Skip to main content

tv   Homeland Security Undersecretary Confirmation Hearing  CSPAN  January 14, 2022 8:02pm-9:45pm EST

8:02 pm
♪♪ >> a front row seat to democracy. ♪♪ >> senate intelligence committee, kenneth weinstein to serve as undersecretary for intelligence and analysis. mr. weinstein previously served as homeland security advisor in the george w. bush administration. [inaudible conversations]
8:03 pm
[inaudible conversations] >> if you could take your seats, i call this hearing to order and welcome mr. weinstein, great to see you. welcome to elizabeth and three of her daughters, mattie and natalie. an intern for the committee last
8:04 pm
summer and we were grateful for her service. i understand your daughter ellie, at berkeley law school is watching remotely and i would ask that you give us evidentiary proof that she did actually tooted for this couple with hours and hopefully if she's ywatching now she is appropriately embarrassed so we will see in the aftermath. i want to commend before -- i want to commend youn on your excellent judgment as evidenced by your attending living in the commonwealth we will question your choice of law school but congrats on your nomination to serve as undersecretary for intelligence and analysis or ina of the department of homeland security. this position sits at a critical juncture between the analytic detail community and information sharing role of the department of homeland security. if confirmed, your job would be to receive and analyze intelligence and lawe enforcemt
8:05 pm
related to homeland security and throughout the department as well as partners at the federal, state and local travel departments and agencies. you come to the hearing with a strong background of intelligence and law enforcement professional, who served our country throughout careers, prosecutor at the highest level through the fbi, general counsel and director more u.s. attorney district and first ever assistant attorney general of the d.o.j.'s national securityi, vision. as homeland security advisor to president bush, you have virtually ever job across the justice and homeland security so the pack after a decade in private practice you've made ths decision to return to public service, i think it is important. in the conversation beforepr th, your appointment comes at a pivotal moment and clearly has
8:06 pm
some challenges while the find and continues to evolve and mature since the creation a he the aftermath of 9/11 and for many of us on the committee there is absent ina recently has been a bit unfocused and stepped between 12 missions national intelligence and departmental priorities. we have some members, we are very unhappy with thehe operatis in 2020 and disappointed i and i provided next to no warning what was to come january 6. we just hadt the one year anniversary of that date and recognition of what domestic violence extremists can do from either end of the political spectrum i believe needs to be a focus on the work. obviously at the same time the domestic violence extremists more first amendment protects americans rights to free speech and nonviolence peaceful
8:07 pm
protests and part of your role to defend the constitution and amendment rights as head of dhs intelligence operations at the center of those two protecting the country and for constitution and i would like to hear today how you hope t navigate important work while not politicizing the activities and for the record, the who's who law enforcement and intelligence officials supporting your nomination for both political parties, a good endorsement you are the right guy at the right time. thank you for appearing at the committee before the committee this afternoon and look forward to your testimony. >> thank you for being hereit ad your willingness to serve as secretary for intelligence and analysis for the department of
8:08 pm
homeland security. the chairman has gone through your public service records, we have all of the same challenges we had when you left and were in public service and ife you have emerged that are relatively new in scale and scope, scott's to the chinese communist party threat and the plan which is now clear to work to dominate the technology in international order. i'm curious to hear your use i would hope to hear about how yu are sure dhs intelligence analysis is used recently perceived which is important to proceed to be used by either party.
8:09 pm
use for purposes of political advantage that is out of time in a broader price of confidence an institution in the country but none more damaged over the last few years in the intelligence community so it's more important than ever we do everything possible to ensure those perception and reality i see operates beyond the policy so both policymakers the american public are confident in their assessment israel. thank you for being here and look forward to hearing your testimony in excess of the question. >> i now ask unanimous consent that letters of support for the nominee included in the record and i would simply say can scott
8:10 pm
letters from who's who across law enforcement and criminal justice believers in his list of supporters from national security and intel, i won't go down the wholean list but my colleagues and ghosts tuning in includes alexander chambers, mike mcconnell, mike morel, tom ridge and a host of others so very impressive group. >> one concerns me deeply -- for the record, that's a joke. that would be a tough book to a nomination. >> without objection, i will submit for the record. will the witness please stand and raise your rightht hand. do you solemnly swear to give the committee the truth, full truth and nothing but the truth so help you out? please be seated.
8:11 pm
before moving to opening statement, i will ask you to answer five standard questions the committee poses to each nominee who appears before us. they just require a simple yes or no fororea the record. you agree to appear before the committee here are other venues invited? >> yes, i do. >> do you agree to send officials from the office to appear before thehe committee designated staff? >> yes. >> do you agree to provide documents or any other materials requested by the committee in order for it to carry out its oversight and legislative response abilities? >> yes. >> will you and truck your office and staff provide to the materials when requested? >> yes. >> you agree to fully inform to the fullest extent possible all> members of the committee rather than simply chairman and vice chairman? >> yes. >> thank you and i will proceed your openingf statement, members for five minutes by seniority.
