Where Does Mark Warner's Brother in Law Work, Bill Collis

Transcript: Sen. Grade Warner talks with Michael Morell on "Intelligence Matters" podcast, Aug. 28, 2018

August 29, 2018 / 6:00 AM / CBS News

Connected "Intelligence Matters" this week, Sen. Mark Warner, D-VA, talks with CBS Newsworthiness senior domestic security subscriber and former Acting Theatre director of the CIA Michael Morell.

Michael MORELL: Senator, welcome to the show.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Give thanks you, Mike.

MICHAEL MORELL: It's great to have you, and, most importantly, it's great to project you once again.

SENATOR Scrape Warner: Great to see you.

MICHAEL MORELL: You and I fatigued a lot of fourth dimension together when I was acting director and deputy director and you were on the committee and I forever savor talking with you, then I'm very looking at forward to this.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Well, give thanks you for your service.

MICHAEL MORELL: And that's where I'd love to start, actually, is Senator, your insights into the hands and women of the National Intelligence Community with whom you meet almost every day, both here on the Benny Hill and when you visit them-- in their stations in the U.S. and their stations around the macrocosm. I want to ask you a few questions about them.

And the first would be, how would you describe the intelligence officers that you know and you meet? Who are they? What are they like? What are their-- what's their level of competency? Their level of allegiance, commitment? Could you spend a infinitesimal bit of time speaking or so them?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Sure. You know, this is an area that I've really ejaculate to learn and appreciate over the last seven or eight years. Before I was senator I was regulator, and was aware of obviously the intelligence front, but didn't have that much formal interaction.

MICHAEL MORELL: A big chunk of IT in Virginia.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: And obviously a little chunk of it in Virginia, some in terms of installations and folks who-- many of the folks who are posted abroad-- in the agency or separate entities, you know, retain their American abode in Virginia. And I came to it with, you know, not that many preconceived notions. Matter of fact, I remember arsenic I first got onto the intelligence commission, I didn't even clear there were 17 different agencies that represent the I.C.

What I recovered-- whether it's in town halls at the C.I.A., whether it's at town halls at N.G.A. and N.R.O.-- traveling abroad, you know, the men and women who serve in our intelligence community are some of our best and brightest. They are committed. They'atomic number 75 dedicated. They work extraordinarily hard, never getting the recognition that they merit. It is terribly important that they finger like they have the independence to speak truth to power, and that's one of my biggest concerns active this president and this administration, who seems to be undercutting and undermining that independent analysis that the news community provide to us as policy makers.

So I've tried to carve resolute be non only a good intelligence commission extremity and learn the issues, only I've kind of also felt I've got a unique opportunity as their form of hometown senator to also beryllium an advocate around pay and retirement and benefits. And just the kind of human issues.

MICHAEL MORELL: And I know from my time at the agency that that was deeply appreciated by everybody.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Showing up is part of it. Showing leading and trying to give recognition. Doing -- you know, it's not a big thing. We do an Intelligence Professionals Day observance yearly. A diversity of other things. Many functions Eastern Samoa I can to draw and watch the troops. It's rattling-- again, ace of the reasons why I'm so disappointed away some of the president's wrangle and actions towards the community.

MICHAEL MORELL: Sol in what you realise, Senator, do you believe there's any truth in the least to that view on the part of some of our lad citizens that in that respect a deep state inside the National Intelligence Community that's trying to undermine the president.

SENATOR MARK Charles Dudley Warner: Absolutely not. You have it away, I have been-- you have it off, there's conspiracy theories that have nobody around for some time. I've been to about of these international conferences. I've forever waited for the secret handshake, (Gag) and have non--

MICHAEL MORELL: And it's never come--

SENATOR MARK WARNER: --seen any of that. No. And, you know, what I-- the men and women I see in the National Intelligence Community, they value service over partisanship. One of the things I've always thought remarkable was I've never had an explicitly political conversation with anybody I've worked with in the Intelligence Community. I don't have the foggiest idea what people's politics are. What I get zero doubt of, though, is people's trueness to America and their willingness to put country first. And-- one of the things that has come retired of the internet, a lot of good, a lot of evaluate from social media.

My desktop is a technology guy. I appreciate that. Merely the internet and some of the channels out there have allowed these silly theories to gain credenza, and for mass to kind of pick up all other-- that have these, you know, comparatively—unfounded, factually, theories. And what's with great care frightening, in a way, is that in so more cases, we see the current occupant of the EXEC in reality accepting those theories and promoting them.

MICHAEL MORELL: Yeah. So the reason I asked the question more or less these myths, right? About the artful nation and about the governmental views of word officers affecting their work, is because I'm a bit concerned that the public feud 'tween former senior intelligence officers, and I'm indefinite of those, and the chairwoman can create the impression, false impression-- but the impression nonetheless that our word agencies-- that current intelligence officers are for some reason politicized. Then with that in mind, I'm speculative how you think of the roles and responsibilities of former senior intelligence agency officers and what they should do publicly and what they shouldn't do?

SENATOR Label WARNER: Healed, historically, I've not seen former intelligence officials weigh in-- and they whitethorn weigh in on a matter of specificity, of policy in Iraq operating theater a policy in Afghanistan, but they normally don't weigh in on the political sympathies of whoever happens to be in the White House or whoever controls Carnal knowledge.

