▶ 0:21:17Chair Cotton: The hearing will come to order. Good morning. Welcome to the senate intelligence committee annual worldwide threats hearing.
▶ 0:21:42Chair Cotton: I would like to begin by welcoming our steamed witnesses, the director of national intelligence, tulsi gabbard, the cia director john radcliffe, fbi director kash patel, commander of U.S. cyber command, general tim haugh, and the defense intelligence agency director, jeffrey kruse. Thank you for your parents and leadership.
▶ 0:22:10Chair Cotton: I want to recognize the hard work and dedication of the thousands of men and women in our intelligence community who you are here to represent today. Their successes are seldom celebrated, but our nation is grateful to each one for the vital work they do to keep our nation safe, prosperous, and free.
▶ 0:22:32Chair Cotton: Our annual worldwide threats hearing allows for the american people to receive an unvarnished, unbiased account of the real, present dangers that our nation faces. As we will hear from our witnesses, many of the threats that we face are truly existential. Communist china is actively working to replace the united states as the world's dominant superpower.
▶ 0:22:56Chair Cotton: China uses coercive military, economic, influence operations short of war to shape a world favorable to its interests and hostile to ours. These methods include, the biggest peacetime military buildup in history, rapidly expanding its nuclear forces, providing critical assistance to help russia withstand U.S.
▶ 0:23:20Chair Cotton: Sanctions, securing its role in accelerating the spread of covid-19 beyond wuhan, turning a blind eye the chinese companies that enable the production of fentanyl flooding into the united states, and putting space weapons on orbit, among other tactics.
▶ 0:23:37Chair Cotton: Iran, despite setbacks inflicted on its so-called axis of resistance by israel over the past year, still aims to destroy what it calls the little satan, the state of israel, and what it calls the great satan, the united states. It continues to arm yemeni rebels to attack global shipping.
▶ 0:24:03Chair Cotton: Although these outlaws suffered terrible losses over the past two weeks thanks to decisive action by president trump and our brief troops. I commend the president, michael waltz, pete hegseth, and his entire national security team for these actions. Iran also continues its decades-long effort to develop surrogate networks inside the united states to threaten U.S. citizens.
▶ 0:24:33Chair Cotton: Furthermore, iran's nuclear program continues to develop multiple space launch vehicles, which are little more than flimsy cover for an intercontinental ballistic missile program that could hit the united states in a matter of years. All of this will soon come to an end. The supreme leader of iran now faces a stark choice thanks to president trump.
▶ 0:24:57Chair Cotton: The supreme leader can fully dismantle his nuclear program, or he can have it dismantled for him. Finally, today's report also acknowledges that illicit drug production endangers the health and safety of millions of americans. For the first time, the annual threat assessment lists foreign illicit drug actors as the very first threat to our country.
▶ 0:25:23Chair Cotton: As the report highlights, mexican-based cartels using precursors produced in china continue to smuggle fentanyl and synthetic opioids into the united states. Last year alone, these deadly drugs tragically killed more than 52,000 americans, more than the number killed in attacks by foreign terrorists or foreign nations. Given these threats, we have to ask.
▶ 0:25:50Chair Cotton: Are our intelligence agencies well-postured against these threats? I'm afraid the answer is no. At least, not yet. As the world became more dangerous in recent years, our intelligence agencies got more politicized, more bureaucratic, more focused on opinions rather than gathering facts. As a result of these misplaced priorities, we have been caught off guard and left in the dark too often.
▶ 0:26:16Chair Cotton: I know that all of you agree that the core mission of the intelligence community is to steal our adversary's secrets and convey them to policy makers to protect the united states. At the same time, it is not the role of intelligence agencies to make policy, justify presidential action, or operate like other federal agencies.
▶ 0:26:36Chair Cotton: After years of drift come the intelligence community must recommit to its core mission of collecting clandestine activities from foreign adversaries whose main objective is to destroy our way of life. It's not that our intelligence community lacks dedicated patriot to show up every day to protect the american people. It has an abundance of them.
▶ 0:27:01Chair Cotton: The reason is that misuse of resources, democratic load default to play it safe, and past administration that prioritized social engineering over espionage. Coupled with recent failures, the finding of the worldwide threat report should be a wake-up call to all of us to get in order. The status quo is proving inadequate to provide the president and congress with the intelligence needed to protect the american people.
▶ 0:27:27Chair Cotton: As more storms gather, merrick's intelligence capabilities require urgent reform -- america's intelligence tape abilities require urgent reform and revitalization. I look forward to strengthen america's intelligence edge and refocus our intelligence community on its core mission, stealing secrets.the american people deserve nothing less. We have assembled an impressive team to get this done, and I look forward to hearing your comments.
▶ 0:27:56Chair Cotton: I now recognize the vice chairman for opening remarks.
▶ 0:28:03Sen. Warner: Thank you, good morning, everybody. I want to thank all of the witnesses for being here. I've got to say, I've been on the committee for 14 years, and this year's assessment is clearly one of the most complicated and challenging in my tenure on the committee. I want to get into that in a moment, but I want to first of all address the recent story that has broken in the news.
▶ 0:28:30Sen. Warner: Yesterday, we stunningly learned that senior members of this administration, and according to this report two of our witnesses here today were members of a group chat that discussed highly sensitive and likely classified information that supposedly even included weapons packages, targets, and timing and included the name of an active cia agent.
▶ 0:29:01Sen. Warner: Putting aside for a moment the classified information should never be discussed over an unclassified system, it's also mind-boggling to me that all of these senior folks were on this line and no one bothered to check. Security hygiene 101. Who are all the names? An apparently included a journalist.
▶ 0:29:26Sen. Warner: No matter how much this secretary of defense wanted to disparage him, he had at least the ethics to not report everything he heard. The question I raise is, everybody on this committee gets briefed on security protocols. We are told, you don't make calls outside of scifs of this kind of classified nature.
▶ 0:29:55Sen. Warner: Tulsi gabbard is the executive in charge of keeping our secrets safe. These government devices. The personal devices. Have devices been collected to make sure that there is no malware? There is plenty of declassified information that shows our adversaries, china and russia, are trying to break in to encrypted systems like signal.
▶ 0:30:25Sen. Warner: If this was the case of the military officer or an intelligence officer, and they had this kind of behavior, they would be fired. I think this is one more example of the kind of sloppy, careless, incompetent behavior, particularly towards classified information, that this is not a one-off or first time error.
▶ 0:31:05Sen. Warner: Let me take a couple of minutes and review some of the other reckless choices that this administration has made regarding our national security. We recall, it seems like it wasn't that long ago, less than two months, in the first two weeks they administration canceled all U.S. foreign assistance. Some may say, how can that be? It is more in assistance. Well, U.S. foreign assistance paid for the units in ukraine that provide air defense to civilian cities being attacked by russia.
▶ 0:31:30Sen. Warner: Foreign assistance paid regarding camps in syria where isis fighters are detained. Foreign assistance paid for programs abroad that ensure that diseases like ebola don't come home. Until recently, a paid for the construction of a railway in africa that would have helped given the united states much needed access to critical minerals in congo.
▶ 0:31:59Sen. Warner: Now that project, china will try to finance it. As well as in the first two weeks, director patel, the administration fired several of our most experienced fbi agent, including the head of the criminal investigative division, the head of the intelligence division, the head of the counterterrorism division, the heads of the new york, washington, and miami field offices, all individuals who were distinctly and directly
▶ 0:32:30Sen. Warner: Responsible for helping keep america safe. The irony was currently the recently dismissed head of the counterterrorism division was involved in disrupting the isis attacks planned for oklahoma city and philadelphia and helped lead the effort to bring to justice the key planner of the abbey gate bombing in afghanistan that killed 13 U.S. serviceman and 150 civilians.
▶ 0:33:00Sen. Warner: That abbey gate effort was actually praised by the president in the state of the union address. The administration's response to these agents' is good work and years of service was to force them out. It's hard to imagine how that makes your country safer.
▶ 0:33:22Sen. Warner: Nor can I imagine how americans are made more secure by firing more than 300 staff at the national nuclear security administration, including those responsible for overseeing the security and safety of the nuclear stockpile. Or by ousting 130 employees at the agency directly responsible for trying to take on china's salt typhoon attack. I would have thought folks on the group chat may have thought twice.
▶ 0:33:52Sen. Warner: How are we made safer by sacking 1000 employees at the cdc or nih who are directly working on keeping our country safe from disease? By pushing out hundreds of intelligence officers? The amazing thing is, our intelligence officers are not interchangeable like a twitter coder.
▶ 0:34:17Sen. Warner: These intelligence officers, our country makes $20,000 to $40,000 of an investment just getting a security clearance. It literally goes into six figures when you take the training involved. Can anyone tell how firing probationary individuals without any consideration for merit or expertise is an efficient use of taxpayer dollars?
▶ 0:34:44Sen. Warner: And, to make clear that yesterday's story in "the atlantic" was not a rookie one-off, it is a pattern. I want to acknowledge director ratcliffe was not here when this took place, but earlier in the administration when a nonclassified network was used, thereby exposing literally hundreds of cia officers' identities, those folks cannot go into the field now. How does that make our government more efficient?
▶ 0:35:14Sen. Warner: You know, this pattern of an amazing cavalier attitude towards classified information is reckless and sloppy. Perhaps what troubles me the most is the way that the administration has decided that we can take on all of our problems by ourselves without any need for friends or allies. I agree that we have to put america's priorities first, but america first cannot mean america alone.
▶ 0:35:43Sen. Warner: The intelligence we gathered to keep americans safe depends on a lot of allies around the world who have sought access to sources we don't have. That sharing of information saves lives. It's not hypothetical. We remember, because it was declassified last year when austria worked with our community to make sure to expose a plot against taylor swift in vienna that could have literally killed hundreds of individuals.
▶ 0:36:13Sen. Warner: However, these relationships are not built in stone, dictated by law. Things like the five eyes are based on trust, built on decades. So often that trust is breaking literally overnight. Suddenly, for no reason I can understand, the united states is starting to act like our adversaries are our friends.
▶ 0:36:43Sen. Warner: Voting with russia, belarus, north korea, a rogues gallery of five or heard of one. Treating our allies like our adversaries. Whether it is threats to take over greenland, over the panama canal, a destructive trade war with canada, or threatening to kick canada out of the five eyes. I feel our credibility is being enormously undermined with our allies.
▶ 0:37:17Sen. Warner: How can our allies ever trust us as the kind of partner we used to be when weak, without consultation or notice, for example, stop sharing information to ukraine in its war of survival against russia? Or how can our allies not only not trust our government but potentially not our businesses with such arbitrary political decisions?
▶ 0:37:48Sen. Warner: Let me give you a few examples. As a result of a lot of work from this committee and others in congress, we made sure america's commercial space industry second to none. From space, launch, commercial sensing, the united states has taken a record lead. Overnight this administration called into question the reliability of american commercial tech industry when max are and other commercial space agencies were directed to stop sharing intelligence with ukraine.
