tv U.S. House of Representatives Legislative Business CSPAN December 13, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm EST
time as governor. i want to focus a little bit on what the caller talked about make america great again statement. we heard mike pence say it in the brief interview this morning. how much was mike pence talking about whatever time in american time in americanica wasabout wr history? was this something he embraced since joining the ticket? like: he never put it that when he was the governor. in thes the problems light of an overreaching federal , if thent and, you know federal government wasn't opposing regulations, the
potential of indiana would be released. been more federal versus state from mike pence over the "make rather than a america great again" return to a .tature of the past that is not the language he used before the trump ticket. he served as a member of congress and mike pence is not -- out his own c-span interviewed mike pence.
-- - thank you for joining us. i cannot think of a more timely thenrsation for this event event than with mike pence. i want to thank our sponsors. i want to introduce rick hunt from raytheon. he will say a few words. rick hunt: welcome. thank you for joining us for the discussion of global and domestic threats to the united states' national security. it is between experienced and
great leaders. is proud to be a sponsor of this series. technology must be flexible and adaptive to identifying targets and defeating threats. non-negotiable in securing the infrastructure. raytheon is committed to innovative solutions for those who secure land, sea, air space, cyber, harbors, and borders. i'm here to listen to these experts, as they discuss the challenges facing national security. thank you. >> thank you. i want to introduce david and secretary johnson.
david: thank you to chris and rick. it is a pleasure to have everyone here for this 2016 securing tomorrow conversation. lloyd, susanob rice, james clapper, and now, jeh johnson. your subject, homeland security, is in the news. we are in a conversation about russian hacking during the election and i wanted to take you back to the important theement you made with director of national intelligence, james clapper, on october 7. i am reading in a served of
rpt ofbecause -- an exce this, because it sets the stage. you said that the u.s. intelligence community is confident that the russian theft oft directed the the emails from organizations, intended to interfere with the u.s. election process. scopeieve, based on the of these efforts, only the senior-most officials could have authorized these activities. a strong statement. i have opening questions. what is the effect you think that statement had? as others have asked, why did you wait that long, when the reports of the russian hacking went back to the summer, at
least? jeh johnson: thank you for having me and it is a pleasure to discuss these issues with you. i have learned, whenever you take an action that is significant, someone criticize .ou -- criticizes you somebody says, "what took so long?" it was a carefully worded and unprecedented statement. for many of us, including myself, we thought it was important to inform the american public and the voting public about what we saw and to declassify what we were in a position to declassify. we were careful and it took some time. we reviewed evidence and
intelligence from the intelligence community and we reached a point where we were prepared to issue this statement. we thought it was important to issue the statement before the election, because of what we saw going on. somebody will always criticize , "why didn't you say 7?"on october 6 or s the most important effect was to inform theble american public about what we seasoning the election that found it interesting
this was unprecedented. i do not know, in recent history, when the government has accused a superpower of attempting to interfere in the political process of the country. that dayll remember, was the same day as access hollywood and it was below the fold news. is above othe fold. i found that interesting. david: i don't want to compare the two. is latest turn in the story that the members of congress were briefed that, in the
judgment of the cia, the intentions of the russians was not just to simply interfere in the election process, but to help donald trump and hurt clinton. thent to ask you about additional aspect. it has been reported, for example, the russians hacked republican websites and have not released that information, in contrast to the democratic websites. is important to put this into context. apparently, there was an inappropriate disclosure of something that was ranked as classified to members of
congress and it was hearsay. so, i would urge us all to be careful about that. , the president has and part of the how we situate ourselves going forward and this kind of cyber environment. it will be done before we leave office and we will declassify as the publicassify for to be fully informed about what we saw and what we assessed. the other thing is that it is
important to note that, on election night, we had our guard and we had a team ready. night, we did not see anything that looked like altering ballot counts. there is a certain amount of noise going on out there and we did not see anything that affected the ballot count. i should ask if you can assure the country, based on what you said, that russian hacking did not affect the .utcome of the election
