This event was hosted by the association of former Intelligence Officers. Okay. I was appear doing my cap dance. To introduce is the axials chairman and former general counsel. He is going lets do it. I am really delighted to introduce matt olson with advertised over the last weekend shes tied up t permanently for some weeks. We asked who can talk about this topic. Her suggestion and the suggestion of the white house we ask matt olson to do this. I met were really grateful to you for doing this on short notice. Matt is perfect for this topic. He has deep experience in the Intelligence Community. The Insurance Agency in between there they came back to the Justice Department and they have the National Security division. Long and deep experience has been one of the principal advocates for renewing section 702. Why dont i start by asking you, matt, what is the 702 Program Assists audience are intelligent they might not know is much as you are i know they would really like to hear what the program where does it comeis from whats the value . Thanks everybody. I am really pleased to be here it is great to be among such a wellinformed and committed group of folks to talk about this. I have to say i walked in the room i am shocked to see a full crowd instead of the director of nationald intelligence im kind of shock to all still showed up. Maybe you did not realize it until now that you are stuck herere with the lawyer. [laughter]gh exactly. Exactly. But obviously d and i is totally occupied with events of our time. I will say is a great friend and a brilliant leader we are lucky to have her in that role through perilous times like this. So i am happy to fill in as best as i possibly can. So yes, sections that 702 is part of the surveillance act. It was added in 2008 and most importantly it expires in at two and half a months at the end of the year december 31 at midnight it will cease to exist. It will have a a sunset built io it. It is without question the single most important Legal Authority that we have a ford intelligence collection at this point. It haspo proven in 2008 to be absolutely indispensable and irreplaceable as a source of authority for collecting foreign intelligence. But some people here may remember coming in days or weeks after 911. As a president ial program. The look and feel that was adopted . It did go out that followed at 11. It was a recognition of 1978 and its initial form was not up to the task of collecting foreign intelligence at the time our focus on al qaeda and counterterrorism. It passed before the internet it passed before the advent of fiberoptic cables and the weight communications are carried that was Technology Dependent and in the way it was written and using the traditional getting probable cause werent as many of you all know probable causeob warrants e targets designed for people in the unitedfo states who were usg that samein tool to target peope outside the United States. That was necessary because the way pfizer was written and wasnt designed to keep up with the times. In the time. 2005, six, seven, eight it was not up to the task. It was not necessary it was given detection to pakistan who gets the same rights as United States. Its part of the effort back then the benefits of beneficiaries as amended section 702, to allow us to have a mechanism to target prisons overseas. People using u. S. Service providers. The challenge was we have a lot using infrastructure but second to none in the world. But we did not have any way to compel them to assist the government. So we change the law to have basically a programmatic approach we go to the fisa court once the earthy procedure we are using non overseas and the court looked at those decisions whether or not they are consistent with the Fourth Amendment in the constitution. And if they are the Court AuthorizesNational Intelligence the attorney general together to go to Service Providers in the United States with directives that require them to cooperate. So that is 2008 focus on counterterrorism and the last 15 years this is indispensable. Not just on counterterrorism but a b range of targets and threats and generating intelligence. The statistics are quite shocking or impressive like 60 or so the pdd articles have some 702 in them. I Something Like it in terms of the value for. Because youre talking about u. S. Service providers if one access gmail there other ways to get some of that. What kind of Services Every communication that goes through a u. S. Switch to a foreign target is also subject under this program. Its a lot there. So then why is it controversial . The weight we think about section 702 is the question, these surveillance clauses we all know all of it because of the way it works what we are targeting somebody overseas is not a u. S. Person. Not infrequently that communican with someone in the United States. The target their communications will be collective because for tagamet communications. So we need to have rules in place that protect the privacy and the interest of people here in the United States. And what we have seen in terms of controversy is how the fbi is one agency that operates within the unitedbi states has access o some of the state how they are able to use it. Much of the concern not so much an essay in cia as a point of intelligence but the fbi. The fbi only acts about 3 of the case. And predicated in fbi investigation. They raised her hand and said were investing this target please put him on 702 coverage. That is accessible by the fbi. Im glad you make that point its a critical one that gets lost in the debate. Nsa is the primary organization responsible of 702. They leave all of the targeting decisions. An targeting decision and the like because we are such an informed group. They make the targeting decisions the fbi the small subset of that about 3 of the overallf collection because thy focus on the 3 translates about 8000 targets last year. They are focused on targets that relate to their investigation. And those can be counterterrorism, they can be counterintelligence, weve written about this so they get that subset and then they are w able to work with that. But only that part they are getting in the 8000 targets. 