▶ 0:38:18Sen. Warner: I have to tell you, that shockwave across all of commercial space, not just commercial space -- I've heard it from some of our hyper scalars in the tech community. It has sent an enormous chill. Who is going to hire an american commercial space company? Government or foreign business with the ability to have that taken down so arbitrarily?
▶ 0:38:48Sen. Warner: That's not just the case of commercial space. We've seen canada, germany, portugal have all been saying that they are rethinking buying f-35's. I've heard from google, amazon, they are having questions if they can still sell their services. We've also seen warren adversaries and friends -- foreign adversaries and friends take advantage of this rift in our national security areas and our sciences.
▶ 0:39:16Sen. Warner: Germany has already put out ads trying to attract some of our best scientists, and the chinese intelligence agencies are posting on social media sites in the hopes of luring individuals without national security clearance who have been pushed out perhaps arbitrarily to come into their service. So, no. The signal fiasco is not a one-off.
▶ 0:39:48Sen. Warner: It is, unfortunately, a pattern that we are seeing too often repeated. I fear that we feel the erosion of trust from our workplace, from our companies, and from our allies and partners cannot be put back into the bottle overnight. Make no mistake, these actions make america less safe. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:40:08Chair Cotton: Before I turn to the witnesses, I want to welcome everyone in our large audience today. I also want to note that we will not tolerate any disruptions of the witnesses' testimony or senators' questions and witnesses' answers. We have a large contingent of capitol police in the room. Any disruptions, opposed or in favor to the witnesses, will result and prompt removal from the hearing room.
▶ 0:40:41Chair Cotton: My encouragement from the U.S. attorney is to throw the book at the person disrupting the hearing. No offense, but we all came to hear the witnesses, no one else in the room. Director gabbard, I understand that you will make a statement for the panel of witnesses?
▶ 0:40:56Dir. Gabbard: Thank you, Mr. chairman, thank you for the opportunity for us to be here to present you the intelligence community's 2025 annual threat assessment. I'm joined here by my colleagues from the cia, dia, fbi, and nsa. Our testimony offers the collective assessment of the 18 U.S. intelligence elements making up the U.S.
▶ 0:41:21Dir. Gabbard: Until community, and draws on intelligence collection and information available from open source and private sector, and the expertise of our analysts. This report evaluates what the ic assesses most threatens our people and the ability to live in a free and prosperous society. As you know, we face an increasingly complex threat environment that is threatening us at home and our interests abroad.
▶ 0:41:51Dir. Gabbard: I will begin by focusing on what most immediately, directly threatens the united states and well-being of the american people. Non-state criminal groups and terrorists putting american lives and livelihoods at risk. I will focus on the key nationstates with the capability to threaten the interests of the united states. In this complex environment, non-state and state actors are able to exploit or take advantage of the effects of each other's activities.
▶ 0:42:20Dir. Gabbard: Conventional and asymmetrical capabilities, even the traditionally weakest actors are able to acquire from available advanced technologies, creating a more complex and serious threat landscape. First of all, threats presented by several non-state actors.
▶ 0:42:36Dir. Gabbard: Cartels, gangs, other transnational criminal organizations in our part of the world are engaging in a wide array of illicit activity, from narcotics trafficking, money laundering, smuggling illegal immigrants and human trafficking, which endangers the health, welfare, safety of everyday americans. Based on the latest reporting available for a year-long period ending october 2024, cartels were largely responsible for the deaths of 54,000 U.S. citizens from synthetic opioids.
▶ 0:43:08Dir. Gabbard: Mexico-based transnational criminal organizations, tco's, are the main suppliers of illicit fentanyl to the U.S. market and are adapting to enforcement and regulatory pressures by using multiple sources and methods to procure precursor chemicals and equipment primarily from china and india, many of which are dual use chemicals used in legitimate industries. Independent fentanyl producers are also increasingly fragmenting the drug trade in mexico.
▶ 0:43:37Dir. Gabbard: The availability of precursor chemicals and the ease of making illicit fentanyl have enabled independent actors to increase illicit fentanyl production and smuggling operations in mexico. Cartels are profiting from human trafficking and have likely facilitated more than 2 million illegal immigrants encountered by law enforcement at the U.S. southwest border in 2024 alone. Straining our vital resources and putting the american people at risk.
▶ 0:44:06Dir. Gabbard: Criminal groups drive much of the unrest and lawlessness in the western hemisphere, and they engage in extortion, weapons and human smuggling, and other illicit and dangerous revenue seeking operations, including kidnappings for ransom, forced labor, and sex trafficking. These and other human traffickers exploit vulnerable individuals and groups by promising low-paying jobs while confiscating their identification documents.
▶ 0:44:30Dir. Gabbard: They operate in the shadows, exploiting lawlessness in various areas and using coercion and intimidation to control their victims. These key drivers of migrants are expected to persist, heightened U.S. border security enforcement and deportations under the trump administration are proving to serve as a deterrent for migrants seeking to illegally cross U.S. borders. U.S. border patrol apprehensions along the southwest border in january 2025 dropped 85% from the same time in 2024.
▶ 0:45:03Dir. Gabbard: Transnational is almost extremists such as isis and jihadi groups continue to pursue enable or inspire attacks against the united states and our citizens come abroad and within the homeland, to advance the ultimate objective of establishing a global islamist caliphate. This includes efforts to spread ideology, recruit and radicalize individuals in the U.S. and the west.
▶ 0:45:28Dir. Gabbard: The new year's day attack in portland had no known direct contact with isis terrace but he was influenced and radicalized by isis all began that. Al qaeda and its affiliates continue to call for attacks against the united states as they conduct attacks overseas. These jihadist groups have shown their ability to adapt and evolve, including using new technologies and tactics to spread their ideology and recruit new followers.
▶ 0:45:57Dir. Gabbard: A range of non--state cyber criminals are -- extortion, commercial pursuits, and financial gain. These actors use a variety of tactics, including ransomware and the denial of service attacks to disrupt systems and steal sensitive and lucrative information using available technologies and U.S. cyber vulnerabilities.
▶ 0:46:25Dir. Gabbard: Ransomware actors last year attacked the largest payment processor for U.S. health care institutions. Another set of criminal actors conducted cyber attacks against U.S. water utilities. Some of these non-state cyber actors operate as proxies for or emulate similar activities that are carried out by major state actors.
▶ 0:46:48Dir. Gabbard: All these nonstate cyber actors often seek financial and intellectual property gains they carry out espionage purposes, targeting our criminal infrastructure. Turning to key state actors, the ic sees china, iran, and north korea engaging in activities that could challenge U.S. capabilities and interests, especially related to our security and economy. These actors are in some cases working together in different areas to target U.S. interests and protect themselves from U.S. sanctions.
▶ 0:47:17Dir. Gabbard: At this point, the ic assesses that china is our most capable strategic competitor. Under the leadership of president xi jinping, the people's republic of china seeks to position itself as a leading power on the world stage, economically, technologically, and militarily. Beijing is driven in part by a belief that washington is pursuing a broad effort to contain china's rise and undermine ccp rule.
▶ 0:47:52Dir. Gabbard: China's most serious domestic challenge is probably china' a slowing economy and potential instability of social economic grievances leading to large-scale unrest. Growing economic tensions with the united states and other countries could also weigh on china's plans for economic growth and domestic job creation. China's military is fielding advanced capabilities, including hypersonic weapons, stealth aircraft, advanced submarines, stronger space/cyber warfare assets, and a larger.
▶ 0:48:23Dir. Gabbard: And avoid conflict, china is building his military capability in part to gain advantage in the event of a military conflict with the united states. Around the issue of china's efforts towards unification with taiwan, china's military is also expanding its presence in the asia-pacific region with the focus on disputed territorial claims in the east china and south china seas.
▶ 0:48:48Dir. Gabbard: Beijing is advancing its cyber capabilities for sophisticated operations aimed at stealing sensitive U.S. government and private sector information and pre-positioning additional asymmetric attack options that may be deployed in a conflict. China cyber activities have been linked to multiple high-profile breaches, including last year's massive compromise of U.S. telecom infrastructure, commonly referred to as salt-.
▶ 0:49:17Dir. Gabbard: Beijing currently dominates global markets and strategically important supply chains, for example, with the mining and processing of several critical minerals. In december, china exposed an export ban to the united states on gallium and antimony, all of which are important to the production of semiconductors and our defense technologies. This was in direct response to U.S. export controls on chips designed to broadly limit prc access to advanced chips and chip I can making equipment.
▶ 0:49:45Dir. Gabbard: China also aims to compete in other industries, including ai, legacy semiconductor chip production, bio manufacturing and genetic sequencing, and medical and pharmaceutical supply production. Leveraging often heavily estate subsidize production at lower scale, and weaker regulatory standards than required in the west, beijing's strategy has given it a leading position in many parts of these sectors and supply chains that support them.
▶ 0:50:14Dir. Gabbard: In 2020 three, china had five first in class domestic drug approvals and three fda approvals. Turning to russia, russian's nuclear and conventional military capabilities with demonstrated economic and military resilience make it a formidable competitor. Moscow has more nuclear weapons than any other nation.
▶ 0:50:36Dir. Gabbard: That can inflict catastrophic damage on the united states and the world in the event of a major war that russian leaders fear put them in their regime at major risk. In late 2024, russia announced updates to its public nuclear doctrine come expanding the conditions under which russia would consider using nuclear weapons. Russia is building a more modern and survivable nuclear force designed to circumvent U.S. military defense through retaliatory strike potential. Russia intends to deter the U.S.
▶ 0:51:06Dir. Gabbard: By holding both the U.S. homeland at risk and by having the capabilities to threaten nuclear war in a conflict. Russia has developed advanced cyber capabilities and attempted to pre-position access to U.S. critical infrastructure for asymmetric options and make it a persistent cyber threat. Russia's cyber activities have been linked to high-profile breaches including the 2023 hack of microsoft.
▶ 0:51:34Dir. Gabbard: Russia is also fielding new capabilities in antisatellite weapons meant to degrade the U.S. and allies' base infrastructure. Among russia's most concerning developments is a new satellite intended to carry a nuclear weapon as an anti-si weapon as an anti-s-- anti-satellite weapon. Iran continues to seek expansion of its influence in the middle east, despite the degradation to its proxies and defenses during the gaza conflict.
▶ 0:52:04Dir. Gabbard: Iran has developed and maintained ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, uavs, including systems capable of striking U.S. targets and allies in the region. Tehran has shown a willingness to use these weapons, including during a 2020 attack on U.S. forces in iraq and in attacks against israel in april and october 2020 four. Enron's cyber operations and capabilities present a serious threat to U.S. networks and data.
