I would say our people are very mission focused and accustomed to the fact we do some of the hardest things there are to do for a living and i like to think that our folks are pretty sturdy. I think of a woman i met the other day, an agent in the miami office who had a bad accident, 12 stitches in her face. The next day boom, right back at work. I think about the folks in the San Juan Office i visited recently. You want to talk about people going through a real storm. They do it and theyre out in the community and i can tell you the Community Values what they do on the island. Thank you. An oped by a number of former intelligence analysts called the nunes memo and its release one of the worst cases of poll itization of intelligence in modern american history. You had concerns about the memo. I know you cant get into the gritty details of that but can you say in your view whether or not one of those concerns is that it may have selectively cherry picked information without presenting the entire fact pattern that led up to that fisa warrant application . Well, senator, i would repeat what we said at the time, which is that we had then and continue to have now grave concerns about the accuracy of the memorandum because of omissions. We provided thousands of documents that were very sensitive and lots and lots of briefings and it is very hard for anybody to distill all that down to 3 1 2 pages. Director pompeo, have you seen russian activity in the leadup to the 2018 election cycle . Yes. I paused only trying to make sure i stay on the unclassified side. We have seen russian activity and intentions to have an impact on the next election cycle here. Director coats. Yes, we have. Anyone else . Admiral rogers . Yes. I think it would be a good topic to get into greater detail this afternoon. All right. According to news reports, there are dozens of white house staff with only interim security clearances still to include jerad kushner until last week and white house staff secretary rob porter who i would assume would have regularly reviewed classified documents as part of his job. Director coats, if someone is flagged by the f. B. I. With areas of concern in their background investigations into white house staff with interim clearances, should those staff continue to have access to classified materials . Let me first just speak in general relative to temporary classifications. Clearly with the new administration in particular were trying to fill a lot of new slots and the classification process and security clearance process has been mentioned. Im only speaking with regard to folks who may have had issues raised as opposed to being in the matter of course of going through the long process. Well, im not in a position we can talk about this in the classified session, but im not in a position to discuss what individual situations are for specified individuals. I might just say that i think sometimes it is necessary to have some type of preliminary clearance in order to fill a slot but i have publicly stated if that is the case, the access has to be limited in terms of the kind of information they can be in a position to receive or not receive. I think thats something we have to do as a part of our security clearance review. The process is broken. It needs to be reformed. As senator warner has previously said, it is not evolution, it is revolution. We have 700,000 backups. So we have situations where we need people in places but they dont yet have that. Your specific question i think i would like to take up in the classified session. Im over my time. Thank you, director coats. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Director coats, director pompeo, admiral rogers, i think you all talked about evidence that the russians would intend to do things to be active in our elections. It seems to me two divisions of that activity. One is information that is put on the record that misleading, false, trying to develop that level. The other even more sinister might be the level of dealing with the election system itself. The voting day system. The Registration System and the voting day system, the one we need to have the most concerns about that Critical Infrastructure. This committee has been working toward both of those goals of trying to shore up Critical Infrastructure on election day as well as alert people to and decide what might be done about misinformation on the other side of the ledger. Voting begins in march. Thats next month. If we going to have any impact on securing the Voting System itself we need to act quickly. I think a great part of the strength of the system is the diversity of the system. Different not only from state to state but from election jurisdictions within those states. Thats a strength, not a weakness in my view. What are some of the things we can do to be more helpful to local Election Officials and encouraging them to share information when they think their systems are being attacked, getting more information to them than we have. There was a lot of criticism in the last cycle that we knew that some election systems were being attacked and didnt tell them they were being attacked. And so the three of you in any order lets just do the order i started with, director coats, director pompeo, admiral rogers, any thoughts you have on what we can do to protect the Critical Infrastructure of the election system and how quickly we need to act if we intend to do that this year . The Intelligence Community are aware and want to provide collect and provide as much information as we can to give those warnings and alerts so that we can share information back and forth with local and state and election processes with the federal government. Department of homeland security, department of the f. B. I. , obviously were involved given theyre domestic issues but we do look to every piece of intelligence we can gather so that we can provide these warnings. It is an effort that i think the government needs to put together