tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN February 26, 2016 2:00am-4:01am EST
and i was mayor of the largest city there for eight years and i worked closely with the police. and the vast overwhelming majority of police officers are hardworking people, honest people trying to do a very, very difficult job. that's right. [applause] senator sanders: and by the way, by the way, when we talk about young people thinking about careers, we need some great police officers out there. think about law enforcement. but -- and here is the but. like any other public official, if a police officer breaks the law, that officer must be held accountable. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: i have talked to people in the african-american community, community with ph.d.'s who say, you know, if i'm driving across
the country, i get kind of nervous. i get kind of nervous and the reason for that is that african-americans are stopped a lot more for traffic issues than are whites. we have got to take on this issue of institutional racism and a broken criminal justice system. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: that is why i believe -- and, again, i speak as a former mayor -- that we have to demilitarize local police departments. some of these local police departments look like occupying armies. what the function of a good police department is about is to be part of the community, to be trusted by the community, not to be seen as an oppressive force in the community.
[cheers and applause] senator sanders: and we need to make police departments look like the diversity of the communities they are serving. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: we also need to take a whole lot of looks at criminal justice, in general. for example, we need to rethink the so-called war on drugs. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: over the last 30 years, millions of americans
have received police records for possession of marijuana. right now under the federal controlled substance act, marijuana is listed as a schedule 1 drug, alongside of heroin. [audience booing] senator sanders: now, i trust everybody in this room knows -- this is a real problem in my state, in new hampshire and around this country, heroin is a killer drug. stay away from it! [cheers and applause] senator sanders: now, there are people and scientists who argue the pluses and the minuses of marijuana, but no sensible person believes that marijuana is anything like heroin and that's why i believe -- now, that is why i believe we should
take marijuana out of the federal controlled substance act. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: stays -- states have the right to legalize marijuana or not. that's a state decision, but from the federal perspective, possession of marijuana should not be a crime. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: when we talk about criminal justice, let me make some connections here. it's not only that we are dealing with institutional racism, it's we are dealing with a situation where youth
unemployment in this country is off the charts. no one talks about it very much. but here's the facts. if a kid is 17 to 20 years of age, graduated high school and is white, that kid is 33% of those white kids are unemployed or underemployed. if that kid is latino, the number is 36%. if that kid is african-american, that number is 51% unemployed or underemployed. [audience booing] senator sanders: so are you ready for a radical idea? [cheers and applause] senator sanders: together, we have got to invest in education and jobs, not jails and incarceration.
[cheers and applause] senator sanders: we are spending -- we are spending $80 billion a year to lock up 2.2 million americans. in my view, it makes a lot more sense to send a young person to the university of ohio than lock them up. it's a lot cheaper. [applause] senator sanders: and when we talk about criminal justice, i will tell you a story. we did a meeting on this. actually, senator turner was with me. we did it in iowa a couple months ago. we had a couple guys there. remarkable men who had served prison time, and one guy said,
you know, i was in jail and then on one day somebody said to me, oh, by the way, you're going to be released tomorrow and here is $75, lots of luck. he ended up back in jail. we need to understand that if we want to cut the rates of recidivism, we need to make sure that people have the education and the jobs they need to find a good life in civil society. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: now, my dad came to this country at the age of 17 from poland without a nickel in his pocket. never made much money. dropped out of high school. my mom graduated high school. so i'm a little bit sensitive to the issue of immigration. i want everybody here to know that in america today, we have 11 million people who come to this country to try to get a little bit better life for
themselves and their children. and what we're seeing now is a horrendous level of bigotry and racism in attacking these people. when you have people like trump saying that mexicans are rapists or criminals, that is an outrage which we will not accept. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: we need comprehensive immigration reform and a path toward citizenship for the undocumented. now, i think the reason that our campaign is doing well is that we are touching a nerve in
america and people are responding very strongly. vast majority of the american people -- you could be conservative, progressive, moderate, democrat, republican, whatever. very few people think it is right that the 20 wealthiest people in this country now own more wealth than the bottom 150 million americans, half of our people. [audience booing] senator sanders: and when i talk about a rigged economy, i am talking about the fact that one family in this country, the walton family who owns wal-mart, owns more wealth than the bottom 40% of the american people. does that sound like what america is supposed to be about? >> no! senator sanders: let me tell you what a rigged economy means. what a rigged economy means is
that the wealthiest family in america, the walton family, pays wages at wal-mart that are so low that many of their employees have to be on medicaid, food stamps and subsidized housing. and you know who pays for that medicaid, food stamps? you do. so on behalf of the wealthiest family in the world -- in the united states, worth some $60 billion or so, i want to thank you. they are very appreciative that you are helping to subsidize their company. [audience booing] senator sanders: that was a joke. in fact, it's an outrage. why should the middle class of this country have to subsidize employees who work for the wealthiest family in america? that's pretty crazy stuff. so i say -- i say to the walton
family, get off of welfare, start paying your workers a living wage. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: now, when we talk about politics in america, you got a lot of republicans running around the country talking about family values. they love families. you all know what they mean by family values. what they mean is that no woman in this room, in this state, in this country should have the right to control her own body. i disagree! [cheers and applause]
san sand what they mean is that our gay brothers and sisters senator sanders: what they mean is that our gay brothers and sisters should not have the right to get married. i disagree. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: now, i know i will not shock anybody when i suggest to you that on occasion there is a bit of hypocrisy in politics. i know you're all shocked to hear that, but in this issue, i think the hypocrisy reaches an all-time high and this is why. you got republicans running around this country and they say, government stinks. government is the source of all evil. we hate government. we're going to cut social security. we're going to cut medicare and medicaid and the postal service because we hate government. but when it comes to a very personal choice that a woman may
have to make, they love the government and what -- want the government to make that choice for that woman. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: that, my friends, is called hypocrisy. when we talk about the need to rebuild the middle class, we are talking about a massive federal jobs programs to put our people back to work. we should be hiring teachers, not firing teachers. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: tonight -- tonight, if memory is correct, i'm heading to flint, michigan, and it's not a meeting that i
look forward to because i know what i'm going to hear because i've already spoken to people in flint. i spoke quietly to a number of people what they told me literally is incomprehensible that we are seeing what we're seeing in the united states of america in 2016. thousands of children being poisoned by a broken water system, a poisonous water system. now, my point is, flint is maybe the worst example of a collapsing infrastructure but it is not the only example. we can create millions of good-paying jobs by rebuilding
our water systems, our waste water plants, our roads, our bridges, our airports, our rail system. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: and the other thing we have got to do is not only create jobs, because real unemployment in america is close to 10%, not 5%. the other thing we have to do is prevent the continued loss of millions of jobs because of our disastrous trade policies. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: one of the differences between secretary clinton and myself is that she supported nafta, she supported permanent normal trade relations with china. [audience booing] senator sanders: i helped lead the opposition to those trade agreements. i was right, she was wrong. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: look, you don't
need -- you know, i suppose we have some ph.d.'s in economics here, but you don't need one to understand what these trade policies are about. it's not complicated. you have a large corporation, and right now you're paying a worker in the united states $15, $20, $25 an hour. you have to provide health care, you have to protect the environmental legislation and regulations. why would you want to do that when you could shut down in america, move abroad, pay people pennies an hour, not worry about unions, not worry about the environment and bring your product back into america? that's what these trade agreements are. nothing more complicated than that. since 2001, we have lost 60,000 factories in america, a lot of that having to do with
disastrous trade agreements. if elected president, we will fundamentally rewrite trade agreements in this country. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: corporate america, every night turn on the tv, they say buy this product, buy that product. well, if they want us to buy these products, maybe they better start manufacturing those products in ohio and america. all of you are aware that as a result of the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior, wall street drove this country too the worst economic downturn since the great depression. that's a fact. we bailed out wall street against my vote, but congress bailed out wall street because the big banks were too big to fail. i.e., if they went under they take half of the economy with
them. turns out that today three out of the four largest banks are much bigger than they were when we bailed them out because they were too big to fail. turns out that the six largest banks in america issue 2/3 of the credit cards that you have, and write 1/3 of the mortgages. in my view, if teddy roosevelt, the great trust buster, were alive today what he would say when you have that much concentration of economic and political power, what you have got to do is break them up and i agree. [cheers and applause] senator sanders: people often ask me, what, bernie, is the most important issue? and i can't give you one issue because they're all important, but this i will tell you.
