those also point to the fsb. there is both remnants left behind and pathways leading back to moscow. mark: julian assange had some fairly obvious links with russian. i know witnesses involved in the original discussions with edward snowden in hong kong and then he went to moscow. they said, julian assange personally arranged for him to go to moscow in the company of sarah harrison, julian assange's girlfriend. a talk show on the russian international government supported propaganda station. he claims he did not get money directly from the russian government. james: that just means it went through a middleman. host: let's say all this information we are seeing, if it were in the u.s. postal service in a letter, would it be illegal to publish it? has given thernet russians and others opportunities they did not have before. if you think about pre-internet elections, they would have had to send hundreds of agents with bags of money. it would have been detectable. they would've had to do a watergate style break in whi

regulators at least in part rely on fsb but fsb is not subject to procedural due process. so i think we have ab interest here, starting with fsoc rather than starting with other end swiss-based fsb where we end up without notice and comment or prohibitions on arbitrary and capricious actions and work to accommodate europeans rather than the other way around, given the impact designation can have on a company, why utilize a process that lacks some basic protections here. why don't we reverse that process? >> well, congressman, we do it the way you want to do it. only made on u.s.-based procedures. fsb is a policy shaping not an action determining body. it's not binding on nations but it does help bring other countries closer to meeting our standards and i think it's good for us to have other countries with high regulatory standards. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes gentleman from georgia mr. scott. >> secretary lew, i want to go back to the iranian discussion for moment, from another perspective. we all agree the ira

those also point to the fsb. so there's both remnants left behind and pathways leading back to moscow. >> and also julian assange has some fairly obvious links with russia in the sense that, i mean, i know witnesses, for example, who are involved in the original discussions with edward snowden in hong kong when he went there, and then he went to moscow, and they said julian assange personally arranged for edward noden to go to -- snowden to go to moscow in the company of this woman, sarah harrison who was, in fact, julian assange's girlfriend. and julian as imaginesanqe at ot had a talk show, he claims i guess that he didn't get money directly from the russian government. i don't know. >> guest: that just means it went through a middleman. >> right. >> host: so let's say all this information that we're seeing, if it were in the u.s. postal service in a sealed letter, would with it be illegal to publish it? >> guest: the internet has given the russians and others opportunities they did not have are before. if you

give me an example where your treasury colleagues rejected or resisted fsb initiative? >> fsb only makes decisions by consensus. it doesn't get to the decision ifitis noot consensus. we drive that process -- >> you never objected? >> no. i didn't say -- >> can you give me some example? >> i've got 10 seconds left. we are happy to get back to you in writing. >> yield back. >> gentle lady yields back. i'd like to thank the secretary for his testimony today. all members will have five legislative days to submit additional written questions for the witness to the chair which will be forwarded to the witness for his response. we would ask mr. secretary that you respond as promptly as you are able, without objection, all members will have five legislative days within which to submit extraneous materials to the chair for inclusion in the record. this hearing stands adjourned. >>> c-span brings more debates this week from key u.s. senate races. tonight, three debates starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. first from pennsylvania, incumbent republican pat too maniy faces the d

because we know wikileaks is a front for putin's fsb.t's why assange specific think requested russian bodyguards in the ecuadorian embay three years ago. keep in mind the kremlin affected the democratic party right before the convention by getting debbie wasserman-schultz fired by dumping the emails. they did it right before to build outrage. here we are less than 35 days from the election? is that right? it's either private emails about her parkinsons, maybe, that some say she is hiding, or some other affliction. and this is far more likely. diplomatic emails from her private server communicating directly with heads of state about contribution to the clinton global initiative which we know happened for convenience sake. they conflated classified government work with pimping for donation for the foundation. bill has been keeping his pimp hand strong on the foundation. obviously they were a tandem set on this. kennedy: she has had as much involvement with russia as her campaign saying donald trump has had. and, you know, her assertion has