at the state and local level and work with those individuals who are engaged in the election process in terms of the security of their machines, cyber plays a major role here. So i think it is clearly an area where federal government, foreign collection on potential threats of interference, warnings and then processes in terms of how to put in place security and secure that to ensure the American People their vote is sanctioned and well and not manipulated in any way whatsoever i was referring to the first part of your question, not truly to the latter. The things weve seen russia doing to date are mostly focused on information types of warfare. The things that senator warner was speaking of earlier. With respect to the c. I. A. s role and admiral rogers will say his, too. Two missions one to identify the source of this information, make those here domestically aware of it to do the things they need to do. Whether f. B. I. Or dhs. Were working diligently to did that. The second thing we do have some capabilities offensively to raise the cost for those who would dare challenge the United States elections. After admiral rogers, director wray i may want to come to you and see on that same sharing information, any impediments to sharing that information with local officials or any reason we wouldnt want to do that. The only other thing i would add. This is also shaped by my experience at Cyber Command where i defend networks. One of the things we find in that role, many network and system operators do not truly understand their own structures and systems. One of the things thats part of this is how do we help those local, federal, state entities understand their Network Structure and what its vulnerabilities and harness the information that the intelligence structure are providing them. How do we work our way through this process . I think thats one of the areas that there has been a lot of discussion whether were doing better. This is one of the areas i think we are doing better. We together at the f. B. I. Together with dhs, recently for example scheduled meetings with various state Election Officials. Normally the barrier would be classification concerns whether somebody had clearances. We were able to put together briefings appropriately tailored and with nondisclosure agreements with those officials. There are ways if people are creative and forward leaning to educate the state Election Officials which is where elections are run in this country. Hopefully well be creative and forward leaning and keep track of what were doing there. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator king. Thank you, mr. Chairman. First statement i want to make is more in sorrow than in anger. I will get to the anger part in a minute. The sorrow part is that director coats, in response to a question from senator collins, you gave an eloquent factual statement of the activities of the russians and the fact that they are continuing around the world and they are a continuing threat to this country. All of you have agreed to that. If only the president would say that. I understand the president s sensitivity about whether his campaign was in connection with the russians and thats a separate question but there is no question weve for us the entire Intelligence Community that the russians interfered in the election in 2016, they are continuing to do it and they are a real imminent threat to our elections in a matter of eight or nine months. My problem is i talk to people in maine who say the whole thing is a witch hunt and a hoax because the president told me. I just wish you all could persuade the president as a matter of National Security to separate these two issues, the collusion issue is over here, unresolved. We get to the bottom of that. But there is no doubt, as you all have testified today, and we cannot confront this threat which is a serious one, with a whole of government response when the leader of the government continues to deny that it exists. Now let me get to the anger part. The anger part involves cyberattacks. You have all testified that we are subject to repeated cyberattacks. Recurring right now in our infrastructural over this country. I am sick and tired of going to these hearings which ive been going to for five years and everybody talks about cyberattacks and our country still doesnt have a policy or a doctrine or a strategy for dealing with them. And this is not a criticism of the current administration, im an equal opportunity critic here. The Prior Administration didnt do it, either. Admiral rogers, until we have some deterrent capacity, we are going to continue to be attacked. Isnt that true . Yes, sir, we have to change this current dynamic. Were on the wrong end of the cost equation. Were trying to fight a global battle with our hands tied behind our back. Director coats, you have a stunning statement in your report. They will work to use Cyber Operations to achieve strategic objectives unless they face clear repercussions for their Cyber Operations, right now there are none. Is that not the case . There are no repercussions. We have no doctrine of deterrents. How are we ever going to get them to stop doing this if all we do is patch our software and try to defend ourselves . Those are very relevant questions and i think everyone not only at this table but in every agency of government understands the threat that we have here and the impact already being made through these cyber threats. Our role as the Intelligence Community is to provide all information we possibly can as to what is happening. Our policymakers can take that, including the congress, and shape policy as to how we are going to respond to this and deal with this in a whole of government way. It just never seems to happen. Director pompeo, you understand this issue, do you not . We wont be able to defend ourselves from being defensive. We have to have a doctrine of deterrents. If they struck us in cyber theyll be struck back in some way, may