there is one issue that impacts all other issues. and that is a corrupt campaign finance system which is undermining american democracy. the koch brothers, wall street, billionaires should not be able to buy elections in the united states of america. together we are going to overturn citizens united! [cheers and applause] senator sanders: as i said earlier, if this country is to do well economically, we need to have the best educated work
force in the world and what that means to me right now are two major things. number one, as a nation, we have got to understand that in the year 2016 when we talk about public education, you're not just talking about first grade through 12th grade. you have got to understand that a college degree today is in many ways the equivalent of what a high school degree was 50 years ago. [applause] so, we got to do two things. number one, anybody in this country, regardless of his or her income -- i came from a family that didn't have a whole lot of money. anybody in this country who is smart, does well in school, and is qualified should be able to go to a public college or university tuition-free. [applause]
[cheering] and second of all, we have got to do deal with this crisis of student debt. anybody here with student debt? [applause] alright. we have legislation that will significantly reduce student debt by allowing those with the debt to refinance their loans and get the lowest possible interest rates they can find. [applause] i'm a member of the u.s. senate committee on the environment and the senate committee on energy. and let me be the first to tell you what i think you already know. climate change is real. [cheers and applause] climate change is caused by human activity and it is already
doing, devastating -- causing devastating problems in our country, all over the world. we need to have the courage to stand up to the fossil fuel industry, transform our energy system. [applause] [cheering] we cannot allow the fossil fuel industry to think that their short-term profits are more important than the kind of planet we're going to be leaving to our kids and future generations. now, i've been criticized in this campaign for many, many things every day, and that's ok. >> i love you! senator sanders: there you go.
i love you, too! [cheering] [applause] and here is one area that i have been criticized. bernie, they say, why do you think the united states of america can do what every other major country on earth does -- u.k., france, germany, holland, scandinavia, canada -- why do you think that in america we can guarantee health care to all people as a right? well, you know what, let me be as clear as i can be. i believe that health care is a right, not a privilege! [cheers and applause] and i believe that when 29
million americans today, despite the gains, the real good gains of the affordable care act, but when 29 million americans have zero health insurance, many of you are underinsured with large deductibles and co-payments, and when we pay by far the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs from a pharmaceutical industry, which is ripping us off in unbelievable ways -- [applause] you want to hear crazy? this is crazy. one in five americans who receive a prescription from a doctor cannot afford to fill that prescription. that's crazy stuff. [applause] so, we are going to take on the drug companies. we are going to take on the
insurance companies, and we are going to pass a medicare-for-all program. [cheers and applause] this campaign is not just about electing a president. although, of course, i'm here for that purpose and would appreciate your support on march 15, but it is more than that. it is more than that. what this campaign is about is pushing forward for a political revolution, which revitalizes american democracy, which demands that our government represents all of us and not just the 1%. [applause]
there is nothing, nothing, that i've talked to you about this morning that is radical, that is outside of the mainstream, that the american people do not want to see happen. they know that the rich are getting richer, while everybody else is getting poorer. the issue is, do we have the courage to tell the billionaire class that they cannot have it all. that this country belongs to all of us, not just a few? [cheers and applause] and if we have that courage, we're going to win here on march 15. and, together, we're going to transform america. thank you! [cheers and applause]
>> the south carolina democratic primary is this saturday did we continue with hillary clinton at a get out the vote rally in orangeburg. live coverage begins at 4:45 p.m. eastern here on c-span. we will also be live with presidential candidate, senator bernie sanders at a campaign rally in orangeburg. that is at 5:30 p.m. eastern on c-span two. the is a look at some of recent campaign lads just campaign ads -- campaign ads. >> the son of a polish immigrant who grew up in a brooklyn tenement. he went to public school and college where the work of his life again fighting for justice.
any truth to power. he moved to vermont and one election in praise. in congress, he stood up for working families and principal, opposing the iraq war. supporting veterans. now he's is taking on wall street funded by millions of contributions. tackling climate change to create clean energy jobs. fighting for minimum wages, and tuition free public colleges. >> people are sick and tired of establishment politics and they want real change. sanders, husband, father, grandfather and honest leader, building a movement. >> i am bernie sanders and i approve this message. we have to
look at the qualifications of the candidates to reflect upon what
our country can be. i think it is hands down hillary clinton. >> hillary is the only candidate that i trust to fight the injustice. -- not to put away. withart has always been hillary clinton. >> i am hillary clinton, and i approve this message. >> no fresh
clean water source. the water is poisoned. >> we cannot drink the water. we cannot bathe in the water here we cannot cook in the water. nobody heard our story. >> i am here because for nearly two years, flint water was poisoned. >> hillary clinton came and showed she was standing with us. novel -- another level of attention and that is what we needed. think -- >> i think we all
would've had a solution yesterday. >> hillary really cares about people. >> when you have somebody like that fighting for you and saying got your back, -- >> i will fight for you in flint the matter how long it takes. >> i am hillary clinton and i
approve this message. >> c-span's campaign 2016 is taking you on the road to white house. the south carolina democrat primary. ira lives coverage -- our live coverage begins with hillary clinton and bernie sanders. also get your reaction from your phone calls. join us saturday or live coverage on c-span, c-span radio and c-span.org. u.s. and up, intelligence officials testify. president obama talks to reporters after meeting with his
national security council. that is followed by democratic residents of candidate senator bernie sanders talking to supporters in ohio. ♪ >> c-span's washington journal's life every day with news and policy issues. that is coming up tomorrow morning. doug collins and a member of judiciary and foreign affair committee will join us. he will discuss the war in syria, gitmo and how president obama should proceed to fill the supreme court seat. -- campaign 16. the endorsement of bernie sanders. be sure to watch c-span's livejournal. tomorrow morning. join the discussion.