to find the computers that the attack was launched that those point to the fsb. with the pathways leading back to moscow. >> but in that sense those that were involved of those original discussions with the edward snowden but in the company of this woman to have the talk-show it don't get money from the russian government to go through the middleman. >> all of the information that we are seeing with the u.s. postal service in a sealed letter is that illegal to publish that could. >> given that the russians and others have an opportunity they did not have before to think about the internet elections there would have to spend dozens or hundreds of agents with bags of money and easily detected. by watergate style break-in see you can pack and get data to cover your traced to some extent it would not have worked without the internet. and we have not seen the court but whatever has happened. >> i certainly have been reporting that myself but the literally it is tiny by comparison. >> that is a good question it is clearly illegal and the argument is that wikileaks is r

>> fsb only makes decisions by con se consensus. >> you never objected? >> no. >> can you give me some example? >> i've got 10 seconds left. we are happy to get back to you in writing. >> i'd like to thank the secretary for his testimony today. all members will have five legislative days to submit additional written questions for the witness to the chair which will be forwarded to the witness for his response. we would ask mr. secretary that you respond as promptly as you are able, without objection, all members will have five legislative days within which to submit extraneous materials to the chair for inclusion in the record. this hearing stands adjourned. >>> on cspan3 we'll take you live next to the national press club in washington. european organization invited to look at u.s. election preparations and rules is holding a briefing at the press club to talk about their operations so far. this group met with state and federal officials, political parties and media and others. live coverage here on cspan3. >> to observe the november 8 general elections

regulators at least in part rely on fsb but fsb is not subject to procedural due process. so i think we have ab interest here, starting with fsoc rather than starting with other end swiss-based fsb where we end up without notice and comment or prohibitions on arbitrary and capricious actions and work to accommodate europeans rather than the other way around, given the impact designation can have on a company, why utilize a process that lacks some basic protections here. why don't we reverse that process? >> well, congressman, we do it the way you want to do it. only made on u.s.-based procedures. fsb is a policy shaping not an action determining body. it's not binding on nations but it does help bring other countries closer to meeting our standards and i think it's good for us to have other countries with high regulatory standards. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes gentleman from georgia mr. scott. >> secretary lew, i want to go back to the iranian discussion for moment, from another perspective. we all agree the ira

those also point to the fsb. so there's both remnants left behind and pathways leading back to moscow. >> also julian assange had some fairly obvious links with russia in the sense that, i know what this is for example, were involved in the original discussion with edward snowden in hong kong when he went there and then went to moscow. they said, julian assange personally arranged for edward snowden to go to moscow, and the company of this woman named sarah harrison was, in fact, julian assange his girlfriend. julian assange also one point had a talk show on the russian international government supported propaganda station. he claims i guess he didn't give money directly from the russian government. gas but that just means it went through a middleman. >> host: let's say all this information that we are seeing, if they were in the u.s. postal service in a sealed letter, would it be illegal to publish it? >> guest: the internet has given russians and others opportunities they did not have before. if you think about

there's no way for us to know once a document comes that comes through the fsb, how much is authentic, how much of it is edited, weird, fachlkt since we don't really know, how much confidence can we have in the content? >> well, you can have zero confidence. actually it was july 27th that we made the pronunciation that when you hack information from your opponent, let's say your russian intelligence, what you want to do is get a stream of real information, but within that stream you're going have selectively edited or selectively timed releases of data which will make your opponent look bad. some of that is real but within that stream of real there's always false documents. we've already seen false documents edited by the fsb and trump supporters. >> you know, i want to play -- marco rubio, of course no fan of hillary clinton and he's only a new fan of donald trump, he talked a little bit about wikileaks and his own discomfort with it. let's take a listen to marco rubio. >> i personally will not be talking about any revelations that come about solely as a result of wikileaks. our inte