8000 target. The privacy is all i can channel is hard. I can channel the government they want to carry out has collected all of these conversations and now the fbi said hey, we are actually interested in the americans. We got into the conversation. And those clearly of concern. I will say the fbi, theres no nice to say this has screwed up pretty badly in administering the limits of the law imposes on those merchants. And thats for the biggest class andd the cycle. Can you give us what happened . I will talk about the thanks groupis the right word. But to take a step back, the way it works is a magic there is a collection against somebody in syria and isis member in syria. That coverage under section 702 it got intelligence outside the United States and syria. They may be talking to a lot of people in syria, iraq, they may also be talking to somebody in the United States. Theyve been talking there communicating by someone in the United States. That one end of the communications inn. Order to fos on a person is any reason to this would be a real concern than fbi would have to focus on that person without then going through title i of fisa going to the fisa Court Getting probable cause. Triggers and focus we should talk a little bit about that. Focusing on here. A big chunk but got the fbi in trouble low probability of high risk to treat this person as a source we can bring this person in for a meeting make sure the not in communication thats not consistent with the rules set up a database for. Exactly. To get a little more in the weeds. The targeting decision to we are targeting. We talk with ther. Fbi has that correction basement targeting decision what we do the 3 they can query it and in many cases there too many cases fbi clearly wrongfully collected data of who they are targeting. Standard is the basic one. Searching the data not targeting but querying the data its already been collected. Theres instances this goes back a few years. With the fbi to demonstrate that standard or contradiction of rotted meeting does not have a risk as foreignn intelligence the database the Security Division the letters of the Justice Department who worked in this area we do the compliance checks all year long. At the Fbi Field Office to make sure business is done right theres a number of compliance problems along those lines. In the last couple of years had taken some real serious steps to address it. At least three cases the procedures in line with the law. I have to tell you i think the fbi is right theres a lot of times people come into the present i want to know even if i have no reason to believe it i would like to check. And i like the fbi to check. The south the law is the op to be relies number. That is whats motivating the fbi. The thing to think about this a lot of databases they can check for they can open cases, Public Information is a lot they can do. Isaac collections has the context of communication. Cnow we cordon that off. That requires special permission. Because 98 of these looking for something terrible was going to happen they spend the time with nothing to worry about. But almost all turnout to be violations. And shocking numbers of searches are done its those kind of searches. I testified the Senate Judiciary committee this past summer section 702 an authorization i was there with the Deputy Director of the cia this Deputy Director of an essay on the director of the fbis the leaders of the Intelligence Community open hearing Deputy Director of an essay point previous counsel she would been previous counsel im sure you had the same reaction probably a three hour hearing for the number of questions the deputy rocco except the rest of the fbi. Absolutely the target, very, very strong questioning. And distressed. Its a real problem we could not have the fbi with the lack of trust. That is why we found thesese problems two years ago they were leaders, attorney general, with our lawyers would implement some changes in the fbi does these queries. Undoes the data. A very simple one is different when he tell this is going to set out to the script with the fbi was doing a few years ago was previously they would query make that conducted a query of all the databases it automatically by default including crosssection 702. They want to check their open cases the same time they did that it would automatically run that query. A simple flip of the switch to change that default setting have to affirmatively opt in and set up automatic. We reduce the query by 93 . Its really a matter inadvertently taking the data. Open up a new counterintelligence case i will run the name and that name will check all the databases. We just change the one setting to write your reasons and record your reasons for searching. We have seen not only a dramatic reduction in queries now the compliance rate is in excess of 98 . Is a lot of people on the hill in simple societyty and the like who would like to help you and there are solutions could be the fbi. The cia do the checks and not have the bureau. We have also had Oversight Board to at least three of the five go to the pfizer court before they search for information in that database. One has to be probable cause, to others that he should take the existing standard