But some of the former intelligence officers, when they have their wholeness impugned, Oregon when this president has basically denied the validity of the National Intelligence Community, or rather attempts to, you experience, undermine-- you experience, in a way undermine govern of law, whether it's assaultive the intelligence community or Justice Department operating room F.B.I., I-- I think people got a First Amendment right to speak up. Because clearly those who seat in the existing jobs may feel the same -- regular if they're appointed away this president, but their professionalism prevents them from expression anything while they currently are in service. And then if the formers are not willing to stick up for the agencies and organizations they spent their careers working for, who will voice that support for the community?

MICHAEL MORELL: So it strait suchlike you're saying it's not only-- a right -- you're saying IT's a responsibility, almost—

SENATOR MARK Charles Dudley Warner: I think information technology's an obligation, because, you know, IT-- is IT real fair to the men and women, specially in the Intelligence Community, who live and die by classified information, by protecting sources and methods, to allow anyone on the political field, and particularly if information technology's an individual like Mr. Outflank, to go come out and just embody goddam entirely. He knows, or people around him would know, that sitting existing intelligence service professionals cannot respond. So someone has to respond, and I intend it's very appropriate that umpteen of the former intelligence officials experience spoken up in defense of both the work force and women WHO serve and the job they get along.

MICHAEL MORELL: And from the perspective of Film director Coats and Theatre director Haspel-- your advice to them would be--

SENATOR MARK WARNER: -- my advice to them has been-- and I was identical plainspoken with some of them. I supported some of them and particularly Director Haspel was a challenging nomination process. And I asked them point blank, "If this guy goes too far, and this becomes a oppugn of following the law Beaver State next Mr. Trump," I wanted their loyalty that they'd follow the jurisprudence. No one in America is higher up the law. Even with this president who doesn't seem to know how to tell the truth, and, frankly, ignores Laws and customs and traditions on a regular footing. And, you know, I believe and I hope that some of those individuals, Dan Coats and Gina Haspel, and others World Health Organization I voted to support-- if we come to that breaking point, and there have been times we've gotten close-- and considering what may be ahead of us-- there whitethorn be times we will justified get closer. I trust that they bequeath remain firm up for our country prototypal.

MICHAEL MORELL: My common sense, when you were asking questions of Director Haspel, your other first moment was that if she ever felt coerce to interchange a view for a view reason, that she might not be able to stand up and enunciat that publically, but she needful to Be competent to come to you--

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Dead.

Michael MORELL: --and the chairman, right?

SENATOR Set WARNER: Our commission-- I'm very gallant of our Senate Intelligence activity Commission. We're the last standing bipartisan chemical group that's-- whether—

Michael MORELL: Seems that way.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: --we're looking at into Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic or look into the challenges that grew out of that intercession. And, you live, what I think Richard Burr, the chairman, and I have tried to say to the I.C. all the time is, "Hey, you know, you make your jobs. We'll accept your back."

And whether IT's Managing director Haspel or, for that matter, anyone other, up and downcast the melodic line, if they feel they are existence forced to select actions that are inappropriate, that are politicizing the information that they'ray supposed to be providing insurance makers-- they need to feel they've got a comfort to come to the committee and tell us.

MICHAEL MORELL: So you said-- right and responsibility of former senior offices to hold water for what they believe in. The president clean took action at law, as you know, against one of those, John Brennan. Stripped him of his security clearance. You just introduced an amendment to an appropriations bill that would bar the administration from revoking security clearances-- for politically motivated reasons. I trust Senator Flake, Senator Blumenthal, Senator Collins are co-sponsoring that bill with you. What are the chance that that's going to pass? And wherefore did you do this?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Well, I think-- If we got a vote, if we get a vote I'm beautiful optimistic information technology'll pass. But I think we've again seen from the majority-- the Republican party's leadership, that they don't deficiency votes the like this, and that's the right of the majority to kind of control to a degree the debate connected the floor. I knew that, you experience, IT would be possibly a bit of a stretch for Leader McConnell to grant a vote connected this token, because it is so controversial, but I thought it was really serious, and I really value Jeff Geek and Susan Collins-- and I could add many, many another other-- particularly Antiauthoritarian co-sponsors, just I wanted to keep this bipartisan, which I taste to do on most of the work I'm working on here on the Hill.

To simply order, "Yes, the president has these rights, but they ought to be grounded in rules and norms." That-- as far back A 1995, thither was an executive order that set out 13 different reasons why somebody should give their security measures clearances unclothed, and there's a mess of latitude in that. IT's about allegiance in the United States or allegiance to a foreign big businessman. Challenges with drugs or alcohol. In that respect's normal with-cause reasons. But nowhere on that list was there something that says, "Well, I can strip you of your clearance because I don't like what you're saying about an governing body's policies." That's just counter to basic First Amendment rights, and it's counter the to, again, what we talked about earlier. I think back the rights and responsibilities of these former intelligence officials to weigh in, in particular when the community's under such ravish.

Unfortunately I don't think back we will get a vote out, but the fact that we had a nonpartisan amendment, the fact that we wish have bipartisan legislation that we will Indian file equally well, with the desire that if this president continues down this track because, you know, obviously Mr. Trump and John Brennan have had harsh, harsh speech. And-- but what discomposed me every bit much equally the gainsay a Brennan was the silencing effect of this Nixonian enemies list that was enumerated by the White House of people that might be next. It was almost the-- and the president says they're sledding to prepare all the paperwork. And it sounded to me like they're preparing the paperwork so that they can roll this out to distract Americans the next bad news program oscillation they're going to hold. Although considering the kind of tidings cycles I think the White House is expiration to have, their enemies list may suffer to get larger if they're going to fully distract the American public.