8:12 pm
>> members of the committee, i am honored to appear before you today as the nominee for undersecretary for intelligence analysis of the department of homeland security. i'm joined my wife elizabeth and emy daughters, cecily and natale and i wouldt like to recognize y daughter ali who is watching this back at school today. it means a lot to me there with me today and it meant a lot to me they've been with me throughout my e career. i'm grateful to president biden for giving me this opportunity to serve in our unit to work with his strong team. i'm grateful to him you were looking beyond political objecto selecting someone who previously served in the administration, small but important way as a affirmation to national security and traditionally has been and must always remain the principal
8:13 pm
of our government. that is the same nonpartisan approach i took during my 21 years in government service. i served as a federal prosecutor for a dozen years doing a range of homicide, can conspiracy criminal cases and doing so without any consideration of politics and with a clear focus on protecting civil liberties and due process rights. i pivoted after the 9/11 attacks focus primarily on national security matters helping the fbi toward intelligence missions after 9/11. establishing new national security division with my colleagues at the justice department running the home and security counsel is president bush's homeland security advisor and once again taking nonpartisan approach i learned is a process and making every decision and full regard and civil liberties. i worked closely with dhs and admired on the be exceptional leadership and respondent to
8:14 pm
natural and homeland security threats. i am clear i'd those threats have multiplied dhs of today faces increasingly complex from adversaries like china and russia and others who target our sense of technology cyber criminals and transnational criminal organizations and victimize our communities. i and a is critical to the department of building to meet each and every one of those threats. secretary meyer presents words, dhs isim fundamentally partnerships and i and a's mission to make this partnership effective by ensuring and intelligence is fully circulated throughout the whole domain security enterprise. a number of functions to accomplish that mission and manages information and intelligence sharing with our
8:15 pm
state, local, tribal territorial and private sector partners. it serves the intelligence needs and components in leadership that leverages information holdings and dhs components and identify and address national security and coordinates information sharing at the department. if i'm confirmed, i will work hard to enhance the ability to accomplish each of those tasks. i intend to focus on the workforce which as i have seen, a very strong impressive of dedicated intelligence professionalsd. as a manager, i first believed it's my first duty to support my personal and leader of intelligence agency, i'll be figures in defending their ability to deliver objective unvarnished analysis and completely free and political influence. i'll carefully review operational roles and how men intelligence enterprise to identify and eliminate unnecessary duplication or overlap and focus in those ares
8:16 pm
where it had particular value. a constant focus on implications of civil liberties and privacy and need for strong safeguards oversight and transparency and intelligence operation. as we all know, we can only be successful at safeguarding our people, home and values if we maintain trust of our fellow citizens. importantly, i will work in collaboration with congress and this committee in particular. i've had a strong relationship with the members and staff of this committee and a deep respect right and iff confirmed, you can count on me being willing and collaborative in a joint effort to make it as effective as possible. thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today and the honor of considering me for this positiop and i'm happy to answer any questions you might have. >> for planning purposes, anyns
8:17 pm
members wish to submit questions today, please do soo by 5:00 p.. friday january 15. i'd like to start -- we had a chance to visit over zoom, you've had positions in prior administrations at least in terms of outside hierarchical approach appeared to be higher in the food chain, and extort my successful private sector career, share with the committee why you are running at this time to come back, we need strong leadership but it would not be viewed as a conventional choice. >> appreciate that question. once again, thank you for the opportunity to talk to you the other day. it was the honor of my life and career to work in government for 21 years as i did and yes, the
8:18 pm
titles and positions and responsibility is great and exciting but really the substance of the job and people who the job is done with that makes it important. i've oftenen been asked my favorite job and my answer honestly is being ausa working with trial teams and prosecuting cases at the low end of the totem pole but it was the substance of it and meaningfulness and camaraderie and that is the way i look at this, a wonderful team and the larger national security leadership this administration as you pointed out, we are at a critical time in our history. important role to play in the missions l so i couldn't be more proud or excited about this opportunity. >> i accept the answer and appreciate your willingness to serve. i promise i won't reveal to president bush or bob moore you said asu job better than working
8:19 pm
with them individually. talk to me and many members may want to get into this, the right choice right now, a piece of dhs that a lot of us were concerned about in terms of what happened and a lot of us concerned, there are enormous challenges in terms of how you set up your role whether it's the fbi, can you ortalk about how you can work wh the fbi and also the conflict with the fbi? >> thank you, there are issues as with any organization, i've spent a lot of time over the last few weeks, i've been tremendously impressed with their quality and dedication, they are good people and that is the key. when you have good people one te team about the team can succeed. it's had headwinds for number of
8:20 pm
reasons, they've largely had acting leadership which is a problem, not anybody's fault, it just happened in a variety of things happened that made things difficult but the makings of a strong team and operation are there and they are doing great things now. in terms of the work with the fbi, it's an important issue and whenever, when you look at the intelligence enterprise in our government, they are intentionally not clearly -- there should always be overlap between agencies but you have to keep a focus, because you don't want overlap to been duplication or even worse, confusion because the agencies are working in the same space with a different analysis, it confuses the customer's so the fbi and i and a need to work closely together, a strong relationship and i expect one of my first visits will be fbi headquarters to talk about the relationship or we can
8:21 pm
coordinate better make those lines clear. >> i do wonder at what time you throw a case and investigation over to the fbi to pursue potentially for criminal charges versus how far you might pursue a matter and have challenges as well, one thing under president trump and doing the job now is building up capabilities and some of those, do you want to speak with that for a moment? >> look at the responsibility and you see overlap, i don't know that necessarily translates, my sense is they'vev done a good job trying to
8:22 pm
ordinary iaa advantage both within dhs as well as state and local and they are helping operation externalize that. we talked at length just the other day and we are going to focus on the overlap and on the need for that coordination to be even stronger because the intelligence operational side is working together. >> senator rubio. >> as we discussed on the phone, i want to i give the opportunity to address if there is reason to address the few but nonetheless on behalf of the time you national office for corporations and the reason it's of concern, it fits the pattern for chinese communist party's aggressively playing abroad and the basic facts as i understand, i want to make sure i understand april
8:23 pm
