So its like a fire side chat, we have no fire side we have chairs, but i want you to use your imaginations and thats gonna be it. So if you guys have questions you should, we will give you the last 30 minutes. And many of you have seen john on 60 minutes on this sunday, john is there anything thats on 60 minutes that you could. I think that went pretty well. The way it was edited. On 60 minutes. But there are second case on 60 minutes over the last, year that was a different issue, one chinese and one russian. I think both the kind of activity we are seeing, and also you know the person, its very different from the last time when this was really a counterterrorism situation, 95 , or post 9 11 alqaeda focused responses. So theres has been a shift over the last years. So one of the questions i think we all have, is an espy is required to act on the china prosecution, the China Initiative what do you see, as the goal of an ice tea, in that space, and what do you consider as a success, to put forward . So well, theres a lot of ways to measure success, and i think let me just step back for those of you who are not familiar with what we have been doing there. Its something that for the last few years, we have is focusing on chinese espionage, particularly chinese economic espionage, and to further their Economic Development and was really the result of the intel there were seeing, to do something about what we are seeing i think success, ultimately were gonna continue as long as they continue, this behavior, this bad behavior, success is ultimately is gonna be a change of behavior. Its a very long road. Its not something that can be done like, not just by justice department, its gonna take other agencies, to involve in this issue, the chinese intellectual property theft of American Company. Thurston lee in a micro sense, there are cases we are bringing, in the that has increased significantly in the last few years or so but, ultimately, i think as with any prosecutions, and this kind of behavior that, ultimately needs to be measured as a success, is a change of behavior. People in the private sector, so could you explain the Risk Management and supply chain management, and coming to doj to you guys, and how they can share information, without fear of being victimized in a second way, for sharing information . So what is the philosophy that you are bringing their, on those issues . One of the coast of the initiative has been increasing outrage because of the private sector, ended my predecessor, did a lot of those when he was on the job. We are very sensitive to the concerns of the private sectors, and i am understand, that having been on the other side of the equation to figure out, when youre involved in the government something, and employee has done, when you are a victim of the company, and what not to do, Something Like a consideration to go into it so i often use, all start generally and i will use one of these examples. We try to work sensibly as we can when the Companies Come forward, one question from the companies is, do i really want fbi to look into my fires, and what the answer is no. But we can work with the companies. laughs you never know what you will find. So we work with companies. We dont want to pardon them with, having to spend a lot of resources on our investigations, we want to ensure them that we are not there to look for other criminal activities, were focused on our investigation, the bigger point is, am i gonna be identified in that . That really works, in that, a we can, and have charged a number of cases that, has, that have defined to the targets, and the if it goes to trial than, you will be identified, this cannot be kept a secret her for ever. I think over the Years Companies have become a little more comfortable being identified partially because, you know there was a time and remember way back, i think he was back then people say i will never do this again. If he does chop, consumer data breach, you buying your clothes using cash down the store down the street, the bridges all over the, place to solve that, is not the same sort of fear about, yourself identifying the bridge, although there are some sensitivity for sure. The other thing is the best thing we can do, the most convincing examples that, we can show accompany were not only going to shut the door as a horse exit gaps, but we are going to help you with future thefts. Mike romneys a u. S. Computer chip maker, so there is a memory chip caught dram, the chinese import all their dram they do not have a mass producer a few years ago they set a goal, that they were going to have mass production capability invested multi Million Dollars setting up a company, to manufacture durham they, build the factory, and set up the company, but they did not have the intellectual property to produce the chip so the way they got it twice, they were gonna steal it, and they started by approaching employees with a subsidiary, and to come over, and has information to them, and the company, they are going to do this. Micro noticed what happened, and they went to immediately to the fbi and the government, they cooperated extensively, and they been very vocal about that operation, and the result of that was not only the individuals who are charged here in the u. S. , in the tie in taiwan, the company itself, also the Chinese Company was charged. Most significantly i think from the point of view of the American Company is that the Chinese Company, was denied entry, by the calmest apartment, and the result of which, they could not import the tools they need it did to use that a stolen intellectual property to create that so the investment, the factory is empty, my client, is not facing a chinese competitor who has stolen their intellectual property and compete with them, so you can tell the stories and, if you require companies to come forward early, you can tell the story, and you are a company or think in, the government can actually help prevent some of the harm this could a result. I think thats a persuasive thing. That makes a great reason, is timing, so, one of those issues is, technology as you said, and then we have the general counsel of the fbi, and one of the issues he was talking about was trying to figure out