are you confident about that? jeh johnson: we see no evidence that hacking altered the ballot count or deprive people of voting. whether the disclosures that were made that we pointed out in altered the public opinion, that is beyond my level of expertise. david: let me take you back to that statement. the word you and clapper chose "interfere." was that meant to encompass the idea that you were seeing an attempt to help and hurt? beinghnson: i am a
cross-examined here! is a significant word. i am not sure that i can say much more than that. it has different meanings to different authors. it is a very serious word. what about affecting the outcome? jeh johnson: i would use the word, "interfere." i want to highlight that the president has directed a comprehensive review of the situation, now that we are past the election and i think it is important to wait for our
report. i am sure that we intend to class -- declassify as much as we can to understand what happened and how to better prepare ourselves for the future. david: this statement is unprecedented and it was an attempt to stop the russians from taking additional actions, with very specific language. day,october 7 two election indication of the activities being observed? jeh johnson: a good question and i think that we should wait for all of the facts to come in and,
frankly, this is something we .hould assess , in myneral matter most nations and superpowers, and there are exceptions you could site for me, they do alter their behavior when you point a finger at them. instance, we will have to assess that more comprehensively. >> i want to ask about director clapper and his assessment, trying to pass a law. before we leave this subject, from your standpoint, running
and the election day ballots , what are the lessons and what do you take away about the vulnerability of the system? jeh johnson: it is a two-part answer. the election system and infrastructure is very decentralized and you have 6000 or 9000 different jurisdictions involved. therefore, you have all sorts of different ways to count votes. most of this occurs off of the thisnet and, as we go into in summer and early fall, we have found that a lot of state election systems have ways to
a lot of them and withto us seeking help vulnerability scans. we had something like 36 states the cyberered security systems through vulnerability scans and we did identify a number of vulnerabilities, not specific to but theem, per se, types of things that we could identify for you. that is number one. hackingtalk about the is ae private emails, this continuing lesson that is
learned by the american public, in general. is government agencies, newspapers, media outlets, universities. they all need to benefit from .he lessons learned there is a lot that we can do with a pained over to's about best practices. do not open attachments you do not recognize. basic training goes a long way to raise barriers and firewalls. the most sophisticated actors can launch the most devastating attacks with spearfishing. somebody opens an attachment they shouldn't and people get inside the wall.
david: during the election campaign, donald trump was generally dismissive of a suggestion that russian hacking was playing a key role. he was interviewed by chris wallace, talking about the latest analysis by cia analysts and he said that he thought it was ridiculous and he said that he does not need daily intelligence briefings, because they are repetitive. you have had hundreds, thousands of intelligence briefings and you have gotten to know the cia well. i want to ask you what your agency and with the what you think the comments from did.resent elect
jeh johnson: i am a consumer of intelligence products, particularly in this job. that means that we get products from a number of intelligence agencies and, every once in a while, you will have a dissenting opinion. and,rge, they all concur in this job, the most important in the ordery is of consuming information every morning. i get up and i read the washington post, the new york times -- in that order! what happened last night when i was asleep? a political alert by electronics. book is onrk and my
my desk and it is the first thing i look at. it is important to note that the thelligence assessments in things generated by intelligence agencies are often a synopsis of world, aoing on in the mixture of the classified and not classified. from reading intelligence products, you find out what is happening in syria and iraq. there, frankly, if i have time, i get to the print newspapers and see how you guys are covering what is happening in the world, if you have it right or wrong. i always find time for the new york post.
>> no doubt. a regular stop. johnson: for somebody like me, the most important part of the day is the hour when i am consuming the intelligence assessments, to know what is happening in the world and the threats to the homeland. down andm done, i go we literally walk through the intelligence i have read and it is my opportunity to ask questions and hear specific items. it is incredibly important. i am hoping and assuming that the incoming administration will treat this equally. david: i want to put pressure on
this. do you think it was important for the president elect to make that kind of comment about intelligence officers who were briefed in congress and are responsible for the foreign threats to the country? jeh johnson: in my experience, and allysts at the cia of these agencies in the alpha that soup are very careful, deliberate. productse intelligence reach somebody at my level or at the level of the president, it will have been coordinated and vetted by numerous different agencies. and toood to scrutinize challenge the assessments, once in a while. i am not afraid to do that.