yet fsb is not subject to the procedural due process. so i think we have an interest here in starting with fsoc rather than starting at the other end with european and swiss base to fsb where we end up without notice and comment or prohibitions on arbitrary and capricious actions. then we work to accommodate the europeans rather than the other way around. given the impact a designation can have on a company, why not reverse that process? >> the only designations we make we make based on u.s. procedures. it is a policy shaping, not an action determining body. it's not binding on nations, but it does help bring other countries closer to our standards. i think it is good for us to have other countries have hig r regulatory standards. >> the chairman recognizes, mr. scott. >> secretary lew, i want to go back to iranian discussion for a moment, but from another perspective. we all agree that the iranian agreement is done. it's there whether you agree with it or not, but here's my concern. we all must agree as a result right now iran stands fl

there's a lot of interesting stuff in the fsb operation, also known as wikileaks, but it's not the kind of thing to move the needle. i look at the obama care premiums, willie. i see in pennsylvania they are averaging in excess of 20% rate hikes. they are going up in florida, skyrocketing in minnesota. donald trump is not going to win minnesota, but there are other places where exchanges are shooting up. i also define the election as more than presidential. senator pat toomey, who is ahead in any reelection bid, kelly ayotte, who is tied in new hampshire. ahead, roy blunt in missouri. joesh even ron johnson in wisconsin is coming back. if i had to look at the whole election, republicans have a lot to focus on in order to security the house and maintain the republican majority. if mr. trump really focuses like a laser, they didn't get to keep their second doctor or second plan, there's an o number, the gap is closing. >> he 'only got about 2 1/2 more weeks. we've been talking about the cubs this morning. you're a cleveland, the tribe hasn't won since 1948. how about a prediction, hugh? >>

you can trace to russia would not be happening if in fact it had not been, this is not freelanced by fsb or anybody else? statement saidr this is coming from the highest levels of the russian government. i will not embellish that statement. anymore. charlie: only talk about a response -- when we talk about a proportionate response, the vice president said putin will know but i hope others will not know. james: he said something along the lines of if and when we do something it will be a time and place of our choosing. it may not be necessarily a symmetrical- response. it may be asymmetrical. charlie: there is the sense they are not paying a price for this. james: maybe not yet. charlie: maybe after the election. james: i am not going to preempt, is a policy issue -- it is a policy issue when we do it, it is not a intelligence issue. charlie: you know things. [laughter] don't you? james: and 84 days it will have my brainwashed. thelie: it is said president is worried about an escalation of this kind with all the dangers there is, both in terms of hacking but also in terms of cyber. -- cyb

a very brave fsb officer. we even had broadcast interpretation of homeland in russia where, again, another fsb was fighting against a muslim terrorist. this is very important. the message is translated everywhere. only the good guys are the security guys. even else, special business are corrupt and bad militias. that is the common message you receive on tv. so definitely the the political message is communicating types of shapes and forms. now, as to our other question who controls and who specifically implements these policies, putin definitely is not, you know, holding his hand on every single thing that's going on. in fact, he's the one responsible for the general trend. but then we have an administration with a bunch of people responsible for interpreting, implementing this trend. and by the way, as ana pointed out, it is very off on the keys that the serve ants the officials trying to serve the president or interpret his narrative correctly, his message correctly, they off, as we do sometimes. and it is g

those things you could trace to russia would not be happening if, in fact -- is not freelanced by fsb or anybody else? >> i believe our statement said we believe the direction of ths is coming from the highest levels of the russian government. >> rose: i was hoping you would enlarge on that. >> i'm not going to embellish that statement any more. >> rose: when we talk about a proportionate response, the vice president said putin will know, but i hope others will not know. >> well, i think he said something along the lines of if and when we do something, it will with -- it will be the time and place of our choosing. it may not necessarily be a symmetrical response. may be asymmetrical. >> rose: but there is also a sense that they are not paying a price for this. >> well, maybe not yet. >> rose: maybe after the election? >> well, again, i'm not going to preempt -- i mean, it's a policy issue about what we do, if anything, and when we do it. that's not an intelligence issue. >> rose: but you know things. ( laughter ) don't you? >> well, 84 days, i'll have my brainwashed. ( laughter ) >>