-- c-span is a home for political junkies. >> there are a lot of c-span fans on the hill. i saw you on c-span. quest there's so much more that c-span does to make sure people outside the beltway know what is going on inside it. >> next, senior u.s. officials testify about the global threat. james comey, cia director john brennan and james clapper appear before the house and intelligence committee to discuss the threat by russia, iran and other nations. as well as terror groups, isis and al qaeda. komi also asked about the about access to the iphone of the san bernardino shooter.
richard leggett, director of defense intelligence agency, lieutenant general vincent stewart and nicolas rasmussen. thank you all. i recognize the challenges associated with discussing sensitive issues in public. i hope you agree that this open forum is critical to explain to the american people the serious threats we face, and also the the efforts of the brave men and women of the intelligence community to keep us safe. i speak for the entire community and i thank you for your service, sacrifice, and dedication. director clapper, this is your last worldwide threat hearing with his committee. i would like to especially thank you for your 55 years of service to this great nation. recall frompper, i last year's testimony, you were concerned about a vast array of threats to remarkably, the number seems to have grown since then.
generally, i share your assessment of the current threat environment. truth is, the u.s. faces the highest threat level since the 9/11 attacks. the american people do not need a security clearance to understand the threats now facing the western world. read the need to headlines out of paris, brussels, san bernardino, and boston. other terrors, and groups are rapidly expanding. with more access to safe havens, recruits, and resources than ever before, without u.s. leadership, the trend will continue. we have discussed syria and iraq with you at length, and close and open sessions. i believe the u.s. response is among the most mismanaged foreign-policy blunders and recent history. after consistently failing to block isis expansion, we have to accept the new reality -- isis is now in dozens of countries and has repeatedly demonstrated the ability to reach our homeland. of focusing on isis as
if it were confined to iraq and syria, we urgently need an aggressive, comprehensive strategy o that stretches from morocco to southeast asia. at the same time, our adversaries are becoming more diverse. we must counter a resurgent russia, defend against cyber manage delicate geopolitical forces in the middle east, and quitting the growing schism between sunni and shia muslims. how does the president respond to these challenges? his hallmark policy of striking a deal with iran, the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism. he also failed to prevent russia from propping up syrian dictator bashar al-assad, amanda the president himself said must surrender power. meanwhile, some of our closest allies -- the kurds come israelis, egyptians -- often downplayed ors
dismissed within the administration. our partners around the world want to work with us. but they cannot rally around american leadership if they do not understand what our foreign policy is trying to accomplish. although i disagree with the president's policies, the committee will continue to provide the intelligence community with the resources it needs to protect the nation. particular emphasis this year on preserving capabilities for the next president. because the intelligence community is being stretched thin and is overwhelmed by a complex threat matrix gregory wasson prioritize investment that we must prioritize investment/ . to protect the american people by providing oversight, direction, and resources to enable effective, efficient, and constitutional intelligence activities. additionally, amid the growing threats we face, it is critically important that we ensure the intelligence community acts as careful steward of the taxpayers'
dollars. our committee will focus on making progress in the following five key areas. first, encouraging efficient investment in areas such as space, where complex capability requirements routinely drive up in adopting new technology. including data analytics, encryption, and technical training specifically, and community-wide projects like cloud, ashley when several community agencies are implementing real -- three organizational plans which applies to the training of the next generation of analysts and to deliver intelligence on hard-to-reach targets. third, producing objectives and
unbiased intelligence analysis. particularly in the department of defense. committeee is a model effort to determine if there were systematic problems or any it is vital that this committee protect and seriously consider the testimony of the many whistleblowers have provided information to us for example we have been made aware that both files and e-mails have been deleted by personal at centcom. and we expect that the department offense will provide these and other relevant documents to the committee. fourth, improving the efficiency of intelligence support to
combat commands, as well as facilities and personnel costs. it is alarming that the committee identified up to $50 million for the savings, and more than $300 million is a needed since the unneeded construction. in total, this is $1.5 billion in savings for one project. the response we received from the administration can only be described as delay, denial, and deception. this has led the chairman's and me to ask the gao to conduct a full investigation. furthermore, was a blower's committee with documentation showing that the department of defense has provided false information to congress. this committee will now conduct another round of interviews, and we will turn over our findings to the house committee on oversight and government reform, which already has an ongoing investigation into this matter. and to the department of defense and inspector general. finally, we have asked for data
on all intelligence is in no animator support contractors at the combatant command. this request was made in december. and this is information that should be readily available. informants have made this committee aware that basing this decision on a significant cost for the taxpayer, are being determined to maximize pay and benefits of small groups of individuals. this includes both the department of defense civilians and contractors. this brings into questions hundreds of millions of dollars of contracts that are being awarded annually.
fifth and finally, migrating cyber threats and improving cyber defenses, and light of the rapid pace of technological change. to address these problems to the committee helped pass the cyber security act of 2015. while the director of national intelligence is establishing the cyber threat intelligence information center, we need to ensure that the new law is of limited properly, and of the new center operates effectively. additionally, the latest challenges that the government has met in gaining access to the iphone used by one of the san bernardino terrorists is emblematic of the growing problem posed by encryption. finally, we need to educate members of congress on the importance of reauthorization of section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. i look forward to hearing what the witnesses have to contribute on these five focus areas. and with that, i would like to recognize my ranking member for any comments you like to make. >> thank you. i want to join you in thanking our witnesses, director clapper. the threats we face today are incredibly diverse and daunting, from cyber terrorism, to russian aggression, to threats from space, to threats from below the sea. we are living in a dangerous world. because of technology, some of
these threats are new. l, but still potentially devastating. north korea's nuclear test and recent space launch, russia's interventions and ukraine, syria, and its threat to the baltic states, china's activity andhe south china sea, regional power struggles in the middle east, are a reminder that state-based threats have not gone down, they are getting worse. still, other threats are shifting. even as coalition bombing has halted the group's expansion in iraq and syria, isis is expanded into places like libya, and has sought to incite attacks in inope, and to incite attacks the united states, as we saw in san bernardino. many of these threats are also interrelated.
isis is compounded by its use of technology, particularly social media and encryption. russia and china possible designs are supported by a desire to confront the u.s. lost dominance in space. to navigate through these treacherous shoals, we look to to sound- to the i.c. the alarm's, and to find solutions. after the hearing earlier this month, many were saying that the earth was going to hell in a handbasket, and i can understand why, given the myriad of the challenges we face, but i want to emphasize that we are highlighting these threats so we can but -- so we can discuss how to best counter them. , we have begun reviewing and receiving budget submissions. we look forward to mower sessions -- more sessions with you to ensure you have what you need, and to do so in a way that is lawful, cost effective, and
keeping with the highest of american values. some solutions are not going to come easily. the simple fact is example of five by the case -- is exemplified by the case involving apple. one thing is clear, the court's ruling will have ripple effects and will significantly impact the law enforcement community, the intelligence community, the business community, and all of us individually. this case and others like it implicate policy questions that cannot be decided by the courts alone. congress, through discussions with the public, the global community, the law enforcement, the intelligence community, and the white house, must weigh the policy considerations and arrive at sensible solutions. as a first step, we need fax. that's why sheriff nuñez and i asked the national academy of science to report on this issue, which will be completed this year. it's also why i supported a
commission on encryption and the broader cyber security commission. a broader debate would move us further from abstractions in towards solutions. as a second step, we need to a knowledge of and not engage in absolutes, as this community has shown in its leadership on surveillance reform, privacy and liberty 10 months -- can and must coexist. there is no doubt that the terrorists are exploiting cheap encryption technology to do us harm, and they will continue. at the same time, there is no doubt that cyber security and privacy are under relentless attack from nationstates and hackers, and encryption provides a key defense. we can agree that law enforcement and the intelligence community have a law enforce -- have an obligation to solve crimes. there is also no doubt that companies have an agreement with their shareholders to maximize
profit, and with their customers to ensure privacy. it is our job to draw lines. a broad advocating mandate on decryption, nor do i favor a world where law enforcement is completely shut out of illicit communications when they have a court warrant. what i am advocating is for a cooperative, fact-based approach to solving this problem. congress can pose a solution if it must, but it will be far better for us to arrive at a solution with the negotiation of all stakeholders, that will set best practices that we can champion around the world. yes, we are living in a dangerous world, as well as a complex world. but it is also a world of great opportunity. some of the challenges we have with incredible talent, creativity, and innovation of american businesses that are solving problems every day. have the best
intelligence community in the world working tirelessly to ensure these advances are not being used to propagate hate and terror for talent -- channels beyond our reach. you, mr. chairman. i yield back. general manuals back. mr. klapper, you have an opening statement. i think you will speak for the entire panel? >> that's right. >> i want to again thank you for your 55 years of service. i don't know if this is your last hearing, but if it is, i am sure you are happy. [laughter] >> we are here to update you on some of the pressing national security issues facing our nation.