▶ 0:52:34Dir. Gabbard: The ic continues to assess that iran is not building a nuclear weapon and the supreme leader has not authorized to nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003. The ic continues to monitor closely of tehran decides to reauthorize its nuclear weapons program.
▶ 0:52:51Dir. Gabbard: In the past year, we have seen an erosion of a decades long taboo in iran on discussing nuclear weapons in public, likely emboldened nuclear in iran's apparatus. It is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons. Iran will likely continue efforts to counter israel and press for U.S.
▶ 0:53:14Dir. Gabbard: Military withdrawal from the region by aiding, arming, helping to reconstitute its loose consortium of like-minded terrorists and like-minded actors, which it refers to as its axis of resistance. Although it is weakened it provides a wide range of threats, especially to israel's population and to U.S. shipping and transit.
▶ 0:53:43Dir. Gabbard: North korean leader kim jong-un is pursuing stronger, strategic, conventional capabilities that can target U.S. forces and allies in the region, as well as the U.S. homeland. To bolster north korea's leverage and stature, defend its regime, and achieve at least tacit recognition as a nuclear weapons power.
▶ 0:54:04Dir. Gabbard: Kim's recently cemented strategic partnership with russia supports these goals by providing him greater financial, military, diplomatic support, reduced reliance on china, and providing north korean forces and weapons systems authentic war fighting experience.
▶ 0:54:23Dir. Gabbard: Kim views his strategic weapons advantage, deepening ties with russia, and north korea's economic durability of strengthening his negotiating position against washington's demands for denuclearization and lessening his need for sanctions relief.
▶ 0:54:38Dir. Gabbard: North korea is probably prepared to conduct another nuclear test on short notice, and continues to flight test its icbms to demonstrate increasing capabilities as leverage in future negotiations. Since 2022, china, russia, iran, north korea have grown closer.
▶ 0:55:00Dir. Gabbard: Removing the accelerant of the war in ukraine, it's unlikely to revert these bilateral relationships to a pre-war baseline, leaving room for new strategic priorities and world events to create new incentives or challenges to their currently high levels of cooperation. Russia has been a catalyst for much of this expanded cooperation driven heavily by the support that it needed for its war effort against ukraine, including protection from U.S. and western sanctions.
▶ 0:55:32Dir. Gabbard: In addition to its exchange of military and other resource capabilities with north korea, russia has more heavily relied on china's financial and defense industry backing and has increased combined military exercises with china to signal shared fortitude against the united states and U.S. allies in the asia-pacific region. With iran, russia has expanded financial ties to mitigate sanctions.
▶ 0:55:55Dir. Gabbard: Iran has become a critical military supplier to russia, especially of uavs, in exchange for russian technical support for iranian weapons, intelligence, and advanced cyber capabilities. In conclusion, the threats that we see to U.S. national security are complex and multifaceted and put the lives, safety, and well-being of the american people at serious risk.
▶ 0:56:18Dir. Gabbard: As the heads of the american peoples intelligence community, we will provide the president, congress, and our war fighters with timely, unbiased, relevant intelligence to keep the united states secure, free, prosperous, and at peace.to the american people specifically, our intelligence community exists to serve you and ensure your safety, security, and freedom.
▶ 0:56:43Chair Cotton: Thank you, director gabbard. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the annual threat assessment for the first time lists cartels and traffickers as the very first threat. Director patel, I'm pleased to say that the fbi little rock field office has been doing its part in addressing this threat. The field office, along with other federal, state, local law enforcement agencies have arrested nearly 300 immigrants in my state in 2025 so far.
▶ 0:57:14Chair Cotton: Could you provide color about the nature of the threat these illegal immigrants pose not only to arkansas but our nation, including some of the details of the horrific offenses they've committed against the american people? The witness will suspend. [protester chanting "stop funding israel"]
▶ 0:57:47Chair Cotton: That protester was a code pink limited, saying -- lunatic, saying the greatest threat to world peace is funding israel. I will observe for the benefit of the audience here and on television that code pink is funded by communist china as well. It simply illustrates, speak up now if you want to be removed as well, whoever is saying that.
▶ 0:58:24Chair Cotton: [indiscernible protests]
▶ 0:58:26Chair Cotton: If anyone else would like to join them, speak now so we don't have any more disruptions. As I was saying, the fact that communist china funds code pink, which interrupts a hearing like this about israel, illustrates director gabbard's point that china, russia, iran, north korea, and other american adversaries are working in concert to a greater degree than they ever have before.
▶ 0:58:54Chair Cotton: Director patel, back to my question. Can you give us color about the threat that illegal migrants pose, not only to my state which has resulted in nearly 300 arrests in 2025, but also to the nation at large?
▶ 0:59:09Dir. Patel: I appreciate the time to address you all. Specifically to arkansas, the priorities of the fbi, which I identified during my confirmation hearing and s confirmation hearing and sense, every state is a border state. Arkansas is no exception. Let me highlight the work of the men and women in the fbi and state and local law enforcement in arkansas.
▶ 0:59:36Dir. Patel: Since february for the loan, we've had 220 illegal immigrants -- february alone, we've had 220 illegal immigrants arrested on charges varying violent felonies. Here is something that I want the american people to hear about narcotics. Thousands of pounds of narcotics were seized in these three weeks in arkansas.
▶ 1:00:05Dir. Patel: Thousands worth tens of millions of dollars. Everything from fentanyl to meth, to cocaine, to heroin, to marijuana, and more, also including manufactured drugs. The fbi has the biggest footprint in arkansas, but we couldn't achieve this mission without state and local law enforcement partners, which has been one of the priorities since I took the helm at the fbi. They provide the greatest ground-level intelligence to conduct these operations in arkansas and every state across the union.
▶ 1:00:36Dir. Patel: Since february 5, we have assisted with the arrest of hundreds of criminals and illegals throughout your state, and that was just a three week operation. Prior to that, there was a bust of 17 federal indictments relating to a meth lab in the state of arkansas in the southwest corner of your state. All of those individuals are facing prosecution for hundreds of pounds of opioids, guns, and other illicit material. We will continue to do that work. We will work seven days a week, 300 65 days a year in every state.
▶ 1:01:05Chair Cotton: Thank you, director patel. As director gabbard highlighted from the annual threat report, director ratcliffe, many, if not most of the chemical precursors for deadly fentanyl produced by mexican drug cartels originates in china. China of course is a techno totalitarian police state. They have technology to monitor their own people that soviet russia could have on the imagined.
▶ 1:01:35Chair Cotton: Is there any reason, director ratcliffe, to believe that china could not monitor and crackdown on this flow of chemical precursors to mexico if it chose to do so?
▶ 1:01:48Dir. Ratcliffe: Thank you, senator, for the question. No, there is nothing to prevent the people's republic of china from cracking down on fentanyl precursors. As you well know, senator, one of the reasons they don't is there are more than 600 prc-related companies that produce those precursor chemicals in an industry that generates $1.5 trillion.
▶ 1:02:17Dir. Ratcliffe: That is one of the reasons why we see the chinese efforts to affect the fentanyl precursors are really limited in nature and intermittent in nature and not a dedicated effort to enforce their own laws and regulations to crackdown on this.
▶ 1:02:41Chair Cotton: I have many more questions that I could ask, but I will try to lead by example and stay within the five minute limit. For the benefit of senators, I remind everyone that there is a vote scheduled at noon. I hope to finish the open portion of this hearing before the vote closes, after which time we will move to the closed portion.
▶ 1:03:01Sen. Warner: Thank you. I will be happy to take your 13 seconds. I want to go back to what I addressed at the outset. This was not only sloppy and violated all procedures, but if this information had gotten out american lives could have been lost. The houthis with this information could have repositioned their defensive systems.
▶ 1:03:30Sen. Warner: Director gabbard, did you participate in the group chat with the secretary of defense and other trump senior officials discussing the yemen were plans? You're not going to be willing to address -- answer my question, ma'am. You were not tg on the group chat?
▶ 1:03:53Dir. Gabbard: I won't get into the specifics --
▶ 1:03:56Sen. Warner: You refuse to acknowledge if you are in the group chat? Why aren't you going to get into specifics? Is it because this is classified?
▶ 1:04:05Dir. Gabbard: It is under review --
▶ 1:04:08Sen. Warner: If it is not classified, share the texts now. Is it classified or not classified information? Director ratcliffe, were you on the group chat?
▶ 1:04:19Dir. Ratcliffe: Senator, I was on a signal messaging group.
▶ 1:04:25Sen. Warner: So, you were the john ratcliffe on that group?
▶ 1:04:29Dir. Ratcliffe: Can I provide some context?
▶ 1:04:32Sen. Warner: Yes, but I have a series of questions.
▶ 1:04:35Dir. Ratcliffe: It is important, because at the outset you made comments about signal messaging using encrypted apps. One of the first things that happened when I was confirmed as cia director was that signal was loaded on my computer at the cia as for most cia officers. One of the things that I was briefed on early, senator, was by the cia records management folks about the use of signal as a permissible work use.
▶ 1:05:07Dir. Ratcliffe: That is a practice that preceded the current administration to the biden administration.
▶ 1:05:11Sen. Warner: I have a series of questions. If you are making a statement that signal is a secure channel --
▶ 1:05:19Dir. Ratcliffe: Cannot answer that? It is permissible to use to communicate and coordinate for work purposes, provided, senator, that any decisions that are made are also recorded through formal channels. So, those were procedures that were implemented.
▶ 1:05:45Dir. Ratcliffe: My staff implemented those processes and followed those processes, complied with those processes, and, finally, please, my communications, to be clear, in the signal message group, were entirely permissible and unlawful and didn't -- and lawful and did not include classified information.
▶ 1:06:05Sen. Warner: We will make that decision. If it is not classified share the texts with the committee. Director gabbard, you're the security director and set guidelines for classified information. Did you contact the defense secretary or others after this specific military planning was put out and say that we should be doing this in the skiff?
▶ 1:06:31Dir. Gabbard: There was no classified information that was shared --
▶ 1:06:35Sen. Warner: If there is no classified material, share it with the committee. You can't have it both ways. These are important jobs. This is our national security. Bobbing and weaving and trying to filibuster your answer -- please, answer the question. If this was a rank-and-file intelligence officer, who did this kind of careless behavior, what would you do with them?
▶ 1:07:05Dir. Gabbard: Senator, I will reiterate that there was no classified material shared --
▶ 1:07:11Sen. Warner: If there is no classified material, share. If there is no classified material, you can't even answer the question if you were on the chat. I think my colleagues remember when you couldn't answer the question if that is a traitor. I have serious doubts -- anyway.
▶ 1:07:33Sen. Warner: Director gabbard, tweeted 11 days ago, any unauthorized release of classified information is a violation of the law and will be treated as such. If this information is classified, what are you going to do?