and i've written about this extensively in my book, which is a book mainly about vladimir putin, the fsb/kgb and how they have co-opted donald trump in his campaign and have been carrying out a cyber and political warfare operation against the united states. donald trump, over the years, has been inundated with friendship from people in russia, real billionaires with hundreds of billio of dollars and he has bought into their entire ideology. he has bought into their political beliefs, he's bought into the belief that they are, like him, the saviours of western civilization against islam. for trump to buy into that, that requires him to give up all of of the traditional standings that the united states has had for 70 years, a belief in the systems of nato, the european union and free markets in the west and russia should be able to do anything it wants. between him and his aides, who surround him, all of whom have links to russia, they have either wittingly or unwittingly been co-opted. i don't believe he's an agent of russia like former cia director or deputy director mike morales said.

military intelligence, they used to be called gru, and the other group, which we actually tied to the fsbthe successor to the kgb, their primary intelligence agency. i actually think that they did not plan to start leaking. with us going public, completely accelerated their timeline. they panicked and said, we need a distribution channel. why don't we go to wikileaks? >> and because wikileaks is wikileaks, it's like having something appear on the front page of a big newspaper. and then we suddenly realized that this was sort of old-style russian information warfare. >> that's exactly what it is. it's information operation. and that's how the russians actually think of cyber. they think about it, how do we use cyberto weaken our opponent's defenses psychologically. the goal is not just to try to influence the election in favor of one candidate or the other, but to discredit the process. >> you don't have to hack all 50 states. all you need to do is create enough chaos, maybe in the voter registration rolls, you show up, sorry, your name's not on the list. that happens to a thousand people

number of ministers and of course, christine was there from the imf and mark carney was there from fsb. look, everybody agrees that this is a problem especially because one obvious consequence is what do we do with the unemployed? you know, and one of them said, this is a fiscal problem. yeah, yeah, absolutely, it's a fiscal problem, but it's a much bigger problem if you just treat it with protectionism. because, this is not the problem. this is not what is causing the unemployment. of course, there is unemployment due to imports. but that's less than 20%. what about the other 80-something? how are you going to handle that? it's not going to disappear now. it's easier to blame trade from the boc, than to say we have a flawed system of education. we have a flawed system of social security. we have a flawed-- we have flawed domestic policies, but it's a soul searching that it's difficult to me, to make. so, it's not the problem in the u.s. only. it's a global problem. every single person that i talked to, particularly in advanced economies, they all face the same, the same problem. >> it

>> you kip -- the sort of the new version of kgb, so new kgb, fsb in russia has been using all of theseermining tactics to try to stoke right-wing movements all across europe and it's had a really detabd destabilizing across the continent. they did it in ukraine. >> i think they're trying to find democratic equality equivalence across the globes. we have problems with our elections, and their elections are -- >> joy and i were discussing this actually before, and when i came on, chris, i stand corrected. i was right that this is about something bigger. i was wrong that it is something so small as a television network. they have much grander ambitions. >> who's they? >> steve bannon, the people behind donald trump. why do you see nijel farage, at all the spin rooms? i think they see potential for a movement that in some ways transsends our borders. >> how they keep it a lie by denying the results of the election? >> it's multipronged. this is a moment -- a critical moment of educated republicans who care about our democracy to put aside party and to start speaking out and i think we're s

that's the -- that's what the cia and kgb or fsb as it's called what they're supposed to do.ifferent about this is using that data to influence our internal democratic processes as they did when they gave this data to wikileaks and then influenced what happened, you know, ultimately removing from power the head of the dnc. >> secretary clinton has talked about this. president obama has as well. what are the implications of trying to influence a u.s. election if that is, in fact, what is happening. >> well, i just want to underscore how unprecedented this is. we've never had a situation like this in my memory, most certainly not from the russians, and the fact, know -- this is very serious that a foreign government would try to change our electoral processes. i think the first step is what the obama administration did yesterday. to attribute this to russia. that's important as a deterrent and the second is to educate the american people about possible other things that may happen between now and november, including two things that worry me the most -- one, e-mails that are rel