to save you time, mine will be the only opening statement. we will be back next week. i will be back on the third of march to address the budget and management issues that you raised, chairman nunez. as i said last year, unpredictable and stability has become the new normal, and this trend will continue, we think, for the first table future. violent extremists are acted in about 40 countries. seven countries are experiencing a collapse of government authority, and 14 others face regime threatening, violent instability, or both. than 59 countries face significant risk of instability through 2016. a record level of migrants is likely to grow further this year. migration displacement will strain countries in europe, africa, asia, and the americas. displacedeople are globally since the end of world war ii, when the united states started keeping such records. timing -- climate change,
environmental degradation, for decisions, and inadequate infrastructure will magnetize that instability. infectious diseases and vulnerabilities to the global supply chain will continue to pose threats. for example, the zika virus, first detected in the western hemisphere in 2014, has reached the united states and is projected to cause up to 4 million cases in this hemisphere. on that premise, i want to briefly comment on technology and cyber. technological innovation during the next few years will have an even more significant in fact on a ray of life -- impact on our way of life. our economical to prosperity, but it will bring new security. the internet of things will create -- will connect billions of devices that could be exploited. artificial intelligence will enable computers to make autonomous decisions about data and physical systems,
potentially disrupt labor markets. russia and china continue to have the most sophisticated cyber bromance. -- cyber programs. china has continued espionage with the united states, and its economic as ganache remains to be seen. iran and north korea continued to talk -- continue to conduct cyber espionage. nonstate actors also posed cyber threats. cyber threats to their greatest advantage, not only for recruitment, but to increase information -- release information. most criminals remain the pervasive cyber threat to the u.s. financial sector. they used cyber to conduct theft, extortion, and other criminal activities. now more sunni violent extremist groups and members of safe havens and in a time in history. the rate of foreign fighters
driving the conflict zones is without precedent. at least 38,200 foreign fighters, including at least 6900 from western countries, have traveled from syria -- to syria from at least one of -- from syria to at least 100 countries since 2012. as we have seen, returning fighters pose a dangerous operational threat. l has demonstrated sophistic -- sophisticated trade tactics, as we saw. isil has become the preeminent global terrorist threat. scores ofttempted attacks outside syria and iraq in the past 15 months. estimated strength and now exceeds that globally of al qaeda. isil's leader seems to strike the u.s. homeland, beyond although theacks,
u.s. is a harder target in europe, isil operations remain a critical factor in 2016. al qaeda's affiliates also have proven resilient. despite counterterrorism that is largely decimated the core leadership in afghanistan and pakistan, al qaeda affiliates are destined to make things in 2016. and theaeda peninsula al nusra front of the two most capable al qaeda branches. mobile-based technology enables , and serves tos undercut law enforcement efforts. iran continues to be the foremost state sponsor of terrorism and exerts its influence in regional crises in the middle east during the islamic revolutionary guard corps quds force, it's terrorist partner handles law -- hezbollah , and proxy groups.
threatfirsthand the posed in the united states by homegrown extremists in the july attack in chattanooga and the attack in san bernardino. the fbi arrested nine isil supporters. in 2015, the number increased more than fivefold. massg toward what was a discretion, north korea continues to conduct terrorist activities. they claim that a satellite was successfully placed in orbit. additionally, in january north korea carried out its fourth nuclear test, claiming it was a hydrogen bomb, but the yield was too low for it to be successful. pyongyang continues to develop missile material. it is also committed to developing a long-range nuclear armed missile that is capable of posing a direct threat to the united states, although the
system has not been supplied. despite these economic challenges, russia continues its aggressive military modernization program. it has the largest and most nuclearnew -- capable armed ballistic missile force. it has developed a missile that violates the imf treaty. china continues to modernize its nuclear missile force and is striving for secure a second strike capability. it continues to profess a no first use doctrine. the joint plan of action provides us greater transparency into iran's material production. it increases the time the produce aould need to nuclear weapon from a few months to about a year. 08n probably views jcpenney -- jc pla as a method of removing sections. a strives to achieve its goals will dictate
its level of adherence. so far, the iranians appear to be in compliance. michael weapons continue to pose a threat in syria and iraq. -- chemical weapons continue to pose a threat in syria and iraq. isil has also used toxic chemicals in iraq and syria, including the blister agents sell for mustard. -- sulfur mustard. the first time a chemical warfare agent has been used in a attack since 1995. in the space and counter space realm, many countries are engaged in the space domain. russia and china understand how our military fights are, and how we rely on space. they are each pursuing destructive satellite systems. china continues to make progress on its anti-satellite missile program. counterintelligence,
it is persistent, complex, and evolving. targeting u.s. information by foreign intelligence services continue unabated. russia and china pose the , followed byat iran and cuba on a lesser scale. as well as the threat of insiders taking advantage of their access to collect and remove sensitive national security information will remain a persistent challenge. with respect to transnational organized crime, i do want to touch on one prime issue, specifically drug trafficking. southwest border seizures of herrmann in the united states have doubled since 2010. more than 10,000 people died of hair when overdoses in 2014, much of it 30 to 50 times more potent. year, more than 20,000 died from opiate overdoses. cocaine production in colombia has increased significantly.
quickly move through a few regional issues. in east asia, china's leaders are pursuing an active foreign policy while dealing with much slower economic growth. chinese leaders have also embarked on the most ambitious military forms in its history. regional tension will continue as china pursues instruction of its outpost in the south china sea. russia has demonstrated its military capabilities to project ,tself as a global power command respect for the west, in advance russian interests globally. in ukrainejectives will probably remain unchanged, and tuning -- including maintaining long-term influence and frustrating its attempt to integrate into western institutions. pigeon is the first leader -- why we're beaten is the first leader since stalin to expand its territory. vladimir putin is the first
leader since stalin to expand its territory. faces the reality, however, of economic recession, driven in large part by falling oil prices as well as sanctions. nearly 4% gdp contraction last year will probably extended to 2016. in the mideast and south asia, there are more cross-border military operations in the mideast region than in any time since the 1973 arab war. forces -- andd isil forces will probably make incremental gains. is now somewhat on the defensive, and its manpower shrinking, but it remains a credible threat. in syria, pro-regime forces had the initiative, having made strategic aims -- strategic gains.