▶ 1:07:51Dir. Gabbard: Two points. First of all, there is a difference between inadvertent release --
▶ 1:07:59Sen. Warner: Careless and sloppy.
▶ 1:08:01Dir. Gabbard: Versus malicious release of classified information. There was no classified information --
▶ 1:08:09Sen. Warner: My time is about up and I will use my 12 seconds. Director patel, has the fbi launched an investigation of this?
▶ 1:08:19Dir. Patel: I was briefed about it late last night and this morning. I don't have an update.
▶ 1:08:24Chair Cotton: At this point in the ordinary course of affairs I would recognize senator collins. She asked me to express that she is under the weather this morning and regrets her absence but anticipate submitting written questions, to which I would request your prompt replies for the senator. Senator cornyn.
▶ 1:08:43Sen. Cornyn: I applaud president trump's efforts to try to bring an end to the war between russia and ukraine. I want to read a statement out of the annual threat assessment and confirm that you agree. It says russia views its ongoing war with ukraine as a proxy conflict with the west.
▶ 1:09:10Sen. Cornyn: It's objective to restore russian strength and security against perceived U.S. and western encroachment has increased the risks of unintended escalation between russia and nato. Do you agree with that statement? That is in the annual threat assessment, correct?
▶ 1:09:33Dir. Gabbard: Correct.
▶ 1:09:35Sen. Cornyn: I would like to refer to an ap story, associated press, dated march 21, 2025. The title is western officials say russia is behind a campaign of sabotage across europe. This ap map shows it. Mr. chairman, I would like with consent this be made part of the record.
▶ 1:10:03Chair Cotton: Without objection.
▶ 1:10:05Sen. Cornyn: The document that ap compiled, presumably through open sources, documented 59 incidents, including cyber attacks, spreading propaganda, plotting killings or committing acts of vandalism, arson, sabotage, or espionage. Is that consistent with your understanding and impression of what russia is currently engaged in in europe?
▶ 1:10:33Dir. Gabbard: I have not seen that specific article, but I can confirm that we assess russia's attempts to conduct such sabotage activities in europe.
▶ 1:10:45Sen. Cornyn: Thank you. One of the things I am most concerned about following some of the discussions between russia and ukraine and the united states, and our other allies, as I said peace between ukraine and russia is the desirable end state. I think you would have to be crazy to say otherwise.
▶ 1:11:17Sen. Cornyn: I also want to talk a little bit about the unexpected or unintended consequences of european insecurity. I know the incoming chancellor of germany has talked about the possibility that germany might share its nuclear weapons with ukraine, and suggested that the u.k. Would be part of that. I know poland has talked about acquiring nuclear weapons.
▶ 1:11:49Sen. Cornyn: Perhaps other european countries to make up what they view as a receding of the american umbrella of protection. General kruse, if that would occur, the perception of european insecurity?
▶ 1:12:19Dir. Kruse: Thank you for the question. One thing the intelligence community works hard on is to understand who has nuclear weapons throughout the planet. As discussed in the opening statements, by the chair and director gabbard, the proliferation and increase in the lethality of nuclear weapons is one of the things that we have to track and face.
▶ 1:12:45Dir. Kruse: It has changed dramatically over the past five years and will continue the change of the next five years. The addition of additional countries which have their own deterrence policies and will act in a nuclear dialogue, or the presence of those weapons, the security of those weapons, the movement and threat of use of those weapons will complicate all of the decisions by which all future conflicts and political decisions --
▶ 1:13:14Sen. Cornyn: It makes the world a more dangerous place, does it not?
▶ 1:13:18Dir. Kruse: Senator, yes, it does.
▶ 1:13:21Sen. Cornyn: By way of history, ukraine used to have the third-largest arsenal of nuclear weapons on the planet. As a result of negotiations between russia and ukraine and the united kingdom, the budapest memorandum documented a commitment by russia and the united states to protect the territorial integrity of ukraine in exchange for them giving up their nuclear weapons.
▶ 1:13:47Sen. Cornyn: Did I correctly summarize the content of the budapest memorandum in 1994?
▶ 1:13:52Dir. Kruse: Yes, you did. Ukraine willingly gave up its nuclear weapons.
▶ 1:14:00Chair Cotton: Senator wyden.
▶ 1:14:03Sen. Wyden: Obviously, my colleagues and I feel strongly about the were planning meeting on unclassified phones. Reckless, dangerous. Both the mishandling of classified information and deliberate destruction of federal records of potential crimes that ought to be investigated immediately. I want to make clear that I am of the view that there ought to be resignations, starting with the national security advisor and secretary of defense.
▶ 1:14:31Sen. Wyden: Director ratcliffe, director gabbard, have you participated in any other group chats with senior trump and ministrations officials in which classified information was shared using phones that were not cleared for such information? The question is for the two of you.
▶ 1:14:48Dir. Ratcliffe: Your question was, have I participated in any other group chats sharing classified information. To be clear, I haven't participated in any signal group messaging that relates to any classified information at all.
▶ 1:15:05Sen. Wyden: Director gabbard.
▶ 1:15:06Dir. Gabbard: I have the same answer. I have not participated in any signal group chat or chat on another app that contained any classified information.
▶ 1:15:16Sen. Wyden: I think it's important to follow through with the two of you. Will you cooperate with an audit to confirm that that's the case?
▶ 1:15:25Dir. Gabbard: I have no objection.
▶ 1:15:27Dir. Ratcliffe: Senator, I will certainly comply with any follow-up that the national security council would deem appropriate. Again, to be clear, the use of signal message, and to end encryption applications, is permissible and was in this case used permissibly, that >> thank you for the question.
▶ 1:16:20Dir. Ratcliffe: Not that I can recall. >> the question I have for you director gabbard involves the question of elon musk going to cease the china war plans because he would be susceptible to that. You are responsible for security clearance policies across the government.
▶ 1:16:44Dir. Ratcliffe: How are you going to go about carrying ar carrying out this obligation ?
▶ 1:16:54Dir. Gabbard: The office of the director of provides oversight over these intelligence elements. Leaders have upheld the trust that the american people have placed in them.
▶ 1:17:14Dir. Gabbard: Both secretary hegseth and president trump completely denied the assertion that elon musk was going to receive any kind of classified work plan brief pertaining to china or any other country. >> what are the president had the prerogative to get clearance , I want to touch on security clearance policies and that's why I'm asking about it.
▶ 1:17:48Dir. Gabbard: Can a president decide who gets the clearance?
▶ 1:17:50Dir. Gabbard: Yes. >> what about your role?
▶ 1:17:57Dir. Gabbard: That's not true. >> how do we resolve it?
▶ 1:18:01Dir. Gabbard: The elected president has the authority to provide clearance to those he deems necessary.
▶ 1:18:11Sen. Warren: I have cap further discussion on this. I think we need more clarity because I that you have the formal responsibility for security clearances and now we have heard that this will be the president's project and I think we ought to have further discussions.
▶ 1:18:37Sen. Langford: Thank you all of you who serve the country. There are a lot of citizens of our country right now that have much greater security in their life because of the work that you do. I appreciate that for the folks in oklahoma, they would definitely want me to say thank you for your service. Let me ask a couple of questions. Iran is listed as one of the top sponsors of terrorism for a very long time.
▶ 1:19:09Sen. Langford: They are the primary armors of hezbollah, hamas, they are having the russians to kill ukrainians. In recent days when many nations have talked about how to provide greater stability, iranian leadership made very clear statements they launched a one state solution for israel and to drive out all jews.
▶ 1:19:40Sen. Langford: This continues to be an issue for americans in particular. My question on this is the sections and the you think of sanctions, what we know about the iranian response under the biden administration, the sanctions will turn down. Iran has been able to sell $90 billion in oil on the global market to be able to re-arm itself and all of the others around the region. Sanctions are now going back onto iran again. What do we know about the effect of those sanctions?
▶ 1:20:06Dir. Gabbard: Thank you for the question. These sanctions have just begun to be reinstated to the full effect have not yet borne fruit. But the message that the president has sent with his maximum pressure campaign is certainly heard.
▶ 1:20:26Dir. Gabbard: As the chairman mentioned in his opening remarks, president trump recently sent a letter to the leader of iran expressing his interest in direct talks in order to try to de-escalate and prevent war, prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon but also stated that there would be military consequences if there was no direct negotiations. President trump is continuing to carry out his vision and mission of peace through strength, acting in the best interest of the american people.
▶ 1:20:58Dir. Gabbard: We will see what choices are made from here.
▶ 1:21:01Sen. Lankford: Thank you. Director patel, during the last administration, the open border policy that they had, we had some years including 2022 and 2023 where there were 70,000 individuals released into the country identify the special-interest aliens. This is something that this committee and the homeland security committee tried over and over again to get details on and the biden administration was unwilling to share any of the details which drew frustration.
▶ 1:21:33Sen. Lankford: The comment that came back to us is that the fbi will attract these individuals to identify them even though there were 70,000 per year coming into the country. You just walked into this position and trying to get your feet on the ground on so many different issues outstanding.
▶ 1:21:47Sen. Lankford: I raised the issue of individuals who are currently illegally present in the country going through a process but are listed as special-interest aliens by definition from the administration, individuals who we do not know their level of risk but they are considered a national security risk but we don't know anything else about that from there. How are you trying to get on top of the number of people that are criminal aliens in the country but also these special interest aliens that come from terrorist areas?
▶ 1:22:16Dir. Patel: I appreciate your question. As far as the fbi is concerned, criminal. We are focused at dhs and elsewhere to identify for our information searing networks that we have stood up with state and local law enforcement to provide the details on any criminal evidence relating to any of the individuals who you highlighted.
▶ 1:22:38Dir. Patel: If there is a nexus there, the case will be opened by the wind agent predicate a factual basis to do so. We will further or for that matter to the department of justice and prosecution. We will report back to you senator with some finality on the outcome of that process.
▶ 1:22:56Sen. Lankford: Are you getting good feedback from social media technology companies and cooperation from them on illegal activities promoted on their site? All the different sites have standards for what can and cannot be done. On the border areas, whether the sites are allowing child trafficking or the hiring of americans to be drivers and they know this is being circumvented. Are they working with you on that to take illegal content off of their sites?
▶ 1:23:25Dir. Patel: We have engaged at the top levels of all the private sector software communities and social media companies and they have been very helpful because they have been told that this is a priority for me at the fbi to work with them because they have so much information to share back with us. That is just on the public systems. We are not talking about the darknet.
▶ 1:23:45Sen. Lankford: Thank you. >> thank you, chairman. Director ratcliffe, I want to start with you. Who determined that the content of this discussion on signal was not classified?
▶ 1:24:06Dir. Ratcliffe: Senator -- there was no classified agent mentioned as part of this story. Normally that would be classified information.
▶ 1:24:25Sen. Heinrich: Was there any declassification after the fact?