2018, a partner at the firm i believe in the china office asked for help working for their clients, i guess china and corporations related to march 2018 release in the trade representative, the findings of the investigation and the practices, the report included the government's for how the tachinese government, chinese state owned enterprise and further made in china 2025 goals and part of its military civil fusion and the report stated in 2012 this company twice requested intelligence from chinese intelligence services and help negotiations and u.s. companies and reports specifically found these examples illustrate how china uses intelligence resources at
8:24 pm
its proposals for chinese state on enterprises the detriment of their foreign partners and competitors there is no dissension between the chinese company and the government, the government corporations competing don't get to go to the cia and i a and get information then these guys deal. but thehe fact about you being asked by a a partner at the firm to intuit, i believe it is correct. if you could tell us the nature of the work, why were you called to it and what did you do? >> thanks for raising this the other day, that was good of you and appreciate you asking. it's an appropriate thing, important to ask about. in terms ofag the fact, it was a partner in the state so that
8:25 pm
partner was looking to see what it could be because of the allegations and he's wanting to find out if there are criminal exposures so he asked me to have an associate to write a memo, these are the criminal laws that could be implicated in a past the memo back, to point out hours of work, no contact with the client, talk to nobody and didn't call anybody in the government, sort of like a law school exercise and associate but it was on behalf of the chinese oil company and you raise legitimate concerns and not just here but you have your leader in this area, senator warren and members of academia and industry to raise the alarm
8:26 pm
about what china is doing and i agree if you need to do that and the fact that that is happening, we are seeing now across the board in every space, political economic military to become dominant of the united states so i agree with that and mentioned the other day my time in the national security division d.o.j. 2006 and 2008, is a dawning realization in terms of technology theft the chinese were so my colleagues and i were sounding the alarm about that back then to get academia and industry to pay attention so it's consistent with what i've seen the last 15 years and if i get into the position i will keep sounding the alarm. >> my time is about to expire but i'm curious, what did you know about the company before
8:27 pm
this work came to your? the way you described is a partner came to you and said can i get answers to? they came back with a memo and you reviewed it and submitted it to the partner who requested it but what did you know about the company at the time? did it make you queasy in any way or concerned that the firm was advocating or trying to help a company's actions that implicate national security concerns? >> a couple things. i thought it's a range of sanctions, didn't have the expertise, i was was the one with whom this would go to, somebody in the white-collar space to look at and say these are the possible laws that could be implicated. you said advocate. i don't think there's any advocating that went on, business and explanatory exercise. >> i met the firm represented
8:28 pm
was on behalf of of the entity not necessarily associate. >> i believe they were doing trade work with them but i don't know for sure but to answer your question, i should have thought more about it than i did that day. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me give my thanks to you for your responsiveness for my concerns about what happened in portland i appreciate visiting with you, i believe in making sure witnesses know what we are going to talk about. when the trump administration department of homeland security troops into my hometown in the summer of 2020, the department office of intelligence and analysis was there, too. according to a report by the department's office general counsel, the intelligence officer spent untrained
8:29 pm
inexperience personnel to portland without a plan for clear management. i spent months battling to get the general counsel report released to the public sore oregonians would know about the abuses that took place. the report was finally releasedt last october but because of redaction, i am still pushing to get the full picture out for oregonians. one issue in k particular, thati am focused on his the general counsel finding that dossiers were developed on people presumably including my constituent whoo apparently were no threat to homeland security. according to the report, some junior personnel were so upset about this they refused to even work on but that's why
8:30 pm
oregonians want to know what went into the dossiers distributed around the department of homeland security but so far that information is just being withheld. do you believe the department of homeland security intelligence personnel ought to be collecting and distributing dossiers on americans?e >> thank you for meeting the other day and thank you for your practice of giving a heads up for the questions you are going to ask. i was troubled by that report, i've been heartened to hear about the changes put in place to address lack of training and guidance and as you pointed out, lack of ability on both concerned was going on but felt they couldn't raise the alarm and i assure you that will not be a situation, people will flow
8:31 pm
fully comfortable to raise their concern. >> what about the dossiers though? should there be dossiers? information ought to be and then? that's what my constituents want to know. >> and in fact goes to the guidelines and it's very clear. you and iti discussed open soure collection which is what ima does, it can be fought especially in the context of a protests or demonstration so clear guidelines about what d.o.j. should do -- dhs can or cannot do, only collect information and distribute if it's relevant to a mission like protecting terrorism, they cannot collect just if somebody exercises their first amendment rights, they can't do that. least intrusive means of
8:32 pm
collecting information and once the information is collected in terms of disseminating it, u.s. person information that needs to be carefully handled pursuant to law so yourder and shouldn't be disturbing it without regard to privacy and what i read is there is insufficient training and guidance you have information about u.s. persons quitter ricouldn't be. >> i'm getting ready to run t ot of time, if you are confirmed, if you released to the public this and other information about this office in portland that i've been pushing to get unredacted, it's a simple yes or no question, would you be willing to release this? >> i will have the authority release but i will push hard to release at the maximum ability. >> is there any reason is shouldn't be released? >> i know there's some reactions
8:33 pm
that might have to do with personal information, private informationso, but i can assure you your concerns have been passed on, folks are already engaging as of last week in general counsel's office and they are working hard to minimize the amount. >> i will only tellea you, you'e got to think because this is what happened in my hometown, we saw the office of general counsel said you got to think it's going on elsewhere and i will tell you, there's an ominous history in this committee, the use of dossier come on board to get to the bottom of it and we will continue to work with you between now and the time the committee votes on your nomination. i will have questions and a second round as well.l. >> i want to add my voice, i'd like you to work, you've got to
8:34 pm
go through your appropriate channels but i hope is much as possible can be released and i think we should give members extra credit for actually being here in credit but that's not the rules so we will go to senator cotton on webex. >> we appreciate the extra credit. >> if tom doesn't poke his head up in a second, i will go to you. senator cotton, are you out there?po i'm going to make the executive morning and go to senator warren. >> thank you, mr. chairman. congratulations on your nomination and thank you for your lengthy distinguished public service and i'm glad your family can be her.