manpower shortages will continue to undermine the syrian regime's ability to undermine battlefield objectives. its groups like unity. they sometimes have competing battlefield interests and fight among themselves. killed as00 have been they war has dragged on, probably a low estimate. meanwhile, the humanitarian situation in syria continues to deteriorate. the refugees represent about half of syria's pre-conflict population. establishing a 30 and security across the country will be difficult with hundreds of militia groups operating throughout the country. isil has established its most developed branch outside of the -- outside of syria and iraq in bases ind maintains
other areas of the country. the yemeni conflict will probably remain stalemated through 2016. meanwhile, affiliates and yemen have exploited the conflict and collapse of government to recruit and expand territorial control. the country's economic and humanitarian situation also continues to worsen. iran deepened its involvement in iraqi, and you many conflicts in 2015. it has also increased military cooperation with russia in support of the regime. iran's supreme leader continues to view the united states as a major threat, and we have assessed his views will not change despite the of limitation deal. jcpoa in south asia, afghanistan is at serious risk of a political breakdown during 2016, encouraged by mounting political, economic, and security challenges. is aing political cohesion
routing stability. needless to say, there are many more threats to u.s. interests worldwide that we can address, but i will stop the litany of dream -- litany of doom and we will address your questions. >> thank you, director clapper. i'm going to go first to director comey. director, there has been a lot recently in the news, as you are aware, involving the iphone that was owned by the san bernardino shooter. what exactly are you asking apple to do? how does this differ from the other times you have asked apple to help you lawfully obtain communications? dir. comey: thank you, mr. chairman. in san bernardino, the federal judge has ordered the maker of the phone to do two things, that is disable the auto-erase function on the phone, so that
if the fbi is trying to guess the past go to the phone, it does not automatically delete the contents, essentially, after and second, to disable the delay between tries, so if we are going to try to guess the code, it does not take years, but instead we are able to do it in minutes or hours, and to do that through the remote pulsing of codes to the phone. that's what the order is about. don't know whether this particular relief has been sought in another corporate seating, i don't think so -- core proceeding, i don't think so. it's possible, but i am not aware of it. >> i'm sure you will be getting more questions from this committee, and i know you are testifying nest week for the judiciary committee. i want to switch over to director stuart. 15, 2016, "the daily
beast" ran a long report titled whistleblowers warned top spy about skewed isis intel." shortly afterward, our committee was briefed by od and i on the survey results, which indicated that over 40% of the analysts build our problems with analytic integrity and sitcom processes. fightersps and war fighting all over the sitcom alr, is it appropriate that we months or longer for the inspector general report before we even begin to rectify these problems? mr. chairman, i have no control it -- mr. chairman,rt: i have no control of the pace. be good for all involved to get closure of the extent of this allegation, we have no control of the process.
i probably won't comment any further on the investigation, representsvey itself a sampling of the 16,000 plus members that we have in this enterprise, and that enterprise where we put very strict measures to ensure that we comply with analytic standards, to ensure that we have a process for those who believe their views are not being heard, through devils advocate programs, through sampling of our products, we think we have in place a good standard in the qualitylook at of our analysis and the integrity of it, and i will leave it at that. >> well it appears there was a process in place to get input from the analysts, and to me it seems like 40% of analysts that are concerned at sitcom, that is something that cannot be ignored.
regardless of the investigation, i know that will take place, but if you have 40% of the analysts, are you going to go back and pull them again, or is this an annual process that od and i goes through, but what changes can be made in the short term with the, for lack of a better term, unhappiness of the analysts at sitcom? is ann. stewart: this annual process. we will continue to look at ways we can improve our training. we have done that already. we have already looked at requests were there has been a dispute, where we sent our analysts over there to look at the analytic rigor and different views, so we continue to do this process even as the investigation goes on. >> would you consider the 40% to be unusually high? lt. gen. stewart: i would consider it unusually high, yes, mr. chairman. >> mr. schiff? >> thank you, mr. chairman.
director comey, i wanted to ask you about the apple case as well. the fact that the san bernardino case is pretty compelling, in terms of wanting to know what is on that phone, whether there were other parties involved, or other plans, or targets of attack, and while that application, as you pointed out, is focused solely on that phone, when i read the emotion in support of the application under ae all writs act, i don't see principle, and by that i mean if the argument is accepted by the court in this case, wouldn't it lead district attorneys and other prosecutors to make the same argument in their cases, and some of those may be compelling. i think you pointed to a pregnant woman who was murdered in arkansas, and the phone may be the only key to her killer is , but nonetheless that action may be good in misdemeanor
cases, involving nonviolent offenses. may only affect this phone, the precedent will be there for many others. i guess what i would like to ask you is, is there a limiting principle here? is there a way through negotiation that we can arrive at places where it is appropriate to seek this relief, and cases where it is not? do and knowledge the broader privacy -- do you acknowledge the broader policy applications under the act writs act? i know a future operating system may not allow this kind of relief, but nonetheless, if it is technologically feasible, even in the next generation of operating systems, for apple to help with the opening of a phone, it seems to me that the argument you are making in this case will apply to the new operating systems as well, so is there a limiting principle here,
and is there any way to resolve this through negotiation? because the initial positions of the parties are, we need accessible may have a legal warrant, and the other side is saying, we can never provide ,ccess, because if we do here we will have to do it everywhere. dir. comey: thank you, mr. schiff. i agree very much with the way you friended. this case and others are very important, but there is a broader policy question that is far larger than any individual case that we have to grapple with, but to the case of the answer will first come from a technical expert. i am not a lawyer, but i will take a shot at it. i think it is potentially, whatever the judge's decision is in california, i am sure will be appealed, will be instructive of other courts, and their way -- and there may well be other cases that involve the same kind of phone and operating system. what experts have told me is the thisnation of five c and
-- of 5c and this particular is limiting.tem all of these decisions will guide how other courts handled similar requests. a tool irits act is used as a prosecutor for howreds of years so that judges interpret that in any jurisdiction is not binding on others, but it will be important , so that's important to say, but the larger question will not be answered in the courts and should not be, because it is really about, who do we want to be as a country and how do we want to govern ourselves? >> let me answer that question -- ask that question from the bureau's perspective, cap law enforcement would with a policy only in certain cases,
where there are violent crimes, or other serious cases, terrorist related, that the all writs act -- changes to the all writs act would apply, is that something that the law enforcement community, the intelligence community, you think, could engage with the technology sector? i think conversation and negotiation is the key to resolving this. this is the hardest question i have seen in government, and it's going to require negotiation and conversation, but i would be very keen to keep the bureau out of the policymaking business. i think we have two roles in this. we must do a competent investigation following the murder of tubing people in san bernardino, and we will, and we will use whatever lawful measures are available, but i think it is important that. or stand the costs associated with moving to a world of universal and strong encryption. -- that people will under stand
to a worldf moving of universal and strong encryption. part of me thinks, i don't want anybody looking at my stuff, but another part of me says law enforcement, which i am part of, really doesn't save people's lives, rescues kids, rescues homes from terrorists, and we do that a lot through search warrants, so we are going to move to a world where there is not-- where that is possible anymore. it will be a different world, so we just have to make sure that the bureau explains to folks what the costs are so that people don't look at us five years from now and say, where were you guys when this happened? important to let this drift. my bureau wants to be a factual input so that we have a robust, well-informed conversation. there is one other matter i
wanted to raise, and that is the subject of libya. concerned that the size of the tumor -- that as the size of the tumor in syria and iraq decreases, we are seeing the growth of a new malignancy in libya. there seems to be a concern with taking more aggressive military action against isis in libya, that it would somehow interfere the ongoing, never-ending negotiations to try to get the two political parties together and form a common government. from an intel perspective, do you think that we could take more aggressive military action , in parallel with the political negotiations, or do you think we have to choose between them? that the pace of those negotiations, which seems endless, that we may get to the point where isis is so entrenched in libya that we have to embark on the same multiyear
project that we are undertaking in iraq and syria. >> i will start that and let others contribute. i think you aptly characterized the dilemma here, in terms of more robust military intervention in libya and the potential jeopardy that that --oses to a fragile, and fragile, evolving political process. we would like nothing better than to have a government in with whom wea could work and from whom we could gain consent for engaging militarily in libya. that is a subject, an active discussion as i speak. i think there was recognition that there was a relationship
between trying to get this national court off the ground and counterterrorism operations, and discussions that jim and i and others have been in, recognizing that what you do in one environment affects the other, but i think the purpose is to try to pursue both with figures simultaneously, recognizing that you cannot put off the counterterrorism operations as this continues to take place. further onill down that. do either of the political theions take issue with necessity of military action against isis? i am trying to get an understanding as to why, in an effort that i am hoping will be more fully integrated with european military leadership, a more aggressive approach against isis in libya would somehow interfere with the political negotiations. competingan: the two governments, neither of them are monolithic.