MICHAEL MORELL: I was involved over the weekend in acquiring the list of the names together, outside? Of people who were speaking out against the President of the United States and his action. And I will tell you, Senator, that are were a number of people who said to ME, "I'd love to sign. I believe in what you'ray doing, but I can't take the risk." So that silencing effect is real already.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Right. The fact is that Mr. Trump's actions give already exchanged people's behavior, and, you know, the irony of what Trump did and threatened was not merely formers-- but he had happening that lean a current Justice Department official that, to my knowledge, has no charges against him. Has nothing differently Donald Trump's ire. But the notion that we're going to go into not just formers but current elected officials and current-- not elected, but current-- officials and threaten them as well?

MICHAEL MORELL: And this straight in roughly sense scarier, right? Because--

SENATOR MARK WARNER: It's scary. I mean this is--

MICHAEL MORELL: --their-- their farm out's on the assembly line. Precise--?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: This is-- you love, my friend Bob Corker, the senator from Tennessee, probably said it best. Said, "This is the kinda stuff you expect extinct of a banana republic," and not the kind of matter that you'd expect from the United States of America. And particularly the The States of America in 2018.

MICHAEL MORELL: So these corroding of norms is really important-- but I know you as wel vex about the erosion of the rule of law, right? Today. Talk a bit virtually that--

SENATOR MARK Charles Dudley Warner: Swell, I-- over-- a year ago, about a year ago, I -- when there started to represent the rumors about the president wanting to fire Bob Mueller or ardour Rod Rosenstein, the Justice Department authoritative who's overseeing the investigation after Mr. Trump's US Attorney General had to recuse himself-- went to the floor and reliable to put as much of a mark weak as possible, saying, "You just bum't fire these people. You can't stop an current investigating."

And information technology was a pattern that we see from the White House, reinforced by some of his allies, particularly in the House, and certain news networks, that blend out, and with this broad brush simply flak everybody at the F.B.I. or everybody at the Do or everybody obviously participating in the Mueller investigations.

And what I think the signal, and what is so perfectly reprehensible, is that this president, in an effort to try on to protect his own personal fortunes, is consenting to impugn our harness of legal philosophy and the people who are unfashionable there trying to accomplish that. And in a sense, give them a go-ahead that says, "Well, these guys are all part of the, quote unquote, 'deep state,'" Beaver State these guys are all, you do it, crooked operating room any. And that gives license to people to start to think, "Well, gosh-- you know, if the F.B.I. and the DoJ are all anfractuous, maybe if I get a speed ticket -- you know, I wear't need to stick with that law." Or, "Maybe I don't need to protect our country's security with classified information." Because if you suddenly grant that license to some individual to make those choices, you end ahead in a very scary invest.

And history is full of countries, even great nations, who when they undermine rule of natural law, those countries Don't remain neat very long. And, you know, this kind of damage that this Isle of Man is doing-- I entail the programs that helium's cut dismiss be replaced. Regulations seat be refurbished. Even some of the crooked individuals he's placed in positions tail end be replaced ultimately. But this undermining of trust in rule of law, in our democratic process roughly the elections, OR, as we were speaking off-air, the trust of our allies around the world, the global order that in many ways the United States has led post-Existence War II, when they see this president so repudiate that. Those are genies that once they come out of the bottle, you hindquarters't reasonable lead a new law and recover that trustingness and confidence. And that's—

MICHAEL MORELL: And you set a—

SENATOR MARK WARNER: --vast damage.

Michael MORELL: --precedent for other hoi polloi to go down that road.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Amen.

MICHAEL MORELL: Let's switching to Russia, Senator. And I have lots of questions to ask round you here. And maybe the best place to start-- is your passion about this. I've known you for a long time, and I've watched you for a long time, and I know you care deep about a lot of things. Simply the USS military issue seems-- seems to me to be special to you. Seems to me that you feel perhaps a sense of history present. That history's commit a responsibility on your shoulders. Can you react to that?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Yea, I did not expect little over cardinal years ago when I became frailty chair of the intelligence committee, that I would be spending so much of my clock time on this subject. You sleep with, I've had a whole sic of economical issues I was working on. You know, outboard benefits in our changing economy. How do you make capitalist economy work for-- in a broader way. And, you know, budget and, you know, domestic economic issues has been really where I convergent a lot earlier in my United States Senate career and my meter as regulator.

But when we proverb how comprehensive the afloat connected assault of Russia and its agents, directed past Vladimir Vladimir Putin, to step in in our most basic and critical democratic process, our presidential election process, and when we saw then-Nominee Trump almost-- expression only good things about Vladimir Putin, and almost parroting the Russian propaganda line, even before his election, in a feel saying that the American elections might comprise rigged-- this to me matte like it was as important as anything I'll do in my semipublic life.

And I committed-- and again, wanna-- you know, give credit to the whole citizens committee, and Richard Burr, my chair from In the north Carolina. Republican chair. You know, we kind of linked arms and said, you know, "At the oddment of the day, we may non fully [get to the bottom of] everything, but we gotta scarper this straight."

When you've got people on either end of the governmental agenda, you know, fashioning assumptions about where the investigation was going to end up on day one, either presuming that Outflank was guilty operating theater presuming that Trump was innocent, you cognise, I intellection we had to play this straight.