8:35 pm
i am sure they are very proud of you and i'm sure your service is a family affair and who are not just hanging out there on your owned. >> the work you did for chinese and client and having to register. the registration act, did you? >> now and i would never lie. >> in the armed service? >> yes. >> i think we've seen a number of instances i certainly happened disturbing to me where foreign governments have hired lobbyists here in washington d.c. who have not registered under born registration act but rather under bobby's disclosure act in order to obscure the
8:36 pm
representation foreign governments. we are here because we are elected by our constituents to serve the people of this country and not foreign countries and certainly not without our knowledge is not advocating for policy changes and congress. could you expand upon your views of the role of foreign user registration act and whether it adequately serving its purpose? >> i think you put your finger on a critical issue. it's been around a long time, it hasn't been forced with sufficient energy forr, decades. there has been a focus on it over the last few years, the justice department is out of resources for that and they are focusing on bringing cases and i think they need to because i think you're right, we need to know who people are speaking for
8:37 pm
when they are advocating for legislative change so i agree with that to the extent i will have a role in not, i would do everything i can to encourage strong enforcement. >> there have been bipartisan bills knocking around here for a while now and we haven't been able to get those passed yet but i hope you'd use the benefit of your experience and your perspective to advocate within the administration for those changes. we are considering foreign sovereign immunity act to allow the 9/11 families an opportunity to file litigation over foreign financing of the terrorist attack 11, one foreign government went so far not choose to hire u.s. lobbyists here in washington d.c. but also
8:38 pm
in list age of veterans who came up here without disclosing who was paying for their hotel room for financing their presence and reported to be advocating on behalf of united states military veterans so it takes different shapes and forms but an insidious problem and one i hope you will help in whatever way you can to address. there has been an increased infocus on domestic terrorism obviously since the events of a jericho january 6 but what part of the u.s. government in terms of law enforcement particularly so far as it affects intelligence community would have jurisdiction investigate cases of so-called domestic terrorism?
8:39 pm
>> micros to what we talked about the chairman, areas of overlap and this is an area where there is shared jurisdiction and shared responsibilities to do intelligence and law enforcement for domestic terrorism threat. the fbi on domestic terrorism when it comes to doing investigations building cases, they will not do and i think it's been testified, they will not do intelligence work, there has to be predication in the guidelines to do that. ina approached it from a different view, it doesn't have that responsibility, limitations discussed earlier that has to be in the departmental mission and can't be focused on first amendment rights and etc. but it can doca open source searching r collection if it relates to a
8:40 pm
threat dhs tasked with protecting against so it's a complementary and responsibiliy to the fbi and ina and additional piece, i and a plays a critical role time the federal government responsibilities and domestic terrorism the state and local in the private sector and that is an important piece and huge value add for domestic terrorism and the whole pintelligence enterprise. >> i have a few more questions, i'll wait for a second round if that's your preference. >> i think it's probably senator heinrichs as well. >> when the american public found out section 215 had been interpreted to allow the collection of millions of americans phone records with a
8:41 pm
single court order, there was an understandable amount of disbelief and outrage to the public and that precipitated stepping in and a freedom act which banned collection of american records including those under 215, the register statue and national security letters. usa freedom act codified and national consensus that th government collection of americans records involved infringed on the privacy and civil liberties of ordinary americans. do you read this consensus and usa freedom act have it right in prohibiting open-ended collection? >> thank you for having that question passed on to my colleagues and dhs who passed it on to me and this is also a topic senator and i have had a discussion about. >> i can imagine. [laughter]
8:42 pm
let me just say the collection is a difficult issue because as i understand it, it might be for one bad guy in the group but then you collect information that involves innocent people you can imagine a situation where there is a crime in a bus station at 2:00 a.m. and you want to get the buses who pulled in at 1:00 because they might have contained the person who committed the murder or whatever. you know everybody didn't commit the murder so you are getting the information from innocent people, thallus the dilemma of the collection so the question then is, is a particular collection agree that would be an appropriate investigative step to solve that murder in the train station but is it appropriate been to take that for millions ofwo people telephe records? that is the issue that came up
8:43 pm
in the 215 order for the metadata program and to main points about that, we discussed with senator wyden, either it was arguably awful and they agree whether risk awful and should have signed it or not, there's an additional step which is an appropriate. does it meetan the expectationsf the american people were of congress to use that tool in that aggressive way? that analysis was how it was done and a second piece is the idea of secret law, the reason the expectations were measured against that program is because the program is classified by the courts opinion authorizing use of 215 the meditator classified can be discussed openly and congress over the american people so people could see orsc
8:44 pm
make their arguments one way or the other and that handicaps that use of virtual and makes understandable why they react the way they did and i think it's a lesson i have taken and it's not the only instance, i think there were others when there was too much reliance on classification when they should have been more transparency. live and learn. if i go back into government, that is a lesson i will keep front and center. >> do you think congress got it right passing usa freedom actens a response in this revelation? >> i think it's understandable why congress did that in terms of the need for 215 for nonfocal collection, i still see it as a need, i'm looking at it from the outside and whether it safeguar- >> but not for metadata that involves enormous numbers? >> exactly, it's the fact that
8:45 pm
the criminal side you have grand jury scheme, you don't have a comparable tool and i don't know whether the administration is on that. >> one of the challenges at ina is the challenges with workforce morale. that was true even before the things you heard in recent years with my colleagues in portland, politicize agent of intelligence and etc. so if you are conference, what are your plans to turn that around? note organization and function well without high quality morale. >> that is a very important question and at the end of the day my main responsibility as as a manager helping to manage this and that means supporting the people from my job to help them do their jobs as well as they possibly can. they are good people and i've been in organizations where
8:46 pm
morale close for a variety of reasons and the nice thing is the right reasons come into play, morale can go back up and it might have taken some hits and i have heard about it but i can tell you the people are pretty energized dealing with them. i think in terms of how to deal with any moralei' issues, one of the points is what you put your finger on, they have to know that i have their back, i'm going to ask them to do nothing more than straightforward analysis, that's all i want and politics will play no role in it. that's has a prosecutor for years national security law work at d.o.j., that's what people want to hear, they are valued for their work and contributions in national security for one political party or another. contribution to national
8:47 pm