a spectrum of political views in each one of those. to the extentis, that there can be in libya, a fair amount of agreement that asl poses a threat to libya a nationstate, and i think there is sentiment among most parties, but not all, that this represents a threat to the , but there is a wide range of views in the political spectrum in libya. >> thank you, i yield back. >> mr. miller. much, mr.ou very chairman. there is a lot of education that will be taking place about section 702. director krapp are -- director clapper, brennan, director coming, could you please how importantfly
section 702 is to your respective agencies? director clapper: i will start, and we also invite rick legit, the deputy director of the nsa, but all of us have an equity. represents a viable intelligence capability for all of us. to be clear, this is the provision in the foreign surveillance act that involves the collection of non-us persons overseas. the current law expires in december 2017, so we are already on an education campaign in congress to ensure people understand what a vital tool this is. let me turn first to mr. legit. -- mr. legett. >> it is a vital intelligence
tool for non-us persons who are overseas, and it does not permit the targeting of u.s. persons. that would require a separate court order. in the course of conducting collection under 702, if a u.s. person is in contact, there are minimization procedures that we used to minimize the retention and disclosure of the identity of that person because it is not of formal -- of foreign intelligence value, and those are reviewed annually by the court. is acomey: 702 critical tool for the cia for the collection of intelligence, as where is -- as well as our operational activities. there have been numerous instances over the years where 702 has been instrumental in our ability to uncover and help
asrupt activities that are threat to our national security interests. it is difficult to go into some of those, but let me mention at least one. in late 2014, a longtime libyan extremist was arrested by local authorities in europe, following several trips into syria and while he met with senior extremist operatives. at the time of his arrest, the cia assessed and that he was involved in next hurdle operational planning, and the cia provided this information from section 702 collection to assist local governments in their investigation that led to the arrest of that individual. that to the masses, and many respects, the way that 702 intelligence -- that depict mise es the wayt epitomiz
702 is used to disrupt these activities. would add ishing i that reasonable people did argue about how effective the telephone metadata collection was. this is not even a close call. if we lost this tool, it would be bad for us. it is important to have this conversation early, so i thank you for the question. >> yield back. >> the gentleman yields back to mr. hinds. comey, i want to pick up the line of questioning on the apple fbi. as mr. schiff said, the facts are compelling in this case. some of the issues are novel and challenging. this body should be determining the answers to the questions you ask, and it will be solved in the judiciary, of course. we will once again shirk our constitutional duty on the authorization of military forces stop we are preparing to upon a
new supreme court nominee. two questionso about the thinking of the fbi. the first is a follow-on to mr. schiff's. it is my understanding that the fbi's request is narrow and only pertains to this device in this instance. there is a legitimate worry, though, that a decision in favor of the fbi could be a narrow end of a very wide wedge. mr. schiff asked about the legal domain in which this might apply. i want to ask about the authority. if the fbi prevails, apple will be required to write code at the behest of government. my question, where does this authority and? -- end? tothat the authority of fbi require the inclusion of code into a new device? could you painted a bright line for us as to where you think that authority ends?
dir. comey: thank you, mr. himes. i don't think my can -- i don't think i can buy nature of my role. i think these are reasonable questions, because judges on both coasts are going to have to interpret the meaning of the all writs act, and what is i amnable assistance, and really not someone of the qualified to offer a good answer to that one. rep. himes: ok, so at this point in time, it is not a belief of the fbi that the authority could go beyond what it has requested in this case? dir. comey: i actually have not thought of it. here is the way i think, the fbi focuses on case, and then case, and then case. i have said this because it is true, the san bernardino litigation is not about us trying to establish a precedent.
it is about trying to be confident investigating something that is an active investigation, so i don't know willawyers and judges think about the limiting principle on the legal side. i just don't know. rep. himes: thank you. my second question is about the way to think about this. right now, we are having this question in terms of the tension between privacy and security, but there is a different tension, security versus security. if you prevail, and if this code is written, it would be the subject of other requests from law enforcement. this code would exist, presumably, on a server at apple, and that creates a substantial threat. if this code exists on a server at apple, it will become the target of our sovereign adversaries, of criminal enterprises, of terrorists. you don't need to think hard to spin some ugly scenarios. if that code gets out into the wild, a terrorist entity knows my precise location, gets photos of my children.
i want to know if you could give us a sense for, in taking the position the fbi has, how did you think about the trade-off between the compelling desire to get the information on this casecular san bernardino with the risks that would be posed by the existence of this code, should it exist and ultimately get out into the wild? again, i think that is something the court is going to sort out. i am trying to because this in answering because i am not a next bird, but what experts have the me is that the code judge has ordered apple to write works only on this one phone, so the idea of it getting out into the wild, as the experts tell me, is not a real thing. the second thing, the code will be at apple, which i think has a darn good job of protecting its code. prior to 2014, they were able to unlock and a phone.