where did meeting at the imf and mark carney head of the fsb looking at ways to stop the de-risking process. some of it may be technology-driven and maybe there are changes in revelations and rules. >> we have gone through a. radical transformation of our company really refocusing our company but that being said we went to the price is operating in 100 countries. there are those businesses sell in our case we had certain consumer segments to your point that were below scale and around our lack of ability realistically to buy growth and a low were longer environment and hypercompetitive environment. it's tough to organically grow and we did a. disciplined capitol allocation of where we could take that n. employ it in december and meant it in some of those cases and those businesses we have tried to recycle that capitol back into other areas of our business and move away from those things that we didn't see over the immediate or longer-term. .. >> the automated unified utilities to make it better for us and for clients. we need governments a notch as the governance in the united states to com

that fancy bear is the gru, the military intelligence agency of russia and cozy bear is tied to the fsbtelligence agency, domestic intelligence agency that's the successor to the kgb. you have to assume that they're getting orders directly from the russian government. in fact the intelligence community here in the u.s. on friday declared that they believe that the orders are coming from the highest level of the russian government. >> do you assume that these latest wikileaks that we're seeing almost every day and we're getting even more today are coming from russia? >> i can't speak to all the leaks, but certainly some of the information wikileaks has put out is a result of the hacks into the dnc and dccc that hired crowdstrike to investigate, so we have to assume that they were given that information by someone. perhaps the russians, perhaps someone else. >> how much better are we getting at combatting this? are defenses superior to what they were recently or good enough perhaps to actually be a real problem for the russians? >> well, it's still a huge problem because when you look at

from global financial risks, we have worked very hard with international parties and the g20 and the fsb to raise international standards. you were has made a lot of progress. they've moved towards a resolution system that is still in development. it's moved a baby step towards an fdic-like system. they still have work to do i think europe's financial institutions are much stronger than they were in the recent ecb stress tests established that. but we've been clear for years pressing they need to do more. we took very dramatic action in this country and i think it's helped stabilize not just our financial system but our economy and confidence in our economy and i hope that we see around the world more pressure. the danger is complacency. you can hear in the united states let's roll back dodd/frank, ease up on regulations, you hear in the other places as well. this would be the wrong moment to think you take your foot off the gas or maybe you'll reverse. one thing we know for sure is risks don't just stop, they change, they have new manifestations of where they're coming from and how you

we've worked very hard with international parties and the g 20 and fsb to raise international standards. europe has made a lot of progress. europe has raised capital and moved toward a resolution system that is still in development. they still have work to do. i think they are much stronger, europe's financial institutions much stronger than it were. -- than they were. we have been clear they need to do more. we've taken dramatic action in our country, and i think it has increased confidence in our economy. i hope we see more pressure around the world. the danger is complacency. the danger is almost a decade away from the financial crisis, you can hear the united states, dodd roll back. frank -- frank. ease up on regulations. this would be the wrong moment to take your foot off the gas, or go into reverse. one thing we know for sure is that risks don't stop. they change and have many manifestations. that we made for the decades before the financial crisis was not thinking ahead. you need to keep your eye on risks of the future and adopt to it. sometimes it means changing what you've don

global financial risks, we have worked very hard with international part please go the g20 and the fsb to raise international standards. you were has made a lot of progress. they've moved towards a resolution system that is still in development. it's moved a baby step towards an fdic-like system. they still have work to do i think europe's financial institutions are much stronger than they were in the recent ecb stress tests established that. but we've been clear for years pressing they need to do more. we took very dramatic action in this country and i think it's helped stabilize not just our financial system but our economy and confidence in our economy and i hope that we see around the world more pressure. the danger is comply sei compla. you can hear in the united states let's roll back dodd/frank, ease up on regulations, you hear in the other places as well. this would be the wrong moment to think you take your foot off the gas or maybe you'll reverse. one thing we know for sure is risks don't just stop, they change, they have new men fas stations of where they're coming from and