security, and not for whether their work butters the bread of one political party or the other. >> and for members who are going to be around for a second round, and i'll be happy to give up my time to get to them, but there are four, five members on webex so it will be a while. senator. >> thank you, >> talking on personnel issues, what you see as the right balance between contractors and permanent employees particularly on the contractors side, what do they bring with them that may be hard to replicate in the agency on a permanent basis? >> talking about management, that is exactly one of the first met questions are going to needi to address i think and i have heard issues or concerns about overreliance on contractors at ina but there should always be a balance, contractors provide really important value, if you
8:48 pm
have a need should always be a to search personnel. contractors provide a really important value. they allow you to search, if you have a need to surge personnel, as you know, it takes forever to hire people, go through the standard process of hiring folks into the federal service, you can get contractors who can surge quickly. they're also helpful if you have particular needs or areas of expertise to satisfy, contractors can be brought in, don't have to train somebody in, so there's a real value to contractors, by the same token, especially with analysts, the optimal is, you know, traditional government employee who takes over the position, learns this, the area of analysis, and really develops expertise, it isn't somebody who comes in and out on six month assignments. that's the optimal. but there should be a balance, and in positions i've held or offices i've run i've always looked at that and made sure
8:49 pm
there was a balance. here my sense is maybe an overreliance on contractors, i think that is being rectified but one of the first things i do as a manager is look at that on day one. >> as we look at the growing importance of artificial intelligence and machine learning and all of the public data that's out there, do you think we'll be able to keep up with the new techniques we need to sort this information down to where a career individual can look at it? or are we going to need some help just dealing with all the information that's publicly available, not anything that we're getting some other way, but how do you propose we go through that in the most effective way and know what we can know from the public available information that's out there? >> right, well i think you're raising sort of the dilemma of
8:50 pm
intelligence and the intelligence enterprise in general, which is there's always too much intelligence and if you can't zero in on what you need, you lose the significance of the intelligence you need to focus on. and especially when you're talking about an entity like ina that's looking at open source information, i mean it's everywhere, it's, you know, there's so much of it. so there are a couple things, one, you identified one issue or one solution which is artificial intelligence. and i have not gotten to sort of deep dive on what ina is doing with artificial intelligence to sort of get rid of the noise and focus on the important information, but my sense is that is an important part of their operations and also training and guidelines, making sure, especially when talking about, you know, looking at people who might be somewhere along, around the line that separates violent extremists from just political extremists who have first amendment rights
8:51 pm
to do what they're doing, you have to be very careful about hoovering up everything about these people because we're talking about personal information so those guidelines have to provide strict guard rails in terms of collection so that also helps to widdle down what you pull in. but that's a real challenge. >> that's helpful. i think you're right. it's going to be one of the first things you have to deal with if you're confirmed for this job is how we going to have explained looking back and there's lots of information there and we couldn't figure out how to find it even though it was publicly available information and then the topic that you got into earlier, that's a different topic in my view of the things that aren't as available to the public as other things are. is it your view you can find full-time professionals you need
8:52 pm
for this skill set? willing to do this job as theiro career? >> the main reason is because the people i've been dealing with our top-notch and the way you recruit the best as you perform the best. if you are known for performing being a strong entity, you want to be part of the team so we will be based on resources talking to you about resources as well. permitting looking w for the bet and the brightest. will have access to them but also there are others in the intelligence community who might be interested coming over during domestic. >> thank a you. >> if senator king -- how about
8:53 pm
senator bennet on webex. going once, going twice. senator casey. >> thank you very much. i'm happy to be junk in the shoes of the senator's you just named. thanks for this opportunity, i want to thank the candidate for nomination, mr. weinstein for public service, his service to the country already distinguished for willingness to serve again. certainly grateful his family is helping him do that as i know every public service depends upon. i wanted to ask about one topic, that's hospital security especially ransomware attacks on hospitals, increasingly hospitals across the country have been targets ransomware
8:54 pm
attacks because of the patient data the systems old and dependence we all have on telemedicine and what happens in the hospital systems we may have a ransomware attack. they've caused severe destructors to patient care and caused and will continue to cause problems. i have two questions, to what extent does cyber mission center provide analysis dhss cyber infrastructure cyber security infrastructure security agency to track cyber threats hospitals and healthcare networks throughout the country? >> thank you, senator and appreciate your question. it's a very serious threat.
8:55 pm
before getting to hospital and healthcare specifically, yes the mission center, i've been briefed up on by and familiar with how it operates and how it works closely with it. i had a talk recently with easterly doing a great job there and we talked about the immigration and they need to focus our channel targeted intelligence to it as one of its customers but also state and local authorities to let them know about threats they see in terms of specific tax and ransomware attacks about parties and groups engaging in ransomware and techniques for dealing withpe ransomware so my understanding is ina is working on all those fronts working in good collaboration.
8:56 pm
jen and f i agree if i get on board who will sit down and see how it could work better. you say that as a second question and i assume it's about hospital specifically. >> that's going to be critical but ordination so you can provide both support and analysis. another question pertains to similar concern, if confirmed, will you commit to enhancing ina's collection and analysis on cyber threats to healthcare networks to enforce federal agency at large provide networks with the most up-to-date actionable information? >> yes, i can commit, focusing
8:57 pm
on that issue, ransomware is terrible directed at anybody but particular at healthcare organization where healthcare organizations will be threatened to be shut down putting people's lives at risk. i would imagine folks at ina and cisa are focused on this issue and resources are put to it in ransomware priority and secretaries but i will sit down and make sure we get a briefing on what we are doing on the healthcare front and make sure we have resources as needed. >> thanks, mr. chairman. >> make. >> ever patient senator. >> that was dripping with sarcasm but thank you. congrats on your nomination, thank you for your past service and not just thanks to you about your wife and daughters. i know oneri is away but many
8:58 pm
times in the years and decades particularly after 9/11, i'm sure dad was away for a lot so thank you foric your sacrificess well. do you believe china sees themselves engaged in a girl, technological raise with less? >> they see themselves in a zero-sum technological raise, not just technological but other aspects as well. >> can you explain to the american people what you think the goals are and how they seek to exploit america's society and to the a degree your views have changed the last couple ofam decades? everybody in 2000 had a benign view, what time and the u.s. might be able to do cooperative competition but we are in a different place, can you explain how your views changed? >> i was just talking yesterday to senator about this.