▶ 1:24:28Dir. Ratcliffe: To be clear, it is a permissible use that has been approved by the white house for senior officials. And recommended for high-level officials who would be targeted by foreign adversaries to use end to end encrypted apps whenever possible.
▶ 1:24:56Dir. Ratcliffe: In this case what the national security advisor did was to request through a message that there be coordination so you mentioned the name of the cia active officer, correct?
▶ 1:25:14Sen. Heinrich: I mentioned the name.
▶ 1:25:17Dir. Ratcliffe: In the article the invocation was that this was improper. That was not the case. A cia officer was not acting undercover. The request for coordination was for a staff member to coordinate on the high side. I communicated the name of a cia officer not operating under cover completely appropriate who does openly and routinely coordinate with the white house as a member of my staff.
▶ 1:25:47Dir. Ratcliffe: The intimation that there was something appropriate was clearly indirect.
▶ 1:25:51Sen. Heinrich: Did it occur to you that given the sensitive nature of this discussion that we could move to the high side?
▶ 1:25:58Dir. Ratcliffe: That was clearly the intent was that this was initially set up by the national security advisor with the instruction that send a point of contact and that you would be provided with information further on the high side, for high side to communication.
▶ 1:26:23Dir. Ratcliffe: It reflects that the national security advisor intended this to be a mechanism for coordinating between senior level officials but not a substitute for using high side or classified communications for anything that would be classified and I think that is exactly what did happen.
▶ 1:26:40Sen. Heinrich: I am curious, did this conversation at some point include information on weapons packages, targets or timing?
▶ 1:26:51Dir. Ratcliffe: Not that I'm aware of.
▶ 1:26:54Sen. Heinrich: Director gabbard, same question.
▶ 1:26:58Dir. Gabbard: Same answer and defer to the department of defense on that question.
▶ 1:27:02Sen. Heinrich: Those are two different answers. You are saying that was not part of the conversation?
▶ 1:27:09Dir. Gabbard: To my knowledge.
▶ 1:27:11Sen. Heinrich: Precise operational issues were not part of the conversation?
▶ 1:27:15Dir. Gabbard: Correct.
▶ 1:27:16Sen. Heinrich: I want to ask you director gabbard, something on a very different track. I very much agree with the conclusion of the aca that foreign illicit drug actors are a major threat in the united states and many of you have spoken to this today.
▶ 1:27:40Sen. Heinrich: It is the -- is the ic wrong in its conclusion that canada is involved? I am surprised given some of the rhetoric that there is no mention of canada in the ata.
▶ 1:27:57Dir. Gabbard: The focus in my opening and the ata was to focus on the most extreme threads in that area and our assessment is that the most extreme threat related to fentanyl continues to come in and for mexico.
▶ 1:28:13Sen. Heinrich: The president has stated that the fentanyl coming from canada was massive and actually said it was an unusual and extraordinary threat and that was the language used to justify putting tariffs on canada. I am just trying to reconcile those two issues.
▶ 1:28:34Sen. Heinrich: Is it an unusual or extraordinary threat or is it a minor threat that does not even merit mention in the annual threat assessment?
▶ 1:28:45Dir. Gabbard: I don't have the numbers related to canada in front of me at this time. I would like to get back to you on the specifics of that answer.
▶ 1:28:53Sen. Heinrich: It is less than 1% of the fentanyl that we are able to interdict. In case you have different information, I will welcome that. >> senator budd.
▶ 1:29:08Sen. Budd: Thank you all for being here. Director gabbard, prior to your role here, we had a big storm in western north carolina. Thank you for your ongoing work there and that of your family. It was good to see them out in western north carolina last week. Thank you.
▶ 1:29:35Sen. Budd: Director haugh, what do we need to do in regard to volt and what do we need to do in regard to our power companies whether it is generation or distribution. Duke energy in my home state or rural electric co-ops. What have we learned and what can I tell them?
▶ 1:30:06Dir. Haugh: 99% of critical infrastructure in the U.S. is controlled by private companies. It drives us to consider how we partner with companies and the private sector. It began when industries came that were seen gaining context and we were able to bring context to that to be able to understand what the threat was and to be able to identify who was behind that threat.
▶ 1:30:34Dir. Haugh: Since that time we have continued to work closely with industry to determine what are the right ways for us to be able to pursue these threats within networks to enable the interagency, to enable our partners and the industry to be able to pursue them. That is the approach we have to take.
▶ 1:30:52Dir. Haugh: It is a collaboration between the government and industry to be able to eradicate these threats and we have continued to pursue them together since our first identification and notification that we did.
▶ 1:31:15Sen. Budd: What have you done on the defensive side here?
▶ 1:31:24Dir. Haugh: I have been given guidance as far as what we have done on the defensive side and I look forward to discussing that with you.
▶ 1:31:32Sen. Budd: Look forward to that. Thank you all for being here. You are all aware of section 702 of fisa, a useful authority to keep our nation safe. We need to rebuild the american people's trust and confidence that such authorities are not being misused by the intelligence community to unlawfully target americans.
▶ 1:31:59Sen. Budd: Since taking over your respective agencies, can you tell me and tell the american people how effective the recent changes have been in protecting privacy and civil liberties of each and every american? If you will comment on how useful the authority is in generating intelligence that actually protect the homeland. I will start with you director gabbard.
▶ 1:32:19Dir. Gabbard: Section 702 which authorizes foreign collection of non-us persons outside of the united states continues to be one of our most effective collection tools to ensure our national security. There are a number of reforms that the senate passed, that congress passed last year that have proven to strengthen the protections of americans for government rights.
▶ 1:32:49Dir. Gabbard: In the short time that I have been in the seat, I have seen a few examples that directly, most recently through the fisa court to weigh in on a dispute regarding provisions that would further protect american fourth amendment rights.
▶ 1:33:09Dir. Gabbard: I will be visiting our friends at the nsa next week and doing a right along -- ride along to observe how those reforms are being implemented to protect american civil liberties union and look for to reporting that after I've had that opportunity.
▶ 1:33:25Sen. Budd: Thank you. Director patel.
▶ 1:33:28Dir. Patel: Thank you, senator. With my background I just want to delineate between title I three and seven of two collection. We need to both ardently defend its use both ardently support reforms that allow the american public to trust that those charged with those capabilities are not violating the fourth amendment. When it comes to U.S.
▶ 1:33:54Dir. Patel: Persons, I have already included an amendment in terms of fbi language to make sure that when a U.S. person is targeted, that the fbi specifically is responsible for coming through all information and satisfy that burden and stay to get in the application.
▶ 1:34:14Dir. Patel: When it comes to 702, some of the biggest risks would not have occurred if it had gone dark and the fbi continues to use that information to protect the homeland.
▶ 1:34:37Dir. Patel: We just need to assure the the american public that even at 702 sphere american citizens information is protected.
▶ 1:34:46Sen. Budd: I look forward to discussing in the closed session.
▶ 1:34:51Sen. King: Director gabbard I did not intend to get into the jeffrey goldberg story but something you said has puzzled me. According to open source reporting 11:44 on the morning of march 15th, secretary hegseth put into this group text a detailed operation plan including target, the weapons we were going to be using, attack sequences and timing and get you
▶ 1:35:22Sen. King: Have testified that nothing in that chain was classified. Wouldn't that be classified? What if that had been made public that morning before the attack took place?
▶ 1:35:33Dir. Gabbard: Senator, I can attest to the fact that there were no classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat at any time.
▶ 1:35:44Dir. Ratcliffe: So the sequencing -- for the sequencing and timing and weapons, you do not consider --
▶ 1:36:00Sen. King: Your testimony very clearly today was that nothing in that senate text was classified. If that is the case, please release the text stream so that the public can have a view of what actually transpired on this discussion. It is hard for me to believe that targets and timing and weapons would not have been classified. Let me move on.
▶ 1:36:28Sen. King: You approved this annual report prepared by the office of the director. Is this submitted to the white house routinely in anticipation of its public release?
▶ 1:36:42Dir. Gabbard: I don't know what you mean.
▶ 1:36:44Sen. King: Was this report submitted to the white house before it's released today?
▶ 1:36:49Dir. Gabbard: It was submitted to them once it was completed. I think probably around the same time it was sent to all of you.
▶ 1:36:58Sen. King: I want to move on. One note that surprised me, this is my 13th year on this committee. Every single one of these reports has mentioned global climate change is a significant national security threat except this one. Has something happened? Has global climate change been solved?
▶ 1:37:22Sen. King: Why is that not in this report and who made the decision that it should not be in the report when it has been in every one of the 11 prior records?
▶ 1:37:29Dir. Gabbard: I cannot speak to the decisions made previously but this annual threat assessment has been focused very directly on the threats that we deem most critical to the united states and our national security. Obviously we are aware of occurrences within the environment and how they may impact operations but we are focused on the direct threats -- safety, well-being and security.
▶ 1:37:56Sen. King: I was out how they will impact mass migration, famine, dislocation, political violence which is the finding of the 2019 annual threat entrustment -- annual threat assessment under the first trump administration. Do you not consider that a national security threat?
▶ 1:38:14Dir. Gabbard: For the intelligence community being aware of the environment we are operating in is a given. What I focused this annual threat assessment on and the icy focused this threat assessment on are the most extreme and critical direct threats to our national security.
▶ 1:38:28Sen. King: Let me ask you a direct question. Who decided climate change should be left out of this report after it is been in the prior 11?
▶ 1:38:35Dir. Gabbard: I gave direction to our team at odeon eye to focus on the most extreme and critical national security threat.
▶ 1:38:43Dir. Ratcliffe: Did that direction include no comments on climate change?
▶ 1:38:48Dir. Gabbard: As I said, I focused on the most extreme --
▶ 1:38:54Sen. King: That is not a response to my question. Did you instruct that there be no finding in terms of climate change in this report?
▶ 1:39:03Dir. Gabbard: I don't recall giving that instruction.
▶ 1:39:07Sen. King: Final question in the few short sections -- in seconds I have. It is in the report repeatedly about cyber danger from china, russia and iran. Why is the administration deconstructing cisa? People fired. Director haugh talked about the importance of cooperation. It seems to have been disestablished.
▶ 1:39:36Sen. King: A policy reason is they are undermining cisa's relation to the state with regard to cybersecurity when the cybersecurity threat is already -- only growing?
▶ 1:39:51Dir. Gabbard: I will not speak for all of my colleagues here but I don't believe any of us have any insight into those specific staffing decisions that have been made.
▶ 1:39:59Sen. King: You have all found -- the report has found exclusively -- explicitly growing cyber threats. It is in our national interest -- is it in our national interest to deal with those insecurities, yes or no?
▶ 1:40:21Dir. Gabbard: President trump is focused on effects and making sure that the people and the resources that we have are focused on our national security. He and his team recognized that more people does not necessarily always mean better effects. Those are some of the things that are driving the changes we are seeing across the administration, is getting all of our agencies back and focused on their core mission. >> your time is expired. Senator rounds.