what happened, the fix in the 2 15 thats coming in, what is your department stands on why that is important aspect of the tour based on your strength, what tour do you think, thats critical, what was do you want more at nsc, or do you think you have enough tools to achieve your goals . For the departments . Thats a question we constantly ask ourselves in the area and, as the security diversion officer, ended to think, thinking behind her to office is, he cannot have been responsible for policy because it never gets done without the operation so, you need to set aside the office and did not just think about it. So the constant question for us is, the u. S. A freedom act and, to 15, was the business record, and really anything that the grand jury subpoena, on the criminal side you can, get the 2 15, and it is accepted the on the pfizer side and you have to go to court. And a prosecutor has to sign a subpoena. So people are using cellphones and, surveillance, without going back to court ahead of time, and the you have to report later, and along walls division, never use and along wharf that means that or a person cannot be tied to a specific Terror Organization i think that as a fire extinguisher in my kitchen ive never used it, but i am just happy to know that it is there, in case i need to. So those three provisions are just the, basic most a basic, i will leave non controversial provisions he can use, and on the criminal side, there is long history on the criminal side those, divisions have never been used the other two, in the misuse. The controversial piece is, sort of grew out of these, the or sorority that we used in the past to get megadeath a record. Currently the administration is asking for that authority to be renewed, it is not being used right now, and you know the idea behind that is, the National Security landscape isnt ever changing one endo we dont want to. Without considering the need for the future. So those are in front of congress right now yesterday, there was a closed briefing and today, the discussion keeps going. And its obviously difficult, in terms of legislative climate right now. But we are going to do our best. Youve seen this sort of technology that are having use in your career, what do you think is the requirement, for National Security arena will, canada take not background youre looking for when you are hiring right now . So whats amazing about this space is the it has changed in 20 years when i went to law school and, maybe when you went to law school, there was not a lot of National Security laws organized to be studied. Exactly. And its, you know, today everyone has got into a security law, program that program, there are much more knowledgeable and sophisticated, i was, when i first started university, law school you, know but the lesson for me in all of the, so i do not go to school thinking i will become a National Security lawyer, most of us probably think that are not, but the lesson for me is going through, and focus on what future happens, and denial of unchanged a lot of things for us in calling for me personally. And one of the glories of being a lawyer and, for lawsuits to think about, your beer building a set of skills to you do not get to wrapped up in expertise especially early on in your career, and then leave yourself open to what the future will brain. On the technology site, again, i am a big deliver of, hiring. Luckily my boss has not has been eager to hire good lawyers. On the Technology Side as a lawyer i, do get asked questions, i am not really a tech person, in tech signs, how am i gonna learn . Does the truth is once you get into the case if you are prosecuting cases about cyber, espionage, or other high tech cases, you do know something about the technology, and but you dont have to you just dont know the areas that are we prosecute cases, if we have to. We prosecute areas ten out of ten, and its something anything from Artificial Intelligence to, electrical vehicles the, commercial airplane technology, to new materials, to data. There is no way you can be an expert in those experience the point is, youve got to learn, i think as it comes to you, and what makes their real experience in the space, is we are really good cyber lawyers there are people, who understand technology enough, and translate that into words, that None Technology folks can understand, whether there are lawyers, judges, or witnesses, or jurors, whoever they are. And the folks who can do that, are remarkable and the beautiful things to watch as they practice their craft, but theyre not focused on whatever technology. And then, maybe because they learned how to translate the language. So i am going to open up two questions. Anyone has any questions to ask, you have ten minutes, police come and get the mic. And while you are thinking about the question. What do you see as the vision for the future . Youre gonna be there for an x number of years . What are the areas you would like to focus on in addition to probably the technology, the major focus, are there any other areas you would like to build up ended, thats in the horizon you want to focus more . I think we have had three focuses, one is china, and political and economic espionage. The second is terrorism including domestic terrorism. The third is foreign influence. And that, is something that weve taken a hard look at through the use of Foreign Agents registration act, through the basically and now the registration requirement, in that state law we used to come in wrecked the russian agent, thats the law you probably saw and papers. And an ex twitter employees who recently adjuster spite on behalf of saudi and just yesterday. Those tools, in general, to many office, for 2016 election when you pull out certain acts, what happened in 2016 ace just a piece of the broader issue of foreign influence in the u. S. , and it is something that we are working closely, with the criminal division, because you know that in ways that we do not think for, Counter Intelligence cases theyre running up against the election finance cases right . That we did not usually have that. Now we are realizing that were running into that endo or working together more and recently that was both election finance case and, somebody who