8:59 pm
i did have some optimism that china would come operate as a responsible member of the world war and respect the rules of the world order and compete fairly and become maybe a capitalist democracy of some sort and retained vestiges of those hopes for quite some time. i mentioned this earlier, i'll say the root shock may be realized was a pipe dream i was heading up the national security division started seeing this assault by china on stealing our technology methodically going industry to industry getting up as much technology and stealing it, chinese nationals and others deployed to do that and it was clear to me they were not playing according to the rules
9:00 pm
they were starting a campaign to play in violation of the rules and that's why we sounded the alarm at national security division. rules. that's why we sounded the alarm. i think a lot of people were slow to pick up that lesson. i was probably slow to pick up too. since that time in the last decade, 15 years, i think we have seen that focus on stealing technology and intellectual property and willingness to bend the rules there is now pervasive threat for the whole approach to the west and the united states. i find it to be a very alarming situation. i agree with your >> i think it's important for
9:01 pm
other members in the senate who are not on the intelligence committee to stand with the national offshore oil corporation does. essentially they are a bully for the pla in the south see try to intimidate china's neighbors and helpid the ccp benefit from the civil military fusion and try to harm other nations that believe in open navigation and seaways in the rule of law and free-trade and human rights. et cetera i have been satisfied with the back-and-forthe how those three hours of billable work came about it on me to speak for the vice-chairman but i appreciated the back-and-forth that you had with him. would you be willing to pledge that you would do no work for ccp affiliated organizations after year term of government service ends quick.
9:02 pm
>> yes i'm very willing to make that commitment and i can do that right now. >> i'm satisfied looking forward to supporting her nomination and colleagues of this committee have had a lot of discussions in a classified space where certain types of work with chinese government affiliated organizations in the past are not necessarily inexcusable as we understand the context we s should move to a standard for all national security affiliated responsibilities that there would be no work for affiliated ccp organizations i support your nomination and the distinctionor about domestic political extremism versus violent extremism and senator cornyn has more questions on that i'm happy to move to the second round. >> and the point that you made
9:03 pm
that many of our colleagues as well as many businesses don't understand this and to sides of the dais as we make the case in a classified setting and i was simply sayn to my colleagues there are two more senators on webex. >> sorry i wasn't there the first time. none of us have ever had that happen before and i appreciate the opportunity. i want to talk about coordination and sharing. we have a huge sprawling intelligence like 17 different agencies on the domestic side most important counterpart is the fbi with local law enforcement.
9:04 pm
ii would urge you to establish a regular systematic relationship with the fbi to be sure you are sharing information is that something you would be interested in pursuing? >> let me thank you for the meeting the other day and specifically for that particular suggestion when you suggested i reach out to the fbi in my counterparts and suggest we have a monthly lunch. that's a great idea for purposes so i absolutely agree with the sentiment and that specific recommendations. >> and serving on this committee going on ten years, has been my observation one of their tendencies of the intelligence agency is
9:05 pm
intelligence isn't any good unless it is shared with the people that need to see it. we classify too much those choices and methods have to be a consideration. but i i hope as you work with the other agencies, for example be learned on january 6 that there was intelligence somewhere in the system of potential violence but it never got to the capital police of the other issuehe of that is to be sure that those that has gathered but it can be helpful to the fbi or local law enforcement. >> you have addressed couple of points with information sharing generally and i live
9:06 pm
and breathe the issues post 9/11. and beforeti 9/11. what that could had the shared. with those cultural reasons and we really had to go to work and those that guard information and don't think sharing first but that's before sharing so that something that needs toor be focused on another issue is
9:07 pm
classification. i believe senator biden was involved. and part of the reason for that is to establish a basis for public trust. especially was state and locals. and that will go to the state and locals. >> and those with domestic terrorism.m. and separate i appreciate your willingness and the answers you have given us today.
9:08 pm
>> and thank you for being here. o and then to describe those federal contracts with the software. that expanding use of facial recognition technology for a of purposes. some of which the potential for abuse. privacy adequate on —- of the bias of facial recognition technology that impact black and asian people so the stakes not only discriminatory to our citizens but to law enforcement and border patrol efforts. then we commit to have
9:09 pm
accounting of exploitation of intelligence and facial recognitionur technology. >> thank you senator. would make that commitment pursuant to our obligation to keep the house intelligence community currently informed of our intelligence activities. but i don't know from being on the inside i don't think there was last facial recognition that i have heard about the concerns of biases in the technology those general concerns whenever you have a powerful new technology for intelligence purposes, needs to be carefully vetted and subject to certain careful constraints and
9:10 pm
guidance. i will be looking into that with the various parties of the privacy officer civil-rights office to make sure that any use of that kind of technology will be done in the appropriate way. >> along the intelligence community members consistently rated dhs as one of the least satisfactory agencies the gao report facing challenges with professional and those historically with the workforce according to officials if confirmed and in those training issues.
9:11 pm
>> that is a fundamental question in the fundamental issue and challenge for me as i walk in to assess what more out of the workforce is to improve the effectiveness of the organization. stepped into management positions throughout my government career and as i mentioned, and morale can turn on a dime that it can also improve on a dime. it is a matter of blocking and tackling of management that people have a career path laid out and opportunities for details and training. that everybody on the line that supervisors and the head of ina have their back so as long as they do their job
9:12 pm
right and honestly and objectively they would be supported and never get a message from the front office they need to do anything for political reasons which is antithetical and look, there are good people at ina and word will get out. it is getting out to the rest of the intelligence community that the surveys are out there. but they play an important role of the critical mission of our government. and we are seeing t that now. and strong management. >> thank you mr. chairman.