▶ 1:40:52Sen. Rounds: Thank you to all of you for your service to our country. With regard to the issues regarding signal, I will address it in the closed session so that we can get more in depth into that issue. I want to direct my first question to director ratcliffe. As the debate continues in washington regarding spectrum, what can you share in this unclassified setting regarding the critical nature of spectrum to national security interests generally?
▶ 1:41:23Dir. Ratcliffe: Thanks for the question, senator. I know this is an issue of great interest to the senate and the potential option of commercial space on spectrum, the discussions about spectrum, there are national security implications to both the dod and
▶ 1:41:54Dir. Ratcliffe: The icy. I think the discussions that we need to have in a classified setting I can relate to you that the directions from early meetings that we have had is that the discussion about where that might take place would not affect specifically cia or icy equities -- ic equities but we need to be concerned that a public option at certain levels
▶ 1:42:27Dir. Ratcliffe: Will have an impact on our ability to deliver an accurate intelligence picture.
▶ 1:42:32Sen. Rounds: In other words there are parts of the spectrum that cannot be shared with the commercial?
▶ 1:42:39Dir. Ratcliffe: That's correct. We can talk about the specific reasons why in a classified setting that would cause a diminishment of our ability to deliver a good threat picture to the commander-in-chief.
▶ 1:42:51Sen. Rounds: And in some places, life or death consequences.
▶ 1:42:55Dir. Ratcliffe: Absolutely.
▶ 1:42:57Sen. Rounds: Thank you. Director patel, I just want to thank you for what you are doing. I know there are a number of items in your previous life that you did that cannot be discussed but nonetheless, we have appreciated what you have done for your country already. I just want to talk to you about, we have seen a series of public news reports about isis threats within the united states. There have been several successful interventions.
▶ 1:43:26Sen. Rounds: Oklahoma city, philadelphia, new york. Although the question remains as to the total number of isis operatives who were able to reach across borders in the months and years before policy changes in january of 2025. To what extent is the fbi tracking operatives who remain in the united states today and what is the fbi doing to track them down?
▶ 1:43:50Dir. Patel: I appreciate your comments. The priorities and the fbi since I took over have been violent crime and national security and this speaks directly to national security. The direction for the fbi is to track down any individual with any terrorist ties whatsoever whether it be isis or another foreign terrorist organization and to include the new designations of the cartels down south and elsewhere.
▶ 1:44:17Dir. Patel: The fbi is utilizing our terrorism task force situated in our 55 field offices. The key to success is a partnership with state and local law enforcement who have the ground-level intelligence in these operatives. We have already shut down numerous threats and we have identified publicly where permissible these threats and where they are coming from. I think the fbi is doing a very good job right now in collecting this information through our interagency process.
▶ 1:44:45Dir. Patel: We will continue to thwart every bad actor affiliated with a terrorist organization or otherwise.
▶ 1:44:51Sen. Rounds: Thank you. Director haugh, you have talked about assault rifle but things you have not had a chance to address, cybercom 2.0.
▶ 1:45:13Sen. Rounds: Can you talk to us about critical 2.0 is in terms of countering the cyber activity going on due to nefarious actors ?
▶ 1:45:27Dir. Haugh: We were asked to look at the model to generate cyber forces. Based off of their request I produce a recommendation of the secretary that outlines three medical things which is how we manage the talent, and develop the talent and how we equip that talent underpinned by computing ai. We brought that plan back to secretary hegseth. He told us to go faster. We delivered and based off this guidance we will now begin to move forward with the rest of the department.
▶ 1:45:57Sen. Rounds: Thank you.
▶ 1:45:58Chair Cotton: Senator bennet.
▶ 1:46:01Sen. Bennet: Thank you for holding his hearing. Thank you for being here. Director ratcliffe, it sounds to me like your testimony today and dni's testimony is that there was nothing wrong at all with the signal threat that you were on. It did not include any targeting information or battle sequence. That is your testimony. That's your testimony.
▶ 1:46:36Sen. Bennet: I am a little staggered that that is your view, director ratcliffe. Does the cia have any rules about handling of classified information, yes or no?
▶ 1:46:46Dir. Ratcliffe: Yes.
▶ 1:46:48Sen. Bennet: Thank you. Do you agree, secretary of defense pete hegseth said this morning when asked by the press what had happened, he said this morning in hawaii that editor-in-chief jeff goldberg is a deceitful and highly discredited so-called journalist who has made a profession of providing hoaxes time and time again.
▶ 1:47:18Sen. Bennet: Do you share the secretary of defense's evaluation of jeff goldberg as a journalist?
▶ 1:47:23Dir. Ratcliffe: I did not see those comments.
▶ 1:47:26Sen. Bennet: Do you share the view of the secretary of defense?
▶ 1:47:29Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't have a view.
▶ 1:47:32Sen. Bennet: Assuming that he has that view, I am curious about whether -- you are the cia director. This has happened. We know it has happened. Did jeff goldberg somehow -- did he create a hoax that allowed him to become part of this signal threat? Please answer the question. Do not insult the intelligence of the american people.
▶ 1:48:02Sen. Bennet: Did he invite himself to the signal threat?
▶ 1:48:06Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't know how he was invited.
▶ 1:48:09Sen. Bennet: Finish her sentence, please.
▶ 1:48:14Dir. Ratcliffe: Clearly he was added to the signal group.
▶ 1:48:18Sen. Bennet: You don't know that the president's national security advisor invited him to join the signal threat? Everybody in america knows that. Does the cia not know that?
▶ 1:48:34Sen. Bennet: I have seen --
▶ 1:48:38Dir. Ratcliffe: I have seen the reports.
▶ 1:48:41Sen. Bennet: Do you think it is appropriate that there was a reporter added, especially one that the secretary of defense says is deceitful, highly discredited, a so-called journalist who has made a profession of peddling hopes is -- peddling hoaxes. Was it professional that he was added to the signal threat?
▶ 1:49:04Dir. Ratcliffe: No, of course not.
▶ 1:49:08Sen. Bennet: You answered the question. Let me ask you. When he was added to the thread, you are the cia director. Why didn't you call out that he was present on the signal thread?
▶ 1:49:22Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't knowing -- I don't know if you use the signal cap.
▶ 1:49:28Sen. Bennet: I do. Now for classified information. Not for targeting. That is your testimony today.
▶ 1:49:37Dir. Ratcliffe: Absolutely not, senator. When I said that I was using it as permitted, --
▶ 1:49:46Sen. Bennet: I agree that is your testimony. You asked me if I use it. I said not for targeting. Not for classified information. I also know jeff goldberg. I don't use it to communicate with him. But you thought it was appropriate. By the way, I think he is one of the more outstanding journalists in america. But I am shocked to find him on a thread that he is reading in the parking lot of a grocery store in washington, D.C.
▶ 1:50:13Sen. Bennet: And your testimony as a director of the cia is that it is totally appropriate. Is it appropriate?
▶ 1:50:22Dir. Ratcliffe: When did I use the word appropriate?
▶ 1:50:25Sen. Bennet: Go ahead.
▶ 1:50:27Dir. Ratcliffe: I did not.
▶ 1:50:28Sen. Bennet: Everybody in america.
▶ 1:50:32Dir. Ratcliffe: No, I never said that --
▶ 1:50:36Sen. Bennet: This is just a normal day at the cia where we chat about this stuff over signal. In fact, it is so normal that the last administration left it here for us. That your testimony today.
▶ 1:50:48Dir. Ratcliffe: That's your testimony.
▶ 1:50:50Sen. Bennet: That's not my testimony. That's what you said.
▶ 1:50:53Dir. Ratcliffe: I did not say any of those things.
▶ 1:50:55Sen. Bennet: We will let the american people decide. I am out of time.
▶ 1:50:59Dir. Ratcliffe: Are you going to give me a chance --
▶ 1:51:02Sen. Bennet: Did you know that the president's advisor was in moscow on this thread while you were as director of the cia participating in this thread? Were you aware that? Are you aware that today?
▶ 1:51:21Dir. Ratcliffe: I am not aware of that.
▶ 1:51:23Sen. Bennet: This sloppiness, this incompetence, this disrespect for our intelligence agencies and the personnel who work for them is entirely unacceptable. It is an embarrassment. >> senator.
▶ 1:51:38Sen. Bennet: You need to do better. You need to do better. I am being gaveled by the chairman and I apologize for going over my time.
▶ 1:51:48Chair Cotton: Senator young.
▶ 1:51:51Sen. Young: Thank you all for being here. I will be asking some follow-up questions, clarifications about this signal episode in a closed setting and try to work with all of you to bring clarity to that situation. There are some unanswered questions. It will take some time to get there. In a more dispassionate setting.
▶ 1:52:19Sen. Young: Director gabbard, I will begin asking you some questions about emerging technologies. There are some broader national security community for a long time. We know that the prc is making generational investments in certain emerging tech. Ai, biontech and other areas of technology to reviews -- reduce our vulnerability against supply chain disruptions.
▶ 1:52:50Sen. Young: As the ic assesses, the prc is seeking to become a global superpower, surpassing the U.S., promote self-reliance and achieve further economic, political and military gate political and military gatin.
▶ 1:53:10Sen. Young: Can you describe the actions that china is taking to operationalize the icy assessment -- the ic assessment in ways that directly target the security of everyday americans?
▶ 1:53:21Dir. Gabbard: Senator, what we know is that they are trying to use these capabilities as a means to continue to exploit vulnerabilities but our own critical infrastructure and our cyber technology. Critical infrastructure is a critical area of concern given what we know has already been exploited.
▶ 1:53:52Dir. Gabbard: These asymmetric attacks that have been placed within our critical infrastructure that are of serious concern given how they could be exploited especially during a time of conflict. We know that they are experiencing a boom in their generative ai capabilities and are competing heavily against our own ai capabilities.
▶ 1:54:18Dir. Gabbard: Obviously ai can and will be used across a multitude of every sector of our society both here in our own country and we expect china to be able to continue to do the same there.
▶ 1:54:30Sen. Young: Two key areas of vulnerability to the united states, conceivably susceptibility to cyber attacks and china's leveraging of ai toward misinformation increasingly in the physical realm, they can pose threats to us as well. As follow-up, director ratcliffe , we have had huawei, we tiktok.
▶ 1:54:58Sen. Young: What will be the next point of technological friction and competition between the U.S. and china? What should members be looking for?
▶ 1:55:08Dir. Ratcliffe: I can answer this question more fully in the classified setting. What I would say as it relates to the issue of emerging technologies and matters of quantum computing and quantum sensing and our ability to stay ahead of china on the technological curve with respect to those issues, I would be happy to get into that in further detail in the classified setting.
▶ 1:55:37Sen. Young: Excellent. We will dive into that. Director haugh, how do you see a biotech -- how do you see biotech playing into this?