do not just take it as written. ask what supports this and how do we know that. it is good to challenge things. in my experience, our men and women in the intelligence community gather and assess intelligence and they are deliberate. if they were not, they would not be in the positions they occupy. >> before i turn to other members of the audience are those on c-span who would like to join in the "cross-examination" of the secretary of homeland security, send in your questions to the hashtag. , donald of twitter trump, i don't know if he is watching, but we invite any questions he has.
i want to ask you about john kelly, a distinguished general, but new to homeland security. you told me that you knew him when you are the pentagon general counsel and i want to ask you about him and whether you have already begun the transition conversations with him. if so, what sort of things have you talked about? >> well, my conversations are private. i know him well from when he was and i wasry assistant a general counsel. traveled together with presentetary and i was his sonmber 2010, when
's casket arrived. general kelly is a man of iaracter and integrity and believe that he will be well received by dhs. david: without asking for details, as you think about turning over the position to him what do you want to make sure he understands? jeh johnson: the first observation and recommendation that i have said publicly, i think it is important for the next leadership team to continue our efforts to reform the way
that the department of homeland security does business. management reform. stovepiped as an agency. stovepiped, as an agency. we have done a lot to centralize the decision-making, when it comes to budgets and acquisitions. hiring, we created joint task forces. border security, all the resources are coordinated by one task force. the same in the southeast. combat anded after a command structure. this andendorsed codified it. itput cement over that and
will stay there. we have joint requirement councils and i am pleased that we have turned the corner on the morale of the department. 3%.morale went up it does not sound like much. the increase of three percentage points is significant and i hope that the next leadership team focuses on the satisfaction of .mployees and their engagement and, all of the different efforts made to improve services. one must always be vigilant about the threats to homeland security, whether terrorism, cyber, aviation. and, immigration policy is
always a learning exercise and it is an issue with a lot of a motion. one has to be extraordinarily patient. david: one of the first is building a wall around the mexico border. wall.hnson: we do have a the wall that we have and what he is talking about building, is it feasible? do you, as secretary of homeland security, think there is more that could be done to make the border more secure? the actson: pursuant to
out006, we have built walls, fences, in the places where it makes sense. the border consists of the rio there are deserts and mountains. for much of the urban areas, there is a wall. used to say, show me a 10 foot wall and i will show you an 11 foot ladder or tunnel. these guys went through a wall in arizona. the answer is not necessarily a wall. if you talk to border security
experts, they will tell you, more surveillance, more technology, more equipment. we need to monitor the migration patterns, as they shift. and that isiles what they say. i have only been at this three years, but it is long enough to know that, when you are dealing immigration, you have to offer people who are desperate the alternative safe and legal path. solution andgional you have to address the underlying conditions that motivate a seven-year-old to , thel from guatemala
entire length of mexico, to the southwest border. desperate,who are you know, we put out information about the dangers of the journey and they say to me that, some of they are mores, dangerous. that is why they left. poverty andddress violence in central america. i am pleased that congress began this effort, otherwise, we will deal with this for a long time. numbers have goneer down. they are a fraction of what they is from a lot of that economic factors. the mexican economy is better. it is also the case that it is
down because of border security and the demographics have changed. it is women and children from central america and they are desperate to get here. we need to make the investment in remedying the factors, which is powerful. david: let me ask you about the question of the undocumented immigrants in the country and what should be done with them. there has been a discussion ofut deportation undocumented is realistic. question.his jeh johnson: in one or 10 years, even if you were trying to fund
people.cannot deport and, the president elect has said that we should focus on the criminals, which is what we are doing. we are priorities and focused on convicted criminals. those who are deported are convicted criminals and that is haveocus they will need to . theave to reckon with remainder of the 11 million who are here. over half of them have been here for more than 10 years and they are becoming integrated members
of the society. they have kids and they have driver's licenses, in many states. the supreme court says that the undocumented person has a right in this country. will we be content to leave them in the shadows and working off of the books russian mark will we get them on the books and make them pay taxes? we have done this kids, a successful program that was launched in 2012. that theation is responsible population of people includes the parents of u.s.