9:13 pm
>> mr. weinstein your cofounder former national security officials for biden and engaged in the political process during the lastt election. you organized calling the previous president a threat to rule of law. certainly you are within your rights to express your point of view to express a candidate of your choice but can you assure americans with whom you disagree politically that you do not view them as a threat to the rule of law? absent criminal conduct? >> absolutely, senator. thank you for the question. thank you to senator rubio for letting me know that question might be coming. i will stand and then it giving you my position. that is a completely fair for
9:14 pm
you to be asking about. you should ask about the political activities of people who come before you to take these positions in the national security and law enforcement enterprises. the last thing we need in these positions of authority is injecting politics into decision-making with the credibility of the national security apparatus. and the thingng about me, up until 2020. and basically my job is to do what is best for the american people and not for the typical party. i feel strongly about the last election. an important point here is the thing i felt most strongly about was the concern that there was politicalization of the law enforcement enterprise that the justice department
9:15 pm
which is the center play on —- centerpiece of the letter and made me feel i should be vocal. that is the concern i think that you have. that's what i'm worried about. i have spent my life as a public servant resisting politicalization. i did that over the last year and you can be sure if i end up at ina that's the position i adhere to. >> we talk about domestic terrorism man whose purview that falls in within law enforcement and the fbi would certainly taketi the lead with a foreign nexus that you would agree that would not be within the purview of organizations like the cia or other parts? >> certainly the domestic focused intelligence work would not fall within the
9:16 pm
purview of the cia. >> that is part of the foreign intelligence surveillance act quick. >> by cia. yes. domestic terrorism threat. >> with the words of the fbi they fill out the applications for the fisa warrant. one of the concerns i think everybody should have is about the abuse of those tools and then to survey americans citizens based on perjured testimony. when you spend the on —- read the inspector general's report on crossfire hurricane it was the perjury of one fbi lawyers. and does that cause you concern?er
9:17 pm
i support the reinstatement of section 215 of fisa the director of national intelligence looking at the skeptics of the power given to the intelligence community under the supervision of the fisa court and members of congress come every example of an abuse of that power makes it harder and harder for us as a political matter to get congress to pass or reinstate those authorities. so let me turn to the border. when you see 2 million people coming across the border during the last year drug trafficking and seizures and people with criminal records
9:18 pm
potentially those of special concern from when i was there last they detain people from 150 different countries coming across the dell rios sector alone. from a national security perspective, is that a concern of yours? >> absolutely. the border is an area of concern because of the possibility wrongdoers get into the country that way and then contraband also. so that is a concern. >> this is not within your authority but i want to use the opportunity to highlight the fact the secretary of homeland security has signed a nonenforcement directive saying the border patrol and i.c.e. should not detain
9:19 pm
anybody who is guilty of illegal entry into the country unless they have committed other crimes. and the nonenforcement posture of this administration and department of homeland security is operating as a substantial pull factor for people to leave their homes to come into the country illegally. i you aware the most recent statistics with regard to those who have come here if somebody claims asylum they are given either a notice to appear in court or in the i.c.e. office are you familiar with that quick. >> generally.
9:20 pm
yes. >> we can come back on the third round. >> i have one more questions and happy to do a third round. >> thank you mr. chairman. two quick points. but first i will be asking written questions with respects to the dossier how they are released and used in a will need those answers before the committee moves forward. number two, there is another part to this debate the bulk collections of millions ofph law-abiding people that i am trying to square your public testimony with the writtenen answers that you gave us to the prehearing questions. let's make sure we walk through this quickly. in youre public testimony "this
9:21 pm
part of the lot was significantly more protective of civil liberties than grand jury subpoena you also testify if the government wanted to collect and obviously innocent day today action come i thank you will have some questions from the fisa court judge. on the basis of the written answers to the prehearing questions, you knew the government was secretly using 215 to collect the phone records of venison americans without any subsequent review by the fisa court. reconcile what you knew at the time based on your answers in public testimony because i'm
9:22 pm
having trouble reconciling the two and maybe there is something else i need information. >> thank you. i think r i can help you. so everybody is on the same page, asking about testimony september 2009 after i left government. in public testimony. it was in a hearing that related to the reauthorization of certain parts of the patriot act including the teefifteen provision. i was asked to testify is someone who worked in that area i left the national security division right had direct responsibility for that area late 2007 early 2008. but i opined about the importance to reauthorize including 215 and the point that i was making was a fairly simple point and as enacted in
9:23 pm
the patriot act was on the criminal side criminal prosecutors can use a grand jury subpoena when they need to get records any physical thing that records a prosecutor could just issue a grand jury subpoena i want those records and i did that thousands of times in my career. the comparable provision on the national security side is teefifteen it required the justice department to go to a judge, explain toe. the judge why it is relevant to a terrorism investigation and then get the judge to authorize the order. and then to be protected of civil liberties because some cannot just use 215 to find out about his girlfriend
9:24 pm
records or something like that. that's the point i was making more protective of civil liberties. and with a series fisa court judges that could be used to get all the metadata. >> that was raised. >> that was raised earlier in the hearing that i testified then is sitting director at the time made the exact same points of having the value of the judge in the process and the importance of civil liberty. and his written statement he specifically singled out his numbers that there was a classified collection at some numbers knew about that he was happy about that classified collection.