not be cyber. I agree and i cant argue. I cant say much in this setting i would argue that your statement that we have done nothing does not reflect the responses that frankly some of us at this table have engaged in and the United States has engaged in both before and after during and before this administration. Deterrents doesnt work unless the other side knows it. The doomsday machine in dr. Strange love didnt work because the russians hadnt told us about it. Its true. Its important the adversary know it but not a requirement that the whole world know it. Does the adversary know it . I save it for another forum. I believe this country needs a clear doctrine. What is a cyberattack, what is an act of war, what will be the response and the consequences. Right now i havent seen it. I agree. It is a complicated problem given the nature. As i sat as a member of the house of representatives i take responsibility for part of not solving it. We do need a u. S. Government strategy and clear authorities to go achieve that strategy. I appreciate it. I dont want to go home to maine when is a serious cyberattack, we knew it was a problem. We had four different committees of jurisdiction and couldnt work it out. That isnt going to fly. I might just add that we dont want to learn this lesson the hard way. 9 11 took place because we were not coordinating our efforts. We are now coordinating our efforts. But we didnt have the right defenses in place because the right information was not there. Our job is to get that right information to the policymakers and get on with it. Because it is just common sense. If someone is attacking you and there is no retribution or respond it will incentivize more contacts. There are a lot of blank checks and a lot of things we need to do. Thank you, i appreciate that. Director coats, you and i talked last year about this same issue that senator king was bringing up as well about cyber doctrine and a point person on who that would be and a defined person that would give options to the president and congress to say if a response is needed and warranted. This is the person, this is the entity that would make those recommendations and allow the president to make the response. Is there a point person to give recommendations on an appropriate response to a cyberattack to the president . That has not yet been completed. Of course, your understanding of the standup of Cyber Command and the new director that will be replacing admiral rogers, the decision relative to whether there would be a separation between the functions that are currently now nsa and cyber has yet to be made. General mattis is contemplating what the next best step is and there is theyve involved the Intelligence Community in terms of making decisions in that role. But at this particular point we cannot point to one sort of cyber czar. Various agencies throughout the federal government are taking this very, very seriously and there are individuals that we continue to meet on a regular basis. The odni has a coordination effort for all the cyber that comes in so we dont stove pipe like what we did before 9 11. So things are underway. But in terms of putting a finalized this is how we are going to do it together is still in process. With respect to responses to that. These are title 10, dod activities unless they are granted to some other authority, a title 50 authority. There is a person responsible. Secretary mattis has the responsibility to advise the president on the appropriateness in all theaters of conflict with our add ver source. I want to bring up the issue of the rising threat in next company. Homicide rate went up 27 last year. We had 64,000 americans that died from overdose of drugs, the preponderance of those came through or from mexico. We have a very rapidly rising threat it appears to me. What i would be interested on a National Security level what is changing right now in mexico versus 10 years ago and our relationship and the threats coming from there . I would defer to director wray relative to what his agency is doing. Clearly, we have a continuing problem in the Mexican Government has a continuing problem relative to the gangs and organizations. There have been some high profile arrests lately. Weve taken down some labs. Mexico is cooperating. But in they themselves will admit that its almost overwhelming. Their army has been participating and almost overwhelming for them to control the situation south of the border. We have our own issues on the Border Protection as well as consumption here in the United States. In many ways what were seeing a more of the same but one of the things that has changed because i think it was at the heart of your question, i think were seeing one of the things were watching in particular is more blackmarket fentanyl being shipped to Trans National criminal organizations in mexico and then they are taking advantage of the pricing advantages and thats being then delivered in large quantities to our streets. Certainly the mexico relationship from a Law Enforcement perspective and domestic security perspective one of our most important the f. B. I. Office in mexico is our largest in the world im pretty sure about that. Or close to it if not. Thats a reflection of how much activity there is. Let me ask you a specific oklahoma question and a national question. There was an individual picked up in oklahoma just a couple of weeks ago by the f. B. I. His fingerprints were identified from a terror Training Camp in afghanistan. He had been in the country for multiple years. And what im trying to be able to determine is the coordination of information to local Law Enforcement and from data that is gathered from some of the work thats happening overseas in afghanistan and such how are those two being married together that we can identify individuals that are a threat to our nation based on their participation in a terror Training Camp overseas coming to the american shores . Well, certainly weve become better