▶ 1:55:53Dir. Haugh: To ensure that as we think about the presidents priorities in terms of both economic and technology security, we are certainly as a community following the guidance that we are increasingly putting our resources to be able to ensure that we understand where china is investing in those resources and how that will impact our economy and the overall health of our national security. .
▶ 1:56:20Sen. Young: Thank you. Director gabbard, not a lot of time left. I did have some crypto interest I wanted to communicate to you. Can you share with this community how a position to disrupt foreign cyber efforts to steal cryptocurrency such as the north koreans have successfully done.
▶ 1:56:47Sen. Young: If others would like to weigh in on this question very briefly, that would be great.
▶ 1:56:55Dir. Gabbard: We are obviously aware of north korea's revenue-generating by stealing cryptocurrency has had a significant effect on north korea's capabilities. I defer to our technical experts on the actions being taken.
▶ 1:57:18Dir. Ratcliffe: This would be a great topic and go to close.
▶ 1:57:23Sen. Young: It will be a busy closed.
▶ 1:57:25Dir. Patel: I agree with the general.
▶ 1:57:28Sen. Young: It is what you get when you visit with a bunch of spies.
▶ 1:57:32Chair Cotton: Senator kelly.
▶ 1:57:36Sen. Kelly: I will come back to the topic of the day. The signal chain as reported by the atlantic. Ms. gabbard and Mr. reckless, you both testify that there was no information operational -- Mr. ratcliffe, you both testify that there was no information operational in nature. I will start with Ms. gabbard.
▶ 1:58:07Sen. Kelly: Was there any mention of a target in yemen?
▶ 1:58:14Dir. Gabbard: I do not remember mention of specific targets.
▶ 1:58:18Sen. Kelly: Any generic target?
▶ 1:58:25Dir. Gabbard: I believe there was discussion around targets in general.
▶ 1:58:32Sen. Kelly: Mr. ratcliffe?
▶ 1:58:39Dir. Ratcliffe: That is specific with my recollection.
▶ 1:58:43Sen. Kelly: Was there any mention of a weapon or weapons system?
▶ 1:58:48Dir. Gabbard: I don't recall specific weapons systems being named.
▶ 1:58:52Sen. Kelly: I am not talking about specifics. Any weapon or weapon system?
▶ 1:58:57Dir. Gabbard: I don't recall specific names of systems or weapons being used or named.
▶ 1:59:03Sen. Kelly: I do not want you to tell me what the specific weapon was with any weapon at all?
▶ 1:59:11Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't recall.
▶ 1:59:13Sen. Kelly: How about anything about timing? Ms. gabbard?
▶ 1:59:18Dir. Gabbard: I don't recall specific timing. I will not get into the detail of the conversation. Obviously there was a significant amount of planning and internal discussions that have occurred prior to an outside of this signal chat.
▶ 1:59:39Sen. Kelly: Director ratcliffe, you are nodding your head. Any mention of any military unit whatsoever?
▶ 1:59:47Dir. Ratcliffe: Not that I recall.
▶ 1:59:50Dir. Gabbard: Not that I recall.
▶ 1:59:52Sen. Kelly: I understand that policy prohibits discussion of even what is called controlled unclassified information or cui on unsecured devices. For both of you aware of that policy?
▶ 2:00:08Dir. Gabbard: I have not read that policy.
▶ 2:00:11Dir. Ratcliffe: Not familiar with the dod policy but I will say that the secretary of defense is the original classification authority for dod in deciding what would be classified information.
▶ 2:00:24Sen. Kelly: Does the intelligence community have a policy that prohibits discussion of controlled unclassified information?
▶ 2:00:32Dir. Gabbard: Yes.
▶ 2:00:34Sen. Kelly: Ok. Controlled unclassified information according to dod includes information that is information that has not been approved for public release. Of what has been disclosed publicly of the signal chain, would either of you feel that it would be approved for public release? Ms. gabbard?
▶ 2:01:04Dir. Gabbard: The discussion that took place in that signal chat group was a conversation reflecting national security leaders and the vice president around the presidents objectives.
▶ 2:01:18Sen. Kelly: Yes or no, would you approve that for public release?
▶ 2:01:22Dir. Gabbard: I don't feel like I can answer that question here.
▶ 2:01:26Sen. Kelly: Because of the nature of this hearing?
▶ 2:01:29Dir. Gabbard: Because of the nature of a private discussion that took place between individual leaders in our government.
▶ 2:01:38Sen. Kelly: It makes sense that you would not approve for public release, when it? -- wouldn't it?
▶ 2:01:45Dir. Gabbard: There are other factors that go into that.
▶ 2:01:48Sen. Kelly: Director ratcliffe, yes or no.
▶ 2:01:51Dir. Ratcliffe: I would not approve the release of classified information.
▶ 2:01:54Sen. Kelly: I am not talking about classified information. I am talking about information not approved for public release. That is information that is considered controlled, unclassified information.
▶ 2:02:07Dir. Ratcliffe: The principles would have been individuals capable of approving there for public release.
▶ 2:02:14Sen. Kelly: I have 20 seconds. The deliberation as to whether or not we should launch a strike on another country, would you consider that classified information, Ms. gabbard?
▶ 2:02:29Dir. Gabbard: The information was not classified.
▶ 2:02:32Sen. Kelly: I am not talking about this. I am just talking about deliberation from principles as to whether or not we should launch a strike on another country. Would you consider that classified information? I am not talking about what happened this week.
▶ 2:02:51Dir. Gabbard: There are other factors that will go into determining that classification.
▶ 2:02:55Sen. Kelly: Director ratcliffe?
▶ 2:02:57Dir. Ratcliffe: The deliberation between principals in our national security apparatus about whether or not to strike another country, would you consider that a declassified information?
▶ 2:03:06Dir. Ratcliffe: A decision about classified information should be. To those channels. .
▶ 2:03:17Sen. Kelly: Thank you.
▶ 2:03:20Chair Cotton: It has been raised at several occasions during his hearing about whether classified information was discussed in this chat. You mentioned about the secretary of defense being the original classification authority. It is important for the public to understand that although you and director gabbard are classification of the road is on many matters, you are not that for all matters in the government, is that right?
▶ 2:03:50Dir. Ratcliffe: That is correct.
▶ 2:03:51Chair Cotton: If the secretary of state is classified sensitive details, that is his authority. If the secretary of energy has classified information about our national laboratories, that is his authority. The two of you cannot speak to other departments who have their own original classification authority. As director gabbard said, it would ultimately rest with one person, the president of the united states. Is that correct?
▶ 2:04:18Dir. Ratcliffe: That's correct.
▶ 2:04:19Chair Cotton: I wanted to clarify that. The vice chairman wants to weigh in as well.
▶ 2:04:26Sen. Warner: It is strange the audience and the watching public 's credibility, we are talking about timing, packages. Somehow this will be ok to put out or likely senior american officials trashing europe. I have been around this for a while. This is not information that you generally put out.
▶ 2:04:54Sen. Warner: The notion there is not even acknowledgment of we screwed up, it is stunning to me. The idea that none of this is classified and we cannot talk about it here. You cannot have it both ways.
▶ 2:05:09Chair Cotton: The witness's point is that they cannot speak for every official in the government who has original classification authority.
▶ 2:05:17Sen. Warner: I am not trying to litigate that. I'm trying to litigate on the face unless as senator bennet said, this reporter is somehow making this all up and I think the white house has acknowledged that the text chain submitted was authentic. It strains my mind to think, if the shoe had been on the other foot, what my colleagues would be saying about this.
▶ 2:05:48Sen. Warner: We will get to the bottom of it. I appreciate your comments but you have testified under law that there is nothing classified in that information. I have not heard anyone of you say we screwed up. We will find out. This is too important to our national security.
▶ 2:06:07Chair Cotton: They testified, correct me if I'm wrong, that there is no intelligence community classified information, is that correct?
▶ 2:06:16Dir. Ratcliffe: That's correct.
▶ 2:06:18Dir. Gabbard: Yes, chairman. >> that is not correct. He said repeatedly there is nothing classified, period.
▶ 2:06:26Sen. Warner: Again, we will see. I cannot believe this is not going to come out. If it is not classified, give it to the public today. I am sure one of your aides back there probably has it. If you have it here, it is not classified. Stand by your position. Or is this just one more example of a careless approach to how we keep our secrets in this administration?
▶ 2:06:52Chair Cotton: With apologies to senator moran.
▶ 2:06:57Sen. Moran: Thank you Mr. chairman and thank you to the witnesses for being here. I want to explore a little bit about ukraine and I will direct this to director ratcliffe or director kruse. The ata assesses that the event in ukraine will lead to events on the battlefield. Our ukrainian forces at any significant risk of collapse this year?
▶ 2:07:28Sen. Moran: >> before I turn it over to director ratcliffe, both sides are working toward the industrial base and the personnel required for that equipment and as they see the battle space will be various portions whether it is in any of the areas where kyiv will struggle to prevent the slow
▶ 2:07:59Sen. Moran: Grind, we do not see an imminent collapse in any of the line of control battle space is this point.
▶ 2:08:07Sen. Moreno: And vice versa. That answers my question. >> can russia maintain its operational tempo without significant changes to how it is conducting the war?
▶ 2:08:24Dir. Kruse: Our assessment from a military perspective is that russia has the ability to sustain, to campaign longer than kyiv wood. When that timeline hits, we do not have an assessment of. I believe if this were to go on for more than the remainder of this year, both sides would have a significant challenge maintaining their defense industrial base.
▶ 2:08:52Sen. Moran: Longer than this year?
▶ 2:08:55Dir. Kruse: That is correct and they will each have difficulty at various points throughout the spring, summer and fall as well.
▶ 2:09:01Sen. Moran: Thank you. Director ratcliffe, ata says continuing the russia-ukraine war perpetuates risk to the U.S. of unintended escalation, large-scale war and heightened insecurity among nato allies. What are the strategic risks to the U.S. of russia were to achieve its maximalist objectives via peace agreement?
▶ 2:09:28Dir. Ratcliffe: Via peace agreement?
▶ 2:09:31Sen. Moran: Yes.
▶ 2:09:32Dir. Ratcliffe: Clearly the negotiations reflect that president trump is seeking a cessation of the war on terms that will end the war permanently. From an intelligence community standpoint with regard to cia assets, we have taken steps to support that, the president's goal of enduring peace.
▶ 2:09:58Dir. Ratcliffe: Two director kruse's comments, I agree with his assessment and the public assessment that russia has the battlefield advantage, is grinding forward slowly. I want to comment on that however to say that with regard to the ukrainian resistance, the ukrainian people and the ukrainian military have been underestimated for a period of several years now.
▶ 2:10:27Dir. Ratcliffe: Ultimately I am convinced from my reflections in observing from an intelligent standpoint that they will fight with their bare hands if they have to if they don't have term acceptable to enduring peace. Obviously to the point of maximalist goals, president trump has communicated that he is aware of the dangers of russia getting what they want.