code beinguire that let into the wild, but again, that's something a judge will have to sort out. time, i wantedd to thank you of raising the issue of cyber security in your written testimony. i wonder, agreements were made when the chinese president visited our president. i wonder if you could characterize whether those agreements have been effective in reducing the amount of cyber espionage and cyber activity that we have seen out of china? >> we could probably go into that in more detail in a closed session. as i indicated in my oral remarks, the jury is out. i don't think we are in a position to say whether they are in strict compliance. they can point to that in more detail in a closed session. >> thank you. >> the gentleman yields back to mr. king. rep. king: i had to think
questions for director coming on apple. one, were there any negotiations between the fbi and apple leading up to the core proceeding? dir. comey: yes, plenty. they have been pretty helpful, by the way. apple has been very cooperative. we just got to a place where they were not willing to offer the relief the government was asking for. rep. king: and secondly, i have in theeveral people media say that the fbi could do this if they wanted to, but they are trying to establish a case here. dir. comey: that is a product of people watching too many tv shows. i don't mind tv shows about the fbi, but sometimes we are not as attractive or talented as we appear on tv. [laughter] rep. king: ok. i yield back. >> mr. quigley? >> thank you, mr. chairman. diving deeper into ukraine and russia, i don't know who wants
to comment first, but some sense of their strategic goals here? obviously, the impact of sanctions is pretty dramatic to their economy. , a frozen guess conflict, and what else can we anticipate? what has had the greater impact on russia, russia's economy has been connected to the price of oil. crude is running around $37 or $38, if that, a barrel, and the planning factor that the russians have consistently used in their budget is $50 a barrel, so sections have certainly contributed to that, but the major impact has been with oil. i think the russians consider .kraine little russia i think it is deeply steeped in their history and culture, so they are going to attempt to sustain influence, particularly
republics,separatist and obviously what the russians most fear and are most concerned ukraine gravitating to the west more than it already has, becoming a part of the european union, or worse, nato, so russia will continue, i think, to sustain their influence in ukraine in that matter. do you see the status continue in the way it is? obviously, there is renewed conflict at different times, but no dramatic change recently. director clapper: that's right. i think for now, they will maintain the status quo. that is creating issues among
the separatists, and a lot of the issues that are occurring along that has been drawn are occasioned by upstart separatists who russians do not completely control. john, you want to add to that? there has been movement as far as the agreement, but there are still shortcomings. , i your characterization think there is still uncertainty about how the russians themselves will yesterday themselves -- will extricate themselves from this, which is taking a toll, the oil prices, because of the sanctions. the economy and the two complex they are most involved with, this sense that -- do you sense that putin has his hands full, or do you have concerns about efforts to destabilize the baltic region?
director clapper: there are concerns about that, but that is more in the soft region. rather than hard military assault on the baltics. that does not seem to be in the cards right now. i do think that the russians are preoccupied right now with syria, and they have put a lot into that. they are confronting the considering or whether they will put more ground forces. think the i constraining factor for them is the memory of afghanistan. getting into kind of a bottomless pit, and i think that thinking andussian is one of the reasons why i think there is an apparent interest in the cessation of hostilities. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> the gentleman kneels back. mr. moreland disorganized.
-- is recognized. comey, this warrant that you want to the court to get, it was really no different in process than what you do for any other words that -- any other warrant that you would want to get to check on evidence. i mean, you were just trying to get to where you could get into the phone, not do anything else, is that correct? that is correct. if you want to search, go to a judge, make a probable cause that there is evidence on the device, and get a search warrant from the court for the device. what happened here, because the devices unable to be opened, the judge issued a separate order on this thing called the already sacked to try to give effect to the -- the all writs act to try
to give effect. to me, just from a common man, i would think it's different if you got to bring people who have killed 14 other folks in a terrorist attack, and you are just trying to get through the security code to get somethe device, versus divorce lawyer trying to figure out what a philandering husband may have been talking to, so i think there is a difference. i think the american people sense that. these are people who have committed a crime. the next thing i wanted to ask is, we have been going through a ,ot of the iran nuclear deal and we have given them a large sum of money, different varying i know thathat, but
a lot of your agencies take part in monitoring the financing of isil, whether that is in libya, , and how are we what the iranians are able to do, or are doing -- it's an open question, any of you can thesen, as far as what are, because to me it gives the perfect opportunity, within going to france and other places in making these large purchases, another great opportunity to launder the money. director clapper: we could go into detail in a closed session. i would say here that, of the money that was released or freed up by the virtue of the jcp
encumberedch of it is for debt or domestic needs of the iranian economy. flowed -- the organization we worry the most about is the quds force -- some money has flowed to them, but not nearly as much as they wanted. far as how tracking finances and financial data goes, the details of that would be best left to them. >> thank you, sir. i yield back. >> the gentleman kneels back, ms. sewall? >> thank you. director clapper, i want to turn back to cyber security and see if you could talk a little bit about what you think your assessment is of the
intelligence community possibility -- the intelligence community's ability to counter cyber threats, and what you see is future threats that we would face, and whether or not we were able to meet those challenges? director clapper: the intelligence committee pertains to intelligence, which is to collect and analyze threats in the cyber domain, and in support of others who are more directly responsible for either planning attacks or for defense. in our forthcoming budget, which i will speak to next week, as to what we are actually asking for the generalhink threat environment is quite
both from the standpoint of the capability of the nationstates, prime among them russia and china, and nonstate actors. there is an inverse relationship between the capabilities that countries have, china and russia being the most forgettable -- formidable, perhaps less threatening in terms of their intent. if you have second-tier countries like iran and north korea -- , how would you assess our ability to counter those threats? clapper: countering them, and one dimension, is our ability to defend, which is not
just a government thing, but the private sector as well, so when you say defend, that is a big domain. i think are concerned, our responsibility and are intent -- cern,oncerned, -- our con responsibility, and our intent is that they have the adequate intelligence to bring to bear. with respect to the space sector, could you tell us a little bit about it? more detail in your report, but about our ability to counter some of the russia and chinese anti-satellite -- that isis a subject best left for a closed session, but i will say that both the
russians and chinese and embarked on a very aggressive and versatile, and diverse, set of capabilities in the space , and this has prompted a lot of attention on the part of the department of defense as well as the intelligence community to provide an array of defenses and resilience, and reconstitution, if necessary should we use our -- lose our valuable space assets. this is a commentary on russian and chinese inside on how heavily the united states depends on space for a variety of needs. >> thank you, i yield back. >> dr. hank? >> thank you, mr. chairman. director comey, not to beat the apple issued a death, but one quick question. has apple clearly articulated
what their reasons are to not cooperate to the extent that you have requested? slope, fourthpery amendment, civil liberties, or is it more of an economic issue, where their cooperation in showing the world that they might be able to accomplish what is requested makes their product less desirable, and therefore they lose market share? dir. comey: i don't know if that is a question i can answer. i obviously don't want to talk about our private conversations in this investigation will stop there -- of this investigation. a lot of been discussion in the press, and they will explain in court while they -- in court tomorrow why they do not think it is appropriate, so i will leave it at that. >> i yield back. >> mr. carson? rep. carson: thank you, mr. chair. director comey condo -- director
comey, can you describe how the fbi makes the decision to determine which communities warrant proactive outreach and engagement to prevent radicalization an? think so.: i any community where we believe there is a risk of people turning towards violence, and sometimes that is an ethnic community, and immigrant community, sometimes it is a particular community with a particular flavor of antigovernment sentiments, young people who in turn -- you may turn the violence, from there we try to engage with the community. is there more of a holistic approach by not only bringing and community leaders, but educators and psychologists within the community, to prevent the kind of self radicalization that is taking place? dir. comey: yes, sir.