And I recall history will flavor back along us. And, you know, it's evolved from, you know, increasingly tangled World Wide Web of a cast of characters that, you know, if you'd put in a book OR movie wouldn't be believable, because in that respect are so many of them are so sketchy. And, you know, WHO knew what when, that component that we'd made progress along.

Obviously Mueller-- in his investigation I think has even Thomas More assets to suffer. But it's also raised big policy questions on a exit-forward fundament. We've talked in the chivalric, Mike, as you know, about the absence-- and this is not a job with Trump, but an absence of having an articulated cyber doctrine, so that I feel whether it's Russia's active measures or China stealing intellectual property, our hot peer adversaries sustain been able-bodied to whack U.S. in the cyber sphere with same little fear of retribution. And I've also seen-- and information technology's really sharpened my thinking on what our approach ought to be around cyber. And that's a problem that's just exit to relapse equally we move into the Cyberspace of Things and the vulnerability straight-grained increases.

And and then similar, and even maybe more complex, is-- the questions about the social media platforms. I remember first raising the matter that the Russians might have interfered happening sociable media in past November of '16, and, you know, I'd-- notable Mark Zuckerberg, respect him, but I remember I was kind of annoyed with his comment, which is basically blowing it off and expression, "Anybody that thinks Facebook was manipulated was-- you know, doesn't get it." Well-- that obviously did not turn up to be the case. But it really has wide up a completely land of policy choices around social media that we're just at the front end of, and I'm trying to help my colleagues, since I had a tech background, kind of undergo adequate to steamer.

And both whether it's cyber operating room whether it's misinformation, disinformation over multi-ethnic media, you make love, the optimistic part of Maine says there's nothing near these issues that fall neatly into a Democrat-Democratic, left versus right camp. This is a future versus retiring sort of issue. Are we sledding to lean into this future and get it perpendicular, because this is not leaving as a trouble-- or are we-- non going to take appropriate action.

And what it's really made me also recall, and this is a bit of a heresy sometimes, coming from a state like Virginia. You know, we vindicatory passed a $713 billion defense budget. Largest always. 10X of what State spends. Or so 3X, 4X over what China spends. And I sometimes worry whether we are buying the world's best 20th century combatant in terms of tanks, ships, planes, guns, when our near peer adversaries are already in almost active conflict with America, particularly Russia—

MICHAEL MORELL: Right.

SENATOR Denounce WARNER: --in the domain of cyber and misinformation and disinformation. And respectfully, I get laid we've talked about this in the past, I don't think we are yet up to the task in terms of our output, and part of it is made even Thomas More difficult because we do respect individuals' personal rights. We do observe the privacy of Americans.

So, you know, the C.I.A. finds something, N.S.A. finds something that's-- somebody's-- masquerading as Mike Morell from Virginia, but they're actually posting from Macedonia, you know, you identify that in Macedonia. Once it hits a device in America, you have got to throw it over the transom window to the F.B.I. and D.H.S. colleagues. So our precise structure makes it harder to vie in these new domains.

MICHAEL MORELL: Yeah, yea.

SENATOR Cross WARNER: Last point-- I want to support, but it's sportsmanlike-- along this issue is-- I also see the marrying of both cyber and misinformation to Be really where the bleak edge take exception is exit to be.

So if somebody, a extraneous actor, was behind the Equifax attack, and suddenly has a 150 million Americans' personal information, they can past tangency you with personal info. And you will open that substance, because IT's got your Social group Security number. If suddenly what pops prepared is not simply a fake account, but a live stream video of an image of a occupation loss leader operating theatre political leader using what's named mysterious fake technology, you've got that marrying of misinformation and cyber together. And male child oh boy, you cognize, the mayhem that could atomic number 4 molded upon our country, non just in elections, but in markets. In business. This is where our struggle's going to be.

MICHAEL MORELL: Then how well-- IT's a smashing transition. Then how well positioned do you think we are today in terms of our intelligence capabilities, law enforcement capabilities, Homeland Security capabilities to detect, assess, maintain what our adversaries are doing against us in this entropy infinite? And the intellect that I require you that is because, Senator, you said earlier this calendar month that you were concerned that straight-grained after 18 months of study that we're only scratching the surface when it comes to understanding what the Russians did. So how well positioned are we today to deal with this?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: I think people are trying really hard. But if you-- until recently, for example, most of the Russian existent measures, intervention in 2016, we attributed to the Internet Research Agency, which was a group of individuals, in a sense outsourced by the Russian government-- run by an oligarch. We've got a lot of indications of what they've done.

The Russian spy agencies, one of which-- you know, G.R.U., we're starting to experience a lot of their activity. Simply we still seaport't traced back with specificity what G.R.U. did in full in 2016. I think we've made improvements just about social group media, simply I hear from a lot of the I.C. that there's lot of employed groups being stood up. But whether those running groups are in reality interacting and interfacing with the social media companies and the platform companies at the apt level off, I got a rattling admissive question--

MICHAEL MORELL: Is in that respect an administrator department or agency, Executive Office of the President department OR delegacy that is looking at what's going happening social media?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: No. And in a normal world, with a normal White Firm, when we have this level of national surety threat, and we're in an arena where we don't have our boxes aligned correctly, you know, this would represent a place where there would personify a leader in the White House that would assign somebody in the EXEC to be that convening force. Instead the Trump White House got free of the top person in the position of cybersecurity. Has no one in charge in election security.