and have to judge that determination. Your thoughts on these other recommendations . The first one ill talk about that first. The idea you suggest section 702 the date of the collection should be available to the cia and the nsa and not the fbi. That is deeply flawed and actually really dangerous. Everybody in this room. Those who want to be looking at the cia or the nsa. We all know the concerns about u. S. Prison data in the organization like nsa or cia but beyond that there is the beginning of a fundamental of 911 you cannot have a wall between intelligence and the one agency the fbi that has authority to act inside the United States. Really one of the critical things we learned and spent 20 years addressing after 911 is the need for the fbi and cia and nsa to work closely together when it comes to National Security. The transformation of the fbi at that point has been focused on. Making sure that matched up on its way that still protects the liberty somert privacy. You just cant have from my Vantage Point nsa and fbi you cannot have a system the one organization with the responsibility for acting inside the unites with authorities to arrest cia, nsa thats why the organizations with the mission to understand from overseas whether its terrorist, or an espionage threat to a Cyber Threats or to take steps inside the macys to stop it. That could be in arrest to be going and knocking on the door of an american company. This is what you need to stop this at the fbis job we cannot stop them they take them out of the ability to have access to the key collections. Its deeply flawed suggestion isaid the Oversight Board has different recommendationsre but one that wants to cut the fbi out they didnt want them to go get a warrant. At least when they are at the point of knowing there something in the database they wanted to see. And i just did a podcast for those ofe you on will be distributed later today or tomorrow. They are talking about their recommendation. That recommendation sort of split two people in the center, and the judge make the will be probable cause, how do you feel about those recommendations is that workable . Just on this question, this proposal the fbi to this across the board. Should go to a court to get permission to look up information Intelligence Community collections from that sitting in the Intelligence Community the fbi, cia holding before they query it will sift through to ask for additional permission from a judge weathers to show probable cause or some other standard. Again this is a really bad idea. For a number of reasons. Its not legally required. Directly looked at the question is the constitution require thek at lawfully collected information. To get a warrant every court no court said you need to go to the federal court you need to go and get additional approval. This is a policy choice we need to be making not a legally required one. When it comes to 702 its a rpolicy that hamstring the Intelligence Community especially the fbi. In part because the sheer numbers. There are thousands of these and often done the very the fbi is opening up an investigation on it. They have multiple three, the Foreign Intelligence Service there are 25 phone numbers that were found in possession of a known nsf officer. There are 25 phone numbers. Some of those are they targets of the Intelligence Officer . Are they victims are they working . We do not d note that phase. The first t thing you might went to do is run those numbers. Person identifies in the database to learn more. To do that at the speed at which we need to do that is again for that thats a cyber case in particular when hours a matter the fbi to put the pens and down stop working on their investigation a writing application to go to a court. I work on these applications, we have to show probable w cause. Theres hundreds of pages long. Judges take weeks to look at them. This is not an agile way to approach National Security. It would be unworkable from that sheer numbers in the time required. There is not going to bee probable cause. Were not going to meet the probable cause standard at the earliest stages. I would say you have a compromise of a network. You may want to look at ip addresses, run those through the system. Section 702. You would be able to show probable cause go and ask for the permission not legally required not sure how the judge would decide think theres foreign intelligence you have experience and theres no reason to think as in particular in that area. On the Intelligence Community is unified in its opposition. We parted some of the commitment of the board members. They think this is a solution not with the fbi for all agencies. You are going to handle u. S. Data at the agency because theres good reason of a foreign intelligence person to be gathering it, they want to have a later on review of what you do there is a major change in every intelligence. Exactly. But make no mistake its right now to focus on the fbi section 702 but theres no limiting principle. The goal here to require every Intelligence Agency including an innocent cia to go to a judge and query request information. Does a lot of good things to say about the program. There are statistics about how often you do it. They said it is essential. It ought to be renewed. So unbalance what is your view of the report . Yes im glad you did a test with two members. Y. The report is a missed opportunity. Have a fivemember board they split three two its two epseparate reports is a threeperson report inpo a twoperson report they agreed on one thing importantly that is the program is extremely valuable. It is uniquely valuable point of intelligence to protect our country. All five members agreed on that. Beyond that