citizens and those who have been here for more than five years. my hope is that congress will reckon with this. these people are not going away. because it is the right thing to do, i think we need to account for these people. thed: what do you think consequences would be for enforcement in workplaces and other places? jeh johnson: it would be disruptive and the next secretary of homeland security angryet phone calls from members of congress who have their constituents rated. d, particularly in the agricultural industry. if you do this the wrong way, you are just encouraging people
to go into the shadows. the reality is that there are ways to control and encourage and we needprograms ways we do these things. this encourages the economy and innovation. pendinga bill that was in congress and what it would have done. the nextlly hope administration will wrestle with this tough issue. there are ways to accomplish, what i think is, a bipartisan compromise. it will make a lot more sense.
david: it is encouraging that i am only now coming to what have -- would have been the first thing i would normally ask the secretary, counterterrorism. we have to ask you about how secure the homeland is and whether you feel that the problems over the last two years has really worried people, these likewolf actors, orlando. do you think that problem is under control? johnson: homeland security motivates the public service. i was in manhattan and i it wasr 9/11 like
yesterday. over the last 15 years, we have gotten a lot that are at ,etecting, at the early stages another 9/11-type plot from overseas. planned, trained, equipped overseas. you have to sort out the noise from what is real. so, we have gotten better at protecting those sorts of plots. the self-radicalized lone wolf-style actor, who is , my observation is
has outsourced by do theirn factors to dirty work. we have to be vigilant, when it protecting infiltrators of our borders. it is the self-radicalized that keeps me up. it will be like this for a while. these factors are difficult to detect. fbi does an the excellent and aggressive job in the counterterrorism mission, predicting and interdicting plots.
those who go out and buy a knife, a gun, the components for a pressure cooker bomb, it is a challenge. i have been out there for three years and promoting better with local sharing police forces. the cop who is on the feet is to tell.one if you see something, say something. that makes a difference. public vigilance makes a difference. the not who discovered exploded bomb in september, if
you keep seeing these signs, you call the cops. the cve efforts. we build bridges to muslim american communities. them in the homeland security efforts. we have to respond and we have to respond by offering the assistance through grantmaking and building bridges to help counteringhe measures. that is imperative. david: there has been heated rhetoric during the presidential with muslim communities
abroad and what people feared would affect muslim communities here. i wonder if you see any evidence and ihange in sentiment am curious if you have had a chance to talk to your successor , general can -- general kelly, on this issue. jeh johnson: i want to keep my conversations with but likely successor private. i would say that american muslim communities are concerned and they are worried. asam is as diverse christianity. in bostonani-american
is different from a syrian houston orn minneapolis. i think they are concerned and they are worried. i hope the rhetoric does not drive them away, vilify them, isolate them. i believe there is bipartisan support for the basic efforts and i think that it is unfortunate that countering violent extremism has been somewhat hijacked by the with islamicate extremism versus violent extremism. andpe that does not persist , from my practical standpoint to refer to what is happening when you talk about the homegrown violent extremists as islamic extremism, it is
counterproductive to building bridges to the islamic community. they all tell me that isis is trying to hijack their religion and we should not dignify that by saying they occupy any aspect of islam. so, to try to approach it that way is counter to the effort. when i was at the department of defense and talking about it didd lethal force, not matter what the baseball card said. they were either lawful or they were not. that was kind of academic to me. guy and you have a lawful military objective to get him. think we do more to setback say to american
muslims that there is a problem with the religion. islam is a religion of peace. a direct sounds like warning to the next administration. mentioned something that was part of your life at the pentagon, but you are still following it closely. it was targeted strikes. ago, i wrote in a column that special forces have made targeted strikes in iraq and syria and the killed over 20,000 targets. it threatens external operations
you whether itsk is central to the story of our world secure and whether you think the rules in are adequate or would be appropriate after the years you serve. jeh johnson: i think that the rules are adequate and it is is rigorousat there decision-makers from my own vantage point. it was my responsibility to sign counterterrorism
authorized by the united states military and i took it seriously. i think iton me and is important that -- the answer to your first question is, yes, i think that target lethal force makes the homeland safer and i think we are getting better at this. i think we have become more out ae and we have taken lot of people who were focused on external attack planning and q and ap.rs of isis a