▶ 2:10:54Dir. Ratcliffe: I think that the peace talks taking place would reflect if successful, that both sides would not get everything that they want and no one's goals will be achieved.
▶ 2:11:08Sen. Moran: Thank you both. I will skip a question and ask what I intended to ask but ask the director of the fbi. Director, I chair is up 70 -- a subcommittee. It has been a practice that the fbi director and the attorney general come before our committee each year.
▶ 2:11:35Sen. Moran: I want to make certain that you do not foresee any challenges that I will have in your presence when you come to speak about your budget. When we visited, you made yourself often available, please talk to congress. We are getting ready for the appropriations project to begin. The budget is seemingly months away, long weeks away.
▶ 2:12:05Sen. Moran: We may ask you to testify about your priorities now or sooner than that. Is that a challenge for you?
▶ 2:12:12Dir. Patel: From the fbi, no as long as the department of justice and the attorney general are good with it. >> director ratcliffe, you have repeatedly made the point that there was no classified information contained in any of these discussions that were reported in the atlantic monthly, is that correct?
▶ 2:12:32Dir. Ratcliffe: That's not correct. What I have related is that any information that was related from my perspective or that I observed from the intelligence perspective was not classified information.
▶ 2:12:49Dir. Ratcliffe: With respect to the allegations that there was strike packages or targeting information or things that relate to dod, as I have pointed out, the secretary of defense is the original classification authority for something is classified or not. As I have understood from media reports, the secretary of defense has said that the information was not classified.
▶ 2:13:13Dir. Ratcliffe: >> are you aware that the secretary of defense to this information prior -- are you aware that the secretary of defense declassified this information prior? Your belief is that there was no classified information discussed, is that correct?
▶ 2:13:36Dir. Gabbard: Dir. Gabbard: my answer is the same as the director of the cia's. >> the answer has to be posed to secretary hegseth whether he has declassified the information and at one point he declassified it. Do you agree?
▶ 2:13:46Dir. Gabbard: I do questions to the secretary of defense. >> director patel, are you conducting an investigation of this, these discussions and activities?
▶ 2:13:58Dir. Patel: As I informed the vice chairman on the same question, I found out about this late last night, early this morning so I don't have an update for you on that. >> thank you. When you get an update, we would appreciate it very much. Director gabbard, were you overseas during any parts of these discussions?
▶ 2:14:19Dir. Gabbard: Yes, I was. >> were you using your private phone or public phone for the signal discussion?
▶ 2:14:28Dir. Gabbard: I will not speak to this because it is under review by the national security council. When that review is complete, I'm sure we will share the results with the committee.
▶ 2:14:39Sen. Reid: What is under review? It is a very simple question. Your private phone or an official phone?
▶ 2:14:50Dir. Gabbard: National security is investigating aspects of how this came to be, how the journalist was added to the group chat and what occurred within that chat across the board.
▶ 2:15:01Sen. Reid: So you will not disclose anything about -- director ratcliffe, there is an indication that the cia has warned retired personnel about the vulnerabilities of signal and other encrypted applications. If that is the case, why were you discussing these issues on signal?
▶ 2:15:31Dir. Ratcliffe: Signal use as you have said repeatedly is permissible for work purposes. I have never said that encryption apps like signal or substitute for classified systems. I was not discussing classified information in this setting.
▶ 2:15:50Sen. Reid: As you have indicated previously, perhaps the secretary of defense was discussing classified information and only he can be held accountable in terms of whether it was classified or declassified, is that accurate?
▶ 2:16:05Dir. Ratcliffe: I did not say it that way. I said he is the original classification authority and my understanding is that his comments are that any information that he shared was not classified.
▶ 2:16:18Sen. Reid: Well you have no way to verify that.
▶ 2:16:22Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't.
▶ 2:16:23Sen. Reid: Again, this is a very troubling example and a great lapse in our intelligence and our discussion. One further point, if you were not aware of any classified information on the discussions back and forth, would it breathe -- would it be appropriate to release the entire text of what he heard?
▶ 2:16:51Dir. Ratcliffe: I think the author has released essentially almost all of the information as it has been related. I don't know what calculation the author made with regard to what information would be released or not. I can confirm that with respect to the communications that were related, there was no classified information.
▶ 2:17:17Sen. Reid: According to the article, the messages contained information that might be interpreted as related to current intelligence operations and the author did not disclose that information. The question would be if he disclosed everything he heard in your view --
▶ 2:17:35Dir. Ratcliffe: That would not classified information. I know the context of what that is and the author said might be interpreted as related to intelligence information. It was not classified information.
▶ 2:17:48Sen. Reid: It goes back to my point, if he would release all this information, he could do so without any liability at the federal level?
▶ 2:17:57Dir. Ratcliffe: I think you are asking for a legal answer and I'm not able to give you.
▶ 2:18:01Sen. Reid: Director patel, you are a lawyer and director of the fbi. Would he faced any legal liability if he released the information?
▶ 2:18:11Dir. Patel: Because of the questions you guys have put to me, I will not address and that legal calls for the department of justice.
▶ 2:18:23Sen. Ossoff: Direct directly, you were a member of the houthi pc small group training and so were the vice president, the secretary of state and defense, the national security advisor and Ms. gabbard, correct?
▶ 2:18:44Dir. Ratcliffe: I believe so.
▶ 2:18:47Sen. Ossoff: So was reporter jeffrey goldberg, correct?
▶ 2:18:50Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't know that.
▶ 2:18:53Sen. Ossoff: Yes you do.
▶ 2:18:55Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't know jeffrey goldberg. I don't know how he was added.
▶ 2:19:00Sen. Ossoff: He was a member of the chain and discussion include the president's wisdom of the strikes in yemen, correct?
▶ 2:19:09Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't recall.
▶ 2:19:12Sen. Ossoff: Vance, "I think we are making a mistake, there is a strong argument for delaying this one month." you don't recall? You don't recall seeing the?
▶ 2:19:28Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't.
▶ 2:19:30Sen. Ossoff: 's go to the private opinions of the secretary of defense -- it included the private opinions of the secretary of defense, correct?
▶ 2:19:39Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't recall.
▶ 2:19:40Sen. Ossoff: Surely you're prepared for this hearing today. You are part of a group of senior echelons of the U.S. government and now a widely publicized breach of sensitive information, you don't recall whether the vice president opined on the wisdom of the strikes, that is your testimony under oath?
▶ 2:19:56Dir. Ratcliffe: In that setting, I don't recall.
▶ 2:19:59Sen. Ossoff: Secretary hegseth said waiting a few weeks or months does not fundamentally change the calculus. Two immediate risks, this lease and we look indecisive, two israel takes an action first or the gaza cease-fire falls apart and we don't get to start this on our own terms. You do not recall the secretary of defense sending that message or reading it?
▶ 2:20:20Dir. Ratcliffe: I recall there being an exchange. I do not recall the specifics as you are reading it.
▶ 2:20:27Sen. Ossoff: A discussion by senior U.S. officials on the timing and risk of a proposed military campaign and disagreements between the president and the vice president about U.S. plans and intentions would be of obvious interest to foreign intelligence services, would it not?
▶ 2:20:46Dir. Ratcliffe: Yes.
▶ 2:20:48Sen. Ossoff: And they were discussing the timing of sending U.S. aircrews into enemy airspace where they faced an air defense threat, correct?
▶ 2:21:06Dir. Ratcliffe: I will defer to the other principles about what the meaning and the context of --
▶ 2:21:14Sen. Ossoff: We are talking about the timing of U.S. airstrikes, correct?
▶ 2:21:18Dir. Ratcliffe: Yes.
▶ 2:21:20Sen. Ossoff: Therefore the timing of seeing U.S. crews in hostile airspace, correct?
▶ 2:21:26Dir. Ratcliffe: Yes.
▶ 2:21:27Sen. Ossoff: Therefore the time period for which enemies could fire into U.S. airspace, correct?
▶ 2:21:38Dir. Ratcliffe: I don't know that.
▶ 2:21:40Sen. Ossoff: You do know that. With the private deliberation of foreign senior officials about the wisdom and timing of potential military action be a collection priority for you and the U.S. intelligence community?
▶ 2:21:55Dir. Kruse: It is our job to do indications and warning for the plans and intentions of adversary leaders and military commanders.
▶ 2:22:04Sen. Ossoff: And would not information about the timing of airstrikes allow a military to pre-position or cue air defense systems to shoot down enemy aircraft?
▶ 2:22:24Dir. Kruse: I think from our perspective, any advanced warning is something that we are trying to prevent.
▶ 2:22:37Sen. Ossoff: This was a huge mistake, correct?
▶ 2:22:41Dir. Ratcliffe: No.
▶ 2:22:44Sen. Ossoff: A national -- hold on. You hold on. A national political reporter was made privy to sensitive information about military operations against a foreign terrorist operation and that was not a huge mistake?
▶ 2:23:07Dir. Ratcliffe: They characterized it as a mistake.
▶ 2:23:11Sen. Ossoff: This is embarrassing. It is utterly unprofessional. There has been no apology. There has been no recognition of the gravity of this error. We will get the full transcript of this chain and your testimony will be measured carefully against its content. Thank you Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:23:31Chair Cotton: I thank the witnesses again for their appearance. The vice chairman has something to add so I will recognize him briefly.
▶ 2:23:40Sen. Warner: I thank the witnesses. What you are saying does not make sense on the face of it. At least director radcliffe you had the courtesy of acknowledging that you were on the chain. Director gabbard would not even touch that even though we have her initials.
▶ 2:24:02Sen. Warner: If you want a comparison, think back to the beginning of the ukraine war when the united states in concert of our then ally the united kingdom declassified a lot of his battle plans -- a lot of putin's battle plans. That was gone through a real process of declassification.
▶ 2:24:35Sen. Warner: This information out where an adversary could reposition defenses and the unwillingness of the individuals on this panel who were on the chat to even apologize or acknowledge what a colossal screwup this is speaks volumes.
▶ 2:24:53Chair Cotton: Thank you two are witnesses for your appearance. A few administrative matters. As I mentioned earlier, senator collins is under the weather and regrets that she could not be here. Senator risch had to preside over a hearing at the foreign relations committee to include the nomination of my former governor to be the next ambassador to israel. He also regrets that he could not be here.
▶ 2:25:22Chair Cotton: He may have written questions as well. I would urge you all to respond to those probably. Now the audience will remain seated while our witnesses and their aides depart the hearing room. The capitol police will ensure this occurs. I want to commend the capitol police and our committee security staff are running an orderly hearing today. For the benefit of members, the vote on the floor has been called.
▶ 2:25:51Chair Cotton: We will adjourn this open hearing and reconvene enclosed setting at 12:40 pf m that hearing is adjourned.