is ana fairer side whos working on behalf of sri lanka, s so if you think of the american role in the world you, realize that why these people are trying to influence american politics, america has such an outsized role in International Politics than, you want to be able to push us to defend thanks. In that, there are categories that prosecutors and problems, one of that, as you mentioned fara, so you also had cases that went south, you ought had cases that. So the aviation starting a fara in case a referral, so is there any thought on that, the some tinkering with the pharaoh actor that you have thought about the at this point . Yes on the fairest side and you know, we asked how we measure success there, are a number of registration, from 2016 to 2019 a number of Foreign Agent registrations, they triple its not because the amount of foreign influence had gone up, its because people finally being open about the fact that it thats what theyre doing. Thats a success. We will be using, additional prosecution, certainly in the last couple of years, and there will be more cases, than the prior 30 years. But the focus is on the number of prosecutions its gonna be, what are all the tools we use, civil enforcement, fairer for the First Time Since the 1990s last year, and we increased a number of inspections, and going back and look at a records, there are a variety of tools we can use, the two biggest detours you know, weve been thinking about, on the fairest site, are, administrative subpoenas, and civil penalties. Currently, the way fare is structured, youve got volunteering compliance, and you volunteered me respond to a lot of inquiry, or you are under grand jury subpoenas. This is an area perhaps something between those two, because opening a criminal investigation, is a circle turn level, to show woefulness and etc so thats one thing. I am lawyer, so you notice they we get people nervous. Exactly that. The other piece is, you know, somewhat of penalties you know the way pharaoh works, he can show the criminal violation, if i have been register for ten years and, there is no penalty for that in the past. So maybe it do it until you get caught. So we need to think about whether, there are some ways between. That it is always very powerful. Any questions . For the director . Youve cowed the our audience. Unfortunately we do have a question. Speaker for tonight, later tonight . You never asked the first question we are the speaker . This turned reception will be far more entertaining. So general counts are, in on this. , about what we are authorized in 2 15 also already there are some in the room that will say whats a big deal . There are others who will say, thats kind of thin, its only a few years six years ago that its declassified. I am interested in your observation, not only about the technology but also the evolving views of National Security sensitivities, moving into one direction, or another, around the public perception, and reception . So critics were you complementing bob, or criticizing . Im gonna give him rebuttal. Time laughs you think a dinner you can ask him more questions later. I think you know, it is interesting on the National Security side especially for those who are thinking about practicing on this side thinking about the moment of 9 11. You know folks, who have written about the facts, when you go back, and you look at it, theres separation of Law Enforcement and the government, there is conventional wisdom for year after year after year in the judiciary, in the executive, and in congress. It was conventional wisdom that few people question and one day it became conventional, anyone who ever thought that it its foolish. Its remarkable how that has changed in the area so two things, one is more fa warning thing, is constantly questioning conventional wisdom. The second thing is, just watch out because it could shift underneath your feet really fast. And i think you know, jack sort of talked about this, National Security and, back and forth, and weve had this in the past remember, we talked about National Security, in the statues because of congressional opinions, and courts, there was no constitutional protections, or people who really want protection for their information, the government needs it. So on the mega side the landscape in congress is really different than the last time i was here the last time i was here, it was just this thing jack worked tremendously on the Senate Intelligence committee side when we were doing that, i had basically, in senate, to republicans in the house almost or they didnt. Like it and. You can count about, more for the democrats and real controversy was over community, for providers who have been working for the government, at the authorities, the government. That has changed so much on the hell right now and for both parties, were so divided over these or thirties, so i think just there is just this push. On the public site i dont know i, think the reason court cases like jones, and carpenter, reflect a hesitation on the part of the american political system, with just amount of data that as collected, and the stored, and that is accessible. You know we used have very bright lines about a third party data, and those seem to be suffering from some revolution. I think one of the difficulties will be for lawyers who practice in the area there is some erosion, thats predictable. And that we do not have a clear lines. This is always a difficulty. You know people are thinking about a third party, and the revolution, in in the next couple of years its hard to imagine that. For the wreck we have to remember, jack is from fbi, not doj. One of the issues is we want to thank you for your service, who approaches the law the way you do, with integrity, we all admire what you do in that department and we thank you for doing a great job, which is not easy. We have two gifts one is our coined, allow you to get refreshments, where you need it. Just once . Then i got to give it back to . You know now you can keep it its a renewable source. Now this book. Not because doj needs the law. Its more we find very helpful. Sometimes you may need that. Thank you. Please join me in thank you. applause
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.