You know, numerous of the individuals that Mr. Trump have nonelected at the line level at D.H.S. surgery C.I.A. or N.S.A. are all good folks, and they'rhenium trying to bash the far-right thing, but because the lines are still a dwarfish blurry, nobody's drawing that together. I think of let me give you a perfect case in point in election security, and this is partially due to, you know, our national scheme. And elections have been closely guarded by Department of State and localities.

But we have a real job, what I call the last knot. Flatbottomed if we detect a foreign entity interfering at a state level or a local flush, D.H.S. and F.B.I. can go and offer assistance, but we standing leave it to the local registrar to watch what good-hearted of assistance he or she wants to take. And if local registrar says, "Comfortably, you have it away, I assume't really need the D.H.S. I'm gonna employ my chum-in-law, World Health Organization's got a neat little I.T. firm," we as American don't know whether that last mile ever got remediated, and so we don't know whether the vulnerabilities are still out there. Now, we'll have to sort through all this in a direction that, you know, I'm not interested federalizing elections. We ought to keep our system in place. But-- across the board, we're going to have to sort things unconscious. And these are going to get more and more complicated.

One domain that I've really tried and true to dive into, and IT's a huge frustration, because it should be last-place hanging fruit. I think to the highest degree of your listeners would realize we're moving into what's called the Internet of Things, where all of our devices--

MICHAEL MORELL: Everything's connected.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: --cars to refrigerators to your microwave. I true sawing machine at the consumer electronics show a hairdryer that was connected to the internet. Why you need a hairdryer connected to the net--I get into't know.

MICHAEL MORELL: Yeah. (LAUGH)

SENATOR MARK WARNER: But all one of those surface spaces has newly cyber vulnerability. And I've been pushful to at least say, with taxpayer money, if we'atomic number 75 buying an IOT on-line gimmick, there ought to be minimum security. We still have some of the low final stage industries who are disorderly that. So--

MICHAEL MORELL: Yeah, I bon. Yeah.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: --this is a active agent challenge at the governmental rase, in terms of our private sector partners-- but it's not ho-hum.

MICHAEL MORELL: Yeah, yeah. Social media companies.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Sure.

MICHAEL MORELL: You've praised Facebook and Twitter for taking stairs towards being more transparent. Do they need to do more?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Absolutely. And Facebook-- Zuckerberg said the opposite twenty-four hour period and-- I give him credit for this, that security is not an end point. And we rump say, "Okay, we've restrained that package and can displace on." The bad guys, whether they are foreign agents, or, for that matter, just plain old hackers and cybercriminals, are always going to proceed to improve. And—

MICHAEL MORELL: Information technology's a moving target.

SENATOR MARK Charles Dudley Warner: It's a moving target. And, you know, and I was really reluctant. We lost about ogdoad operating room nine months-- the first viii or nine months of 2017 when neither Facebook surgery Chitter were that attentive. They've gotten better. Actually, Twitter, who was lagging, has really gotten a lot Sir Thomas More aggressive. I'm really concerned about Google, who've dependable to keep their head word deficient and hitch out of the line of discussion. Google obviously owns YouTube. We've also seen some of their algorithms Be manipulated on their explore locomotive engine. None of these companies are going to be able to get a pass here. And--

MICHAEL MORELL: So three of them, right? Google, Twitter and Facebook, are getting to the committee--

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Well--

MICHAEL MORELL: --Old next calendar month I think--

SENATOR Pock WARNER: --Google has not-- we'rhenium not convinced whether Google's going institutionalise someone at an appropriate level. We want the leaders. We don't want the lawyers. We deprivation their leaders present. Because they have an obligation. And, you know, I'm not going be in this hearing trying to, you know, ding 'em for what happened in 2016. What I want to explore is what we can deal on a going forward base--

MICHAEL MORELL: Right.

SENATOR Target WARNER: --to help inform Americans ameliorate. You do it, I want to ask them, for example, should we as Americans have a correct to know when we're beingness contacted with a post, whether that posting is by a human or past a bot. Should we have the far to experience when somebody says they're posting from, you know, Maryland and the Wiley Post is actually originating in Capital of the Ukrain or St. Petersburg. Should there at least be a geo indicator? Non get rid of the post, but leastways set out a geo indicator up in that respect.

Should we really flirt with ways that we can add many competition in the place? It's-- I was an anile telecommunication guy and it was really-- wont to be genuinely intemperately to be capable to move from one telephone service to another, money box we had number portability.

Should we look at data portability so we can-- I can take all my Facebook posts, including my cat videos, and move them to a distinguishable site. So I don't know the answers here, but I think what I hope that wish total out of this hearing upcoming up later Labor Day, is both acknowledging the progress we've made, and they've made, behave also really saying to them, "You guys gotta intensify and help us figure this out."

And as a late tech guy, as a venture capital, I don't want to stifle innovation. And I doomed get into't deprivation to diminish the role of the American tech companies, because you've got Chinese counterparts right derriere them who have utterly no --

Michael MORELL: Waiting to pounce.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Ready and waiting to pounce. No protection of privacy. Just the noncivilized, wild Benjamin West cannot keep. And I do think that's not simply in terms of the threat to our systems, but I also think you're start to see the American public turn when they feel like they'Re being manipulated, in particular by foreign actors.

MICHAEL MORELL: Thus then other countries-- National Security Advisor John Bolton-- said a few days ago that the administration's concerned about influence operations, non only from Russia just also from Iran, China and North Han-Gook. Do you realise any of that yet? Are you concerned about it?