it has to be an entire community thing. they cannot be law enforcement or religious institutions, it has to be parents, educators, physicians, social workers. one of the things the bureau is trying to do as part of our countering violent extremism effort is bringing together talented people from all --ferent super pacs gives different perspectives in the community, especially if we are dealing with a young person, there is a prospect of a group coming together and redirecting that person, but there has to be a whole lot of folks besides us. has the citizens academy been an effective tool and creating some kind of buy and what those communities? dir. comey: yes. is run inns academy all of our field offices. we invite people in from all walks of life to see how we do our work, ask us hard questions, and stay involved to give us
feedback on how we are doing, and to connect us to parts >> dr. winthrop is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i do want to thank all of you for being here and as dr. hecht said, what you represent and the work you do, i have a question more for later in closed session. but one thing that i think we can't ignore as we sit here on the side of congress, admiral mullen spoke years ago about our debt being a threat to our national security. and so i want to ask you, director clapper, you know, as we face all these increased external threats to our nation, how does this basically an internal threat of our debt affect our capabilities in the work that you do? >> well, it's -- it affects us, if -- to the extent that has inhibition on our resources. meaning our funding.
so that's why we've been very concerned about the impacts of sequestration which we're not through yet. so in that respect, it -- it is a concern. i have to say that thanks to the congress, we've done reasonably well in our funding requests. and i hope the same is true in 2017. certainly i would just say as a citizen, i do worry about our debt. and as a country. and so i worry about it from that respect. >> in the line of national security, i think that we need to -- continue to address your needs and helpful to us when you discuss whether you have the appropriate wherewithal to do your job. and as we make decisions here. i thank you for that input and i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. mr. stewart. is recognized.
>> thank you, mr. chairman. and to you, gentlemen, i express my appreciation and gratitude and sincerely on behalf of millions of americans who may or may not recognize the really wonderful work that your organizations do and the many dedicated men and women who sacrifice to do that. thank you. i will like to -- i suppose i could ask this question to nearly all of you all, though. director brennan, and perhaps mr. comey as well, you might be best suited although mr. -- i would appreciate your opinion as well. in this conversation with apple, which is taking a fair amount of our time here, the longer term problem, and we've had opportunities to talk about this with all of you, is the prospect of within a few short years, we may be -- to use the phrase dark with heavy encryption that doesn't allow us to use law enforcement mechanisms or national security tools. and i'm wondering if you would elaborate on what that really
means. could we help the american people understand that the encryption which we may not control, they may not be u.s. companies that are developing this encryption, that it's becoming widely available, and how that's going to make it more difficult for you to keep us as we expect, to keep american people safe? director comey, yes. >> this is a problem that all of us in the intelligence community have been talking about to sound an alarm. because we see increasingly in our national security work, and the bureau has significant criminal responsibilities in our criminal investigative work, increasing situations with lawful ot court orders read the communications of terrorists, gang bangers, pedophiles, all different kinds of bad people. and with the -- and lausm court orders and search warrants are increasingly unable to make that search warrant effective. and enter a device with a court's permission and get
what's on there. that affects all of our work. you've seen it. this committee has obviously -- knows a lot about it. rost promptly in the counterterrorism side with isle trying to motivate people either to come to their so-called cal fate or kill in the united states and when they find someone they think will either come or kill, they move them to a mobile messaging app that's end to end encrypted that we can't read with court orders. and that is a big problem for us. there are substitutes around the edges of it. people talk about met e-meta data the information about who contacted whom and that's useful but no substitute for knowing what they're talking about. sometimes physical surveillance is useful. sometimes informants are useful. but there really is no substitute. anybody who knows our work will tell you this. there's no substitute for being able to have a judge order access to the content. so our job is not to tell the american people what to do about it. we're just here to tell you there is a big problem and that darkness is going to grow and
grow and grow. and change our world. >> victor brennan, would you or mr. legend elaborate on that from an international perspective and the work where trying to do overseas and the encryption and how that affects that? >> i'll start and i know rick will have some comments. one of the most important submissions for c.i.a. is the collection of foreign intelligence. and increasingly, the cost of the -- because of the terrorist threat we face we need to get the intelligence that resides within intelligence organizations. the ability of these terrorists to communicate with one another and manners that make it very difficult for us to uncover, it has been increasing. and it is very frustrating. but also very concerning. because they follow the press. they follow these discussions. they are very sophisticated. a lot of them have grown up in an era of technological revolution. and they've been able to take advantage of that. and so it has made our challenges very difficult. so from my perspective, on the
foreign intelligence front, the more intelligence that we can obtain through our lawful authorities the better able we are to protect the american people. >> rick. >> yes, thank you, sir. i agree with both director comey and director brennan on the importance of this. and the impact it has. we track when our foreign intelligence targets talk about the communication or the security of their communications, and we see a growing number of them because of the -- the information that's in the press about the value of encryption moving toward that in a way that inhibits our ability to understand what they're doing and what director comey said about the difference between meta data and content is hugely important. and often overlooked. it's one thing to know that a person is in a particular place at a particular time. it's something else entirely and necessary to understand the -- in defeating terrorist plots to know what the target is, what the timing is, how the
attack is going to develop. >> in conclusion, i would just say this. i appreciate your conversation with apple. and director comey, you, i think, stated it well. this is a conversation that i think the american people need to have. we talked a little bit about 702 and the pathway forward with that as well. but it seems to me that technologically some of these conversations may become moot. because we may not have access to that information regardless. just because technology makes it impossible for us. in the future. and how we grapple with that is something i think we should consider as well. but mr. chairman, thank you, and i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. i want to thank the panel for the open session portion of the worldwide threats hearing. we will hopefully reconvene about 10:30 down in the classified spaces.
>> today on capitol hill, and advanced 3-d technology in the impact on consumers, manufacturers and jobs. housel be live with the energy and commerce subcommittee, live 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span two. today agriculture and homeland security experts testify about ways to keep the food supply secure. the subcommittee on emergency preparedness and communications also hearing live on c-span3. ♪
>> i am supporting hillary clinton. i think she is a fighter and the record shows she has been fighting for children, minorities for her entire life. she always works hard. >> i am supporting bernie we have somese insurmountable changes we need to have happen. incrementalism will not work. hillary clinton wants to chip paint off the walls. bernie wants to bring down the wall. that is what people of my generation need with the economy. that is that. feel the burn. ♪ >> next president obama gets an update on the fight against isis. the president spoke to reporters following a meeting with his national security council. he addressed military action against isis targets and technology experts in silicon
valley. this is 15 minutes. president obama: i just met with our counsel. i want to thank president -- i want to thank secretary kerry for hosting us. city k carter and chairman dunford on our military campaign. our special envoy to the coalition. at the outset this remains difficult fight. the situation in syria and iraq is one of the most complex the
. rld has seen in recent times aisle is entrenched. even in places where isil has been driven out it leaves behind utter devastation, communities in ruin that need to be restabilized and rebuilt which will take years and tremendous international resources because certainly in iraq they are hard pressed to come up with everything that they need to rebuild and in syria the regime there still is not constituted in such a way that it is investing in civilian populations. countries communities and groups that agree on fighting isil in the short term often don't agree on broader long term goals. indeed, the fight in syria is not only a civil war but it is also a proxy war between regional powers