a pardon to edward snowden, whose revelations these activities will lead all of us to know what the nsa has been collecting about us and about people, would you do that? would you offer a pardon

we caught passed the so-called fisa act in that prevented any intelligence agency in the united states from interfering with one single telephone call or one communication of an american citizen in less than objective jury juries that this was the threat to our security. that prevailed pretty much until 9/11 and then it began to liberalize this and laws were passed by the u.s. congress most of which were not even read by anybody has served on the intelligence committees. when they passed the law they still had some restrictions in it. no doubt in my mind that the nsa went much further than law permitted and now. >> so to ask if the question that i think a lot of people wonder, if you were president today and it was within your power as president to issue a pardon to edward snowden whose revelations of these activities lead all of us to know what the nsa has been collecting about us and about people, would you do that? would you offer a pardon to snowden? >> no, because you haven't -- can't convict someone who hasn't been tried and convicted. if i were president and he decided decided t

it's fisa -- pfizer could be renewing discussions to renew astrazeneca. all these tensions over at ukraine. >> yes. overall we are looking at a down day and perhaps just to put that into context. when you look at what's happening on this flat section for these big banks that have reported earnings here in hong kong, certainly is a little bit optimistic. we're just about flat here. fairly decent, i guess some analysts are describing these latest set of results from these chinese banks. obviously you're seeing profit growth. perhaps of course if these banks keep lending more it will hide the fact that it should be rising higher. that's a topic for another conversation. now, we'll stay in china. the banks were the only ones reporting a decent set of results. insurers, for example, china life here, you see the stock reaction for today. first quarter net, they're falling close to 30%. it's the same story if you look across the brokerages, the steel income 7% drop in net here, for example. angang steel is down. in hong kong, we're looking at first quarter net d

how is that structure being implemented under the modified order and how is the fisa court approving the queries under the modified order? are doing so pursuant to the orders of the president, which i think are entirely reasonable. it does not have an impact on our ability to make good use of that tool. you go to court, present the case we make using the reasonable articulable suspicion standard. we now limit the action that we take to two hops. the way in which we are now proceeding is consistent with andpresident's direction our obligation to keep the american people safe. court approving those queries of the data under this modified order? >> the court is presented with a -- ast, a statement of statement by the department that we feel that reasonable articulable suspicion has been met and then we make a determination about whether they agree or disagree. the order is then signed. subject, to another this question about the application for grants. the office of violence against has recently announced changes to its grant limitation process for 2014, which limits the grant applicant

intelligence community, passing intelligence authorization acts and improving cybersecurity and reforming fisa be willing to come before the committee even after you retired. your service to this country over 30 years has been exemplary and we owe people you and in cia led especially those employed in the hot spots around the world a tremendous debt of gratitude. mr. chairman, and i yield back. >> thank you for the kind words, mr. ruppersberger. we have continued to work in bipartisan way and continue to that you will be ranking member and i will be chairman. thank you for that. before turning to our witness, as this is an investigative hearing we're going to swear the witness in before he testifies. this is the prerogative of every committee chair it has not been custom here at the intelligence committee. so while it is always against the law to provide false statements to congress, the act of swearing in a witness impresses upon him or her the gravity of the proceeding and the need to tell the full and complete truth. so with that, i would ask mr. morell if you would please stand. and hold o

we have the nsa mass surveillance which has the secret fisa court.there is a long tradition in this country of secret jurisprudence, and it is kept secret. for me the biggest this point has not been the lawyers but also the politicians, because we write off bush who was willing to torture and disappear after 9/11. what was disappointing to me was how much of the bus policy obama has been willing to continue, really because he has not been willing to pay the political price to end it. torture, buthe churc has fought the prosecution of the torture. it is only with the fight with the senate intelligence pity that maybe we will see a report on the bush torture, but we are a long ways from prosecution. obama could have moved the 9/11 suspects to new york to prosecute them. instead he succumbed to the pressure from the right wing and we are going through this endless charade in guantanamo with the commission which frankly the trials that have long been over and people would have been fairly convicted, we are nowhere near that happening in guantÁnamo. the f

now, in taking a look at what the fisa court said a few years ago in 2011, they observe the 250acquires more than million internet communications each year pursuant to section seven of two. that was in 2011. i want to probe how it could be that we would collect this data looking at foreign purses on a persons on a 51% basis of confidence that the person is abroad and query for u.s. persons. how does that comply with the fourth amendment? has been donethat is consistent with the fourth amendment. that only goes part of the way. the president has said because we can do certain things does not mean that we should do them. we look at 215, proposed modifications that have indicated looking at sections of 72, and we are going to have modifications we are going to propose there as well. >> let me ask you in terms of whether you think we have legal or constitutional limits in receiving information on american citizens in the united states that have been collected allies, forfrom our example, britain or canada or australia's security forces. is there any prohibition constitutionally in receiving

for the ability, as we have now, in a variety of other fisa circumstances, the ability to get informationon an emergency basis with collapse some subsequent court approval, and review. just to ensure that we can have all the tools that we need to keep the american people safe, and to deal with those emergency situations, where they might arise. >> thank you, mr. attorney general. mr. chairman, do i have time for another question? [ inaudible ] >> then i yield back. >> and i just want -- i'm going to miss the vote. i want to defend dr. harris. i think the charter schools tuitions, the voucher, is really important. i've been in some of the schools in the district of columbia. it is making a difference. in my old neighborhood in philadelphia where mr. fattah knows well, that's an opportunity for kids in the inner city to get an education. i was the first in my family to go to college. an education gave me, so i think mr. harris, dr. harris is passionate about that, and so, in defending dr. harris, i think that's what he was concerned about. we don't have to go into it. >> let me just make cl

more pressing work passing intelligence authorization act and improving cyber security and reforming fisa. in the meantime let me say thank you for coming before the committee even after you have retired. your service to this country for over 30 years has been exemplary and we all owe you especially those deployed in hot spots around the world a debt of gratitude. i thank you and yield back. >> thank you for the kind words and the one thing is we have worked in a bipartisan way we will continue to do that the remaining months that i know you will be ranking member and i will be chairman thank you for that. before turning to our witness, as this is an investigative hearing we are going to swear the witness in before he testifies. this is the prerogative of every committee chair it has not been the custom here at the intelligence committee. so while it is always against the law to provide false statements to congress, the act of swearing? a witness impressing upon him or her the gravity of the proceeding and the need to tell the full and complete truth. so with that, i would ask mr. morell

to wiki leaks and i and other nations and groups around the world they just cut russia off from the fisa massacred now that works once or twice and then people start to say well why do we need to be dependent on this and in fact putin said it's a great shame that some companies have taken a decision on certain restrictions i think will simply lead to a loss of certain segments of the market for them and a rather profitable market at that right so visa has started a war with russia. i'm not sure what gives them the right to start a war i thought maybe the president or congress are somebody and politics would start the war but apparently visa is now starting wars west g. seven and the g. eight are gene nine g. eight one it's only one country now they've got all the gas state thanks think thank you stacey i'm going to put my visa card into a plastic bag and send it to us it's actually actually i did say to the second to all of our. largest consumer of the seas and i see what many in the country is the federal government simply say the property of the united states government. is the united