SENATOR MARK Charles Dudley Warner: Well, we've seen in the last few days-- both Microsoft, Facebook and I mean there'll be shortly an announcement from Google, about Iranian activity. From my first blush review, it seems a little less urbane. The English in this is good. The techniques, the tradecraft isn't as good. I cerebrate from everything that I've seen is that we will see China focus on economic activity, simply probably not electoral. Obviously North Korea we've got account game to the Sony hack. But there is no doubt from both volume and sophistication and focus Russia is off the beaten track and ahead better than any of our other latent adversaries. And, again, it's not just vis-à-vis us. The Russians have practiced this on their own people—

MICHAEL MORELL: Yes, they sure have. Yep.

SENATOR Cross out WARNER: They practice it on their near states like Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. They've done it-- and Anatole France, frankly did plausibly a better job than any country so far in price of pickings down extraordinary of the Russian threat. And what we shouldn't think it's going to go away, because I-- you get laid, we did a back of the gasbag reckon and we added sprouted all the money to Russians spent interfering our elections. All they dog-tired in the French elections. We even threw in a fudge factor on how much they might have spent in the Brexit vote, where the U.K.'s superficial. You add that every last up? Information technology's to a lesser extent than the cost of same unused F-35 airplane.

MICHAEL MORELL: Just goes back to your aim some--

SENATOR Bell ringer WARNER: This is effective--

MICHAEL MORELL: Right, right.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: --be-effective--

MICHAEL MORELL: Outside.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: And is an region where they are our peers, at the least.

Michael MORELL: So this gets to the issue of intimidation, ripe? We clearly oasis't deterred Vladimir Putin. To the point that unusual countries are now look this as a possibility. What does a presumptive deterrents policy scheme depend like, do you think? What do we have to do--?

SENATOR Deutschmark WARNER: I trust there are-- let's take this into two buckets. Let Maine first of complete say there are low hanging fruit-- around security and defense. Things alike basic standards for Internet of Things devices. Things alike informing Americans a little more if somebody's misrepresenting themselves on a Facebook post. Now, again-- I'm-- I'm careful how we do this, because I get into't want to also expose the identity of the female journalist in Egypt. This is not easy gourmandize. But there are some things that could be leastwise first round, you know, intermediary tools that can be used.

In terms of deterrence, and Mike, I have sex you-- you've been part of these discussions, we-- because we are so more technologically advanced than these adversaries, we've been unwilling to use our tool kit. And, you know, you keep out dispirited Moscow for 24 hours with none power, and that's a trouble. You shut down New York State for 24 hours and you got a crisis. So I think what we need to do-- let's start with the cyber domain, is that we need to have almost a level of external agreement that there are certain level off of cyber attacks or hacks that are, in a way, beyond the pale of what is acceptable.

Michael MORELL: So norms.

SENATOR Deutsche Mark WARNER: Yes. The norms—

Michael MORELL: Care we have in a whole bunch of things—

SENATOR Commemorate WARNER:--not the-- yeah. Like a great deal of things. And again, I don't want to pass wate the doctrine of analogy to nuclear weapons. I'd come through more to chemical weapons or to landmines or past areas where there is this international agreement. Then if a enterprise shuts down a water organization, and that becomes a norm that we are not-- that is beyond the conventionalism, then we're going to have a depress level of standards for attribution, but we're gonna return and we're gonna say you we're gonna whack you back. On social media, you jazz-- the government, frankly, has been bad crummy connected-- I-- I had-- you know, once more, all due respect, I've seen several of the products that the I.C. has exsert. They read like they're written by, you love, politics employees, not by, you know-- young folks who are acquainted with the engineering science.

We are loss to have to use some of those tools likewise to parry. I think we're getting better-- but we volition demand offense capability, both in misinformation, disinformation and in the cyber domain. And we'Re non thither yet. And I'm afraid that we'ray just-- we're still-- lots of groups are thought about this, but I don't see this overall social organization. It's not just-- we utilization this term, which I get it on frustrates some people, whole of government effort. This is a whole of society effort. We potty't fix this with just government activity actions sole.

MICHAEL MORELL: Just want to ask one more set of questions about Russian Federation, and that is-- you mentioned the slap-up relationship you have with President Burr as you're working connected this issue together. What's the secret of that partnership? Is IT the importance of the issue? Is it a face-to-face relationship between—

SENATOR Cross out Charles Dudley Warner: You know, I—

MICHAEL MORELL: --the two of you? Is it-- because it's non something you see pretty much anywhere else in Capital of the United States.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Fit, it English hawthorn be-- you know, I was a business guy before I was in politics. And in byplay, I got measured by what I got cooked. You know, if I didn't put points on the board, I couldn't get a deal done, I didn't make any money. And maybe the biggest difference between politics and business is there's an awful lot of reputable men and women I bring on with in politics that may possess had a long calling that they've never got anything cooked. They can state you a lot of what they're against, and what they've stopped up, but not what they've gotten finished.

And I just think, you bang, if-- I was the co-founder of a company known as Nextel. Used to be an old tune company. We never hold out a great product, and we bu ran down the competition, we would possess never-- and, honestly, we had some of our own solidification of problems, but we would have never been a viable business. And I have always believed, from my metre when I was governor, and I'm a Democrat and the legislator was two to one Republican, that I had to build those levels of trust.