9:25 pm
and how teefifteen was designed and that still is a valid argument under to 15. >> my time is up i continue to find it hard to reconcile what you knew at the time you gave this public testimony, when you talked about format teefifteen was significantly more protective ofe civil liberties. you knew the government was secretly using section 215 to collect all these phone records of millions of amendments on —- innocent americans with no review by the fisa court. i will get more information to youvi with respect to reconciling what you knew at
9:26 pm
theom time which does not seem to me to be consistent with what you said publicly and me will continue this discussion. we will need additional information and i told you when you came in i would continue this with you. >> senator, just a couple of points. at that point i was out of national security i did not know what was still running or not. i knew that had been authorized at some point previously before my w coming into the nsa but also the question was about review of the fisa court my understanding at authorized and reauthorized a number of times. so thereng was continuing revie. >> i'm not sure that is helpful to you because your written answers to the
9:27 pm
prehearing questions indicated you knew the government was secretly using 215 in a way that had no subsequent review. and we will continue that discussion. >> we are in the seven minute route area. >> as undersecretary for intelligence and analysis, what is your role in the official capacity with regard to border enforcement and threats to the homeland coming across the border? >> that my understanding is it is twofold. one is to provide intelligence
9:28 pm
and information to the range people that are actors that are with law enforcement and around the border to make sure state and local territory or tribal partners who are down around the border are getting as much intelligence as we can find with what they expect to see crossing the border illegally. and what kind of my on —- migration patterns someone one-handed is to provide that intelligence as well as a federal agencies and dhs but also to collect intelligence that might be gleaned from those coming across the border.e and intelligence and important information to help the
9:29 pm
intelligence community and state and local partners is developed and then we channel that intelligence into ina then they turn it into an actionable product. >> given the volume of people across the border that have come across the past year. and then try to estimate people weal never see the then to be detained along the border and among those we identify people with criminal records multiple offenses and drug smuggling sex offenders in the light. currently there is no process in place to do biometric identification of all the people who are coming across
9:30 pm
the border. is there a law enforcement professional body people are coming across the border for whom we have no record? positive or negative. they are released into the heartland of the country and given a notice to report or to appear and in the last six months 50000 didn not show up at the i.c.e. office giving notice to report and violating the terms of their release. do you view that as a national security and law enforcement vulnerability? >> itt is always a concern and when you have that space and the lack of information of
9:31 pm
people in the united states and the more we can learn those coming across the border the better i want to know more rather than less. and then making sure they go through the process whether it comes across the southern border or airports and ports. >> do you consider our lack of knowledge a national security vulnerability? and a lack of knowledge about people coming to our country and want to know more about these people than less and have an understanding of somebody is coming in for maligned purposes whether to launch a terrorist attack or what have you.
9:32 pm
coming through as refugees to the airports and i know we want to have more not less. >> so yes that is a vulnerability? >> nd they arrive from lack of intelligence and that is all about minimizing vulnerabilities before it becomes a reality. so my feeling is and then the more knowledge that we have. >> i want to take you back to law school. and analyst watson to say you have information on a group
9:33 pm
called sons of liberty may seem to be very strong supporters we have heard attempt they may be planning some type of action involving violence the us supreme court. what do you do? >> that's a great question have a very vague recollection of our school but i remember getting called on in classes. it's a very realistic scenario going back to given where domestic terrorism is coming from but some of it is politics and political view. makes the intelligence operation and incredibly difficult because you cannot
9:34 pm
and every law enforcement community is forbidden from doing that just because somebody exercises the first amendment rights. and then to say what they think is completely absurd and extreme if they are not citing violence you are allowed to do it and could not and should not collect against that person or party is the last piece of what you said the analyst came in that to my attention the indication that this group is planning some kind of violence because that is the dividing line. if there isin a sufficient basis to believe that this group is planning a violent act of some kind especially like this and that is intended to influence the government, then that
9:35 pm
makes it a fitting and appropriate target for intelligence collection much of the factual basis is there that the group is going over the line into violence? is not a remote possibility to go from politically extreme to violent, that there has to be some evidence that this group is in fact crossing over the. >> with my favorite interchange with the law t professor. that i bravely guest and said yes. and the professor says mr. king a shorter and more accurate answer would have been no. [laughter] thank you.
9:36 pm
>> welcome back to the arena. you have proven me completely wrong and you saw from both sides of the dais an enormous amount of interest. and you are at this moment in time with law enforcement that i kind of understand the role and then hypothetical that this u group with a plan of action in this part of dhs.
9:37 pm
and it is still evolving in light of the fact of 9/11 and with those circumstances right now. and then how we work that to be one of your responsibilities. that clearly the data indicates at least at this moment in time, needs a permanent leader and the senate approved leader. i appreciate your candor work and your comments to my colleagues working issues
9:38 pm
around china, but i think it's important talking about china as well that with the ccp and president xi from wherever they are. but as i dig into this a little bit, maybe i have more of an understanding with this job and this challenge is not as high as other jobs in the past, might be the kind of thing to bring it back into government service. thank you for your testimony and yourst thoughtful answers and i will be expecting validation that she's actually giving them time at berkeley to watch this hearing i
9:39 pm
mention it twice to see if she actually did follow through. >> put her to the test. >> if there are additional questions please submit them by friday the 15th close of business. my hope is we can move quickly on this nomination and my hope is we can get some help from republican friends because too many people have been held up for too long in the same you get in the better for dhs and to benefit our country. with that, any last comments? >> thank you b for holding this hearing. i will get confirmed and then get in there quickly and i'm anxious to get in there to work with dhs and your colleagues. >> meeting is adjourned.
9:40 pm
[inaudible conversations] >> that said there's no threat to earth from asteroids or
9:41 pm
comments nothing on course to hit the earth. that said we have not found all of the asteroids yet and then to assess that so take the first steps. >> and then with new data. and then some of the most exciting to come out are things i'm not even sure i can tell you right now.
9:42 pm
>> we believe
9:43 pm
>> certainly johnson secretary these new because they were
9:44 pm
transcribing many of those conversations in fact a major the conversations were taped as johnson would signal them he would signal to the open door. >>


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on