used a cool that should be judiciously and a lot of people are uneasy about the target vehicle force because they view it as easy to use, a push of a button from something remote. i understand that and that is why we need to have systems and processes in place to evaluate the use and to use this thing carefully. david: do you think that people auld feel safer if they knew little bit more about the things the military as special forces are doing overseas to go after doing external operations? is probably ahere
side of this that the american public would not care to see. --atched -- tried to watch the video of every strike i authorized and they are pretty ugly. they are not pleasant. we have, in this administration, i think, made the best efforts at transparency and i gave a , talking about the legal architecture efforts i think that we need to continue that. this didn't get a lot of attention, but, in the war powers filing in 2012, we declassified what the department of defense was doing in somalia,
because we thought it was important to tell the public that we had counterterrorism elements ofnst al-shabab. we should not have secret enemies. the public needs to know what the military is doing on their behalf to keep them safe. i hope the next and administration sees this that way and will continue those efforts. it is important for transparency and credibility. image ofpower of full you watching all of those videos. it is something i will remember. i want to go to twitter. there is an interesting question. you are working with google and well,, a company we know
to use big data and analytics to find a high valued targets. jeh johnson: i am not sure that i would put it that way. we have a good relationship with reasons ofctor, for building cyber security there isies and efforts we talked about. i am encouraging the tech sector to work closely with us for cyber security purposes. it is a delicate relationship something we need to
continue to work on. david: the questioner was thinking about extremists in the homeland who are identified syria.ata analytics in johnson: all the internet providers have terms of service and things that are prohibited, in terms of content. we have been working with and encouraging service providers where they find it. exercise,difficult sometimes like chasing a rabbit. it is out there in a flash and it is all over the place. i gave a number of internet service providers credit for taking this stuff down.
the flipside is that i would like to see the internet service providers help to amplify the isil with acounter positive message on how they could channel their energy and their anger. there is more that can be done. david: let's turn to a different face of homeland security, the mood of the country. a divisive election and . am wondering what you feel days.hnson: 108 say about the you country's mood?
what are your thoughts, as you get ready to leave, about where we're at. how are we getting along? jeh johnson: a good question and i cannot help but think back to eight years ago and the with thet in this town election of a black man to president. we had reached a new height in the country and it was something i never thought i would see in my lifetime. now. is division right theink a lot of us in political class massively misunderstood what was happening
in the cultural divide between -- i am beyond my job description -- between a lot of people out there who are the idea that the government does not work for them and they are disconnected with the government, the , and those of us who are public service -- servants and cover public servants. we all thought he went too far and that he would crash and burn. that never happened. baseresident elect's wanted to support him. so, i think we are seeing the
inrging cultural distinction and those who believe the government does not work for them. those of us who are part of the system. i think it is incumbent on all bridges.build these one of the things -- you may think this is corny -- i get and, iffrom school kids i get three from the same school, i will do a video teleconference with the class. -- auld be a school of
20,000. a city of they never expect the secretary of homeland security would respond to their letter. , "i have beene assigned to write to you and could you send a t-shirt." all of a sudden, there is a call and they are stunned. the school gets into the auditorium to participate. that is a school in a town of 20,000 people in the heartland who was touched by someone in washington, with a never thought would ever reach out. -- who they never would have thought would have reached out. a congressman in the flesh in my social studies
class. difference, if the public feels like the government is being responsive. it is incumbent on all of us to make the best efforts. david: let me close. we have come to the end of the hour with another corny subject. reachher week, i tried to you with a journalistic question said, he is at the lincoln memorial. , he is at thenot lincoln memorial. i thought that was interesting. knowing i was seeing you, i want to save the question. what were you doing at the lincoln memorial?
is it a place that you go to often and what do you take away from it? jeh i have been to the lincoln memorial several times. taken ave actually visiting delegation from china. place, wherete martin luther king gave "i have a dream." one of my favorite places if not my favorite place in all of washington to just visit. me, that means a lot. a lot has been written about my father's father who was a sociologist. , we were allamily postal workers in this town. they believed in federal service.