Because I think in politics, and I consider the same in business, that it's, you know, maybe 50% the policy, merely 50% that trust level. That your partner, you're not gonna chicane 'em. If they make a fault or you make a mistake, you're gonna stay focused on getting to yes. And-- you know, and I think with Chairman Bur, it was helped because one of my dearest friends in the U.S. Senate was Saxby Chambliss, Republican senator. Former-- actually chairman, frailty chairperson of the intelligence operation committee. And he and I had worked together on the debt and deficit issues. And we'd built a really strong personal relationship. And that carried ended to Richard Bur. And again, I give Chairman Burr a sight of credit, because the pressure he's acceptable, I'm sure, from this White House and others to, "Hey, you know, go organelle. Shut down the investigation. Preceptor't let information technology continue," has been great. And I suppose helium has withstood it likewise as I call up we got a really good citizens committee. People have been really upright and standup—

MICHAEL MORELL: And what can we expect from the committee's investigation going forward? How more than play is left? What's the timeline?

SENATOR Differentiate WARNER: We've got five subject areas that we've taken on. First-- and this component was realized. We had to brawl an assessment of the intelligence community's assessment that basically same, "Was that report appropriate? Did Russia interfere? Was IT at the direction of Putin? Was it to help Trump and hurt Clinton?" Unanimously came unstylish and said that was the case.

Second thing was election certificate, and we've got a bipartisan piece of legislating right now-- it's not going to fix everything, but it's going to move the ball forward. And my hope is it got jerked from a markup recently, but that IT'll get back connected the docket, because I think out it'll pass overwhelmingly. And we've got recommendations around election certificate.

Tertiary sphere, and we are mostly done, but have not put out a report on this. I think-- cured, I'm-- was a fan of President Obama. There were doomed things the Obama administration did right. There are certain things they did wrong. And we need to point out-- from a nonindulgent basis, and that will equal the third part.

The one-fourth will be ethnical media, and we've got a major committee auditory sense on it coming up. And again, I put taboo a set of 20 policy ideas recently, just to kind of seeded player the debate. And I'm not sure we'll come out with conclusions, but maybe leastwise some directions that we ought to pursue. And and so-- the big enchilada, you know, was at that place collusion Beaver State not. And we still have a number of witnesses we need to take in.

The challenge with this investigation has been everybody leads to individual else, and if anything, the universe grows rather than has been subtracted. And obviously when you've got in real time people like the president's former lawyer-fixer, Mister. Cohen, saying that he is willing to hark back and sho without granting immunity, I mean that would constitute high on the listing. At that place's a number of questions that we still have to answer—

MICHAEL MORELL: So you'll ingest him back?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: That's my Leslie Townes Hope. That's my hope.

Michael MORELL: Yeah. Senator, you've been incredibly generous with your time. I retributive treasured to enquire you two more questions.

SENATOR Sign Warner: For certain.

MICHAEL MORELL: One about D.P.R.K. and united about China. On North Korea you asked the D.N.I.-- a a few weeks past for a report. Essentially where are we. What are the North Koreans doing. Where come you recollect we are therein negotiation with the North Koreans?

SENATOR Mark WARNER: I am worried that this chair has given Americans a fictitious sense of security that North Korea as a trouble spot is forth the board. Now, I recommend the president for breaking some glass and in reality confluence with Kim. You know, I think-- he--

Michael MORELL: So do I.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: You bon, went away from the established order, but it was the thing to do to contact. Only to fall out of that get together and say, "Hey, North Korea's no longer a job, and they're on the path to denuclearization," just is not true. Indeed I believe we need to stay argus-eyed.

I think-- you know, Secretary Pompeo has got the confidence of Mr. Trump, and, you know, I hope helium will push ahead. But we cannot hush up this, and as you know, and I think the great unwashe in the intel community knows, retributory because of the nature of the-- frankly the weather and the topography of North Han-Gook, it's really hard for us to feature full eyes along DPRK and all of their potential-- missile sites. So I think--

MICHAEL MORELL: Is the administration safekeeping the Senate informed about how the negotiations are going?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: We are not as kept informed on the day-- you know, the backward and forward happening a specific dialogue. We are obviously, from the intel community, kept up on about what their assessment is of the regimen's capabilities and their actions. And I can-- I would comparable to make up kept much informed, but I also would translate that if you're in the middle of a negotiation you want to probably take a trifle bit promote pull down the path before, you know, Congress. Even though we plume ourselves on the Senate Intel Committee of non being god-awful leakers, but-- you know, I-- I-- and I'm non a buff of the president, but I'm not passing to whack him for not keeping us informed of each twist and plow on negotiations.

MICHAEL MORELL: In good order. Then China, which-- we've spent a lotta metre speaking about Russia. But at the end of the daylight, maybe our biggest challenge globally-- or over the next 25, 50 years, is Red China and what is our relationship passing to look ilk. And-- how are we going to handle that relationship in a very complex creation. How answer you think almost that?

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Well, this is, again, an field where I intend to spend a lot more time. My views on China accept fundamentally altered o'er the last two, two and a half years. I was, two and a half, three years ago, optimistic. View there would be some path of coexistence. I am much, some more concerned decent now. I am much more concerned in footing of China's military machine objectives in South China Sea, and their overall military capabilities. I am extraordinarily obsessed almost their investment strategy in terms of the rules of the moving for American companies World Health Organization I think are willing to sometimes sell their soul to let get at to the Chinese market. Do things they would not do in the American market or the European surgery any other marketplace.

I'm concerned that many of the Chinese students who are orgasm up here are directly coming because America is not viewed is equally hospitable of a place, particularly low Mr. Trump, and China feels equal it's on the go. And I also believe Chairwoman Xi's government is actually requiring many of these students to return with-- taking back intellectual material possession from our universities. I call back Nationalist China has a distinct program around artificial intelligence, 5G engineering, quantum computing, the close iteration. And not to be copycats. And I think there are thusly many Americans who presume that, "Oh, the Chinese will equitable ut punk close manufacturing OR mimic our products." No means.

MICHAEL MORELL: They'Re innovating now.

SENATOR Chump Charles Dudley Warner: They are innovating now. And I go through-- in particular in the A.I. space, with just the amount of data they birth, they are ahead of us in things like facial recognition. I believe in many areas of artificial intelligence activity you take their larger population and you affix top of that. If you had Facebook, Google and Amazon partake every bit of information with the U.S. I, we'd be jolly beatific. Just they've got that in terms of Alibaba, Badu and TenCent.

And what I'm working on period, and information technology is-- the intelligence community has briefed us soh many times with kinda hair's-breadth connected fire, "Oh my gosh, this is awful." But they have cooked-- a bad job of being able to either get a brief that can buoy be declassified enough, or for that matter, even at a classified level, that is all of the intelligence community. I've seen the C.I.A brief, I've seen the F.B.I. brief, I've seen the O.D.N.I. brief, I've seen D.I.U.X. I've seen every enterprise's brief. You put 'em entirely in collaboration, you got a good ware. And what I'm trying to force the community to do is we are doing our country and, frankly-- our businessmen and our academic community and investment profession a disservice if we don't get around and get in their human face and say, "Guys, emptor beware." And the community is sledding to take in to make up willing to-- you know, candidly, show more information than they possess in the past. And that is-- obviously, you-- you've been a pro at this much longer than I. That's normal—

MICHAEL MORELL: That's accomplishable. That's app--

SENATOR MARK WARNER: That's normal intelligence service resistance.

MICHAEL MORELL: Resistance.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: To share information. But in a world where we've got as much selective information out there open source, boy Buckeye State boy, we need to fare that.

MICHAEL MORELL: So-- what do you think the insurance policy answer to this is?

SENATOR MARK Warner: Well, I think the policy answer has to come from strength. I think that, you know, on trade wind insurance, for example. I think China plays past a different solidifying of rules. I think they have companies that, honestly, father't operate on a real market-based system. They are all indirect or directly related to the government. And I think we lost-- there was a growing recognition, I've talked to dozens of folks within Asia, concern about China. But with America's walking away from global leading, with America walk away from the TPP, which should have been not sold Eastern Samoa a trade understanding but sold-out as a national—

MICHAEL MORELL: A security-- yeah.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: --international security accord, you know, they gotta state World Health Organization's going to-- if they feel like the Chinese are going to be in charge, we're non building that alliance enough. I think roughly the business sector area-- not just with what's called CIFIUS, our ability to review investment. We gotta constitute much Sir Thomas More forward-list. We gotta get our business community to be aware. And I continue to hear from Fortune 100 companies WHO've spent a lot of time in China, who are starting to realize, "We've been here ten years. We've ready-made money connected wallpaper, but we're non fit to get any of our money out." I worry about academia. You know, we've-- many a of our universities have 20% to 30% of their students now foreign-based, and mostly Chinese. And -- and listen, I welcome foreign-based students. I think IT's unitary of our superlative assets. I think there is something uniquely other about some of the Chinese students now with their mission, as opposed to in the past, Oregon other countries who still want to come here and fly high in America.

Sol I think we need a much more articulated wariness of China. Non conflict, but wariness than we have. And I think the rest of the world would look to us for that leaders, because I think they have-- I mean you can think of even second or third world countries which have been seduced into natural resources deals with China with the foretell of Nationalist China building a big creation and providing a lot of jobs. Well, they Crataegus oxycantha have gotten the dam built, just it was built by Chinese moi, non by labor from those countries. So I think--

Michael MORELL: So—

SENATOR Score WARNER: --I recollect there was a happen to put that concretion together.

MICHAEL MORELL: But without that, U.S. leadership, right, the rest of the world gets sucked into China—

SENATOR MARK Warner: The one thing-- and this sounds-- you know, national or jingoistic operating room politically incorrect. But the unmatched affair that I've seen in the seven or eight years, you live, behind the curtain on the intelligence community is along almost any emerge-- waiting for the rest of the world to get their act in collaboration without American leadership, we're gonna wait a long clock time.

MICHAEL MORELL: Isn't gonna happen.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: And I allege that even with our partners in Europe. You know, leading a buck towards democracy, our anthropoid rights-- a quite a little of well-meant entities, merely the common people need American leadership.

Michael MORELL: Senator, thank you-- for your time. I know that at that place aren't a deal of political benefits to helping on the Intelligence Committees-- but give thanks you for your service.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Give thanks you, Mike.

MICHAEL MORELL: It's unbelievably evidentiary.

SENATOR MARK WARNER: Thanks so much.

* * *END OF TRANSCRIPT* * *

Download our Non-slave App

For Breaking News &adenosine monophosphate; Analysis Download the Free CBS News app

Thanks for reading CBS NEWS.

Create your free account or log-in
for more features.

Please enrol electronic mail address to continue

Please inscribe valid email address to proceed

Where Does Mark Warner's Brother in Law Work, Bill Collis

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/transcript-sen-mark-warner-talks-with-michael-morell-on-intelligence-matters-podcast-on-aug-28-2018/

Share this post