8 Burst results for "National Counter Intelligence And Security Center"
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on The Sean Hannity Show
"And and the materials that you can provide to the committee or to the fbi Would they corroborate this nation. Sure of course When they were in ukraine with their collision by the phone where they're discounts to those Compromising materials where. I read it to provide it to fbi so you you have recordings of both so check and boosts of Where they're discussing the comedy material on mr trump absolutely coordinating with our with somebody that he thinks as a russian what four to get compromising materials on trump naked trump. Gosh what a dope now swallow suggesting. Trump is behind the access report. These people are frigging deranged man. Oh gosh anyway. Swallow well warned of an influx of russians and us politics on the trump. What about his compromising materials. When or if there's any compromising materials on trump and you know this this honeypot apparently scandal. That went on. These mayors apparently slept with this person. unbelievable but that's the nature your democratic party. You know there was an interesting story. Looks like china's already. You know they want to try and pick up where they left off with the biden corruption family and remember all the money they pay to hunter the email outlining how it's going to be distributed twenty million hundred ten million for the big guy. Remember that holding. It will hold it for the big guy. Well it's like the time the biden you know going to return the favor. There is a daily wire piece out top. Us official told the think tank last week that us intelligence is seen a sharp uptick in the chinese communist party to influence. Joe joe biden's team and those around him and national counterintelligence security center director. William abi nina told the aspen institute that the think tank that china has launched an influence campaign on steroids targeting biden. What we predicted. China would literally re emphasize their influence in the campaigns to the new administration. We're starting to see that now player across the country to not only the folks that are in the administration those around the folks that the administration. That's one area. We're going to be very keen on making sure the new administration understands that influence. What it looks like what it tastes like what it feels like robert. O'brien the national security adviser at warned Back in august that china is trying to elect biden and that china had the most sophisticated global influence programs and strategies abilities and capabilities in the world. Well by the way china apparently is amassing large quantities of private american healthcare data gloating sensitive genetic information as the corona virus. Pandemic you know is now. Put more people in the in the medical system. They've made collecting health related. Data a national Priority according to a new report submitted to congress by the us china economic security review commission. Great that's good news. I'm by the way it looks like mayor..
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on The Daily Beans
"There we present or able, and we've also seen warnings from VHS Russia seeking to amplify that very message that Joe Biden has a mental issues or is mentally unable to to serve as president. So think about it would if Russia were just Sending those messages out to ether without that foundation it would be much less effective. It would be it would matter a lot less like Russia said. Twelve years ago while Barack Obama was running for president in two thousand, eight voting can't be trusted male unbalanced their fake it would have been irrelevant. It wouldn't really matter because that wasn't an essential part of our system and John McCain wasn't deriding that aspect of our system whereas today it is all the more important and one of the two major party candidates saying. It can't be trusted will be amount to cheating and we'll make it. So we'll never quote unquote know who won the election so Russia sees this stuff Russia Dax. It's methods as time progresses and seeks to amplify messaging that students objectives but this is a fluid operation with agency that is very responsive to our own weaknesses and our own failings as a democracy. Yeah and as you brought up all this this US intelligence that we're getting about. Misinformation about Biden and his mental health, etc.. You know these come from press releases from Evans who's the director of the National Counterintelligence Security Center. But he also tends to I see in this reporting or at least a briefings that he's giving to Congress he tends to equate what Russia is doing with what China in Iran or doing. Can you speak to that for a minute? Yes. So unfortunately, and I think he I, don't I've not seen him explicitly drawn equivalency other than putting them side by side but I have seen donald trump bill bar tried to say the real threat here's China and fundamentally that is just Misleading and not based on evidence that is either available publicly or lawmakers have said is available to them privately where there is no equivalency between what China is known to be doing, which is just public messaging. In favor and it's favorable to one candidate over another as compared to stack that up against what Russia for example did in twenty sixteen, which was launched a sprawling covert operation that reach more than one hundred, million Americans on social media, bat stolen release, sensitive political emails, and that's just a medically penetrated election systems across our country and as I said, we now know that Russia is launching another covert Operation Right now, that is seeking to manipulate Americans across social media and protect potentially with stolen documents and. It remains to be seen whether Russia was the to affect actual voting systems but there's no equivalency again between that effort and China's known to be doing overtly and just around policy or just to get around gathering of intelligence. So moving forward to be clear if China, word escalate toward launching a covert operation to interfere in this election in favor of one candidate or another whomever that will be worthy of condemnation that'd be worthy in the policy response just as it is with Russia. But right now that's Not The case and it is not only distracting, but it's detrimental to our national security to act as though those threats are the same because it just muddies the waters and makes it all the more vague to why it's so urgent or should be that we should be confronting this Russian threat vigorously and crow actively, and thank you for giving us semi You know some information about how we can do that during this election and before I let you go I have about a minute. Left I want to ask you when you know when if trump is no longer in office how should the next president tackle this threat? So I would say to tackle the threat of four and election interference. You have to forget about the distinction between domestic and foreign policy because they go hand in hand you both need to renew America at home by were securing our infrastructure mitigating the effectiveness of operations across social media or with stolen documents, and you need to build our institutions off local media. Things basic is healthcare and infrastructure to get at the polarization in our country to make us less vulnerable to reduce the visitors, the tensions in our society so that we both have a secured election system. We have less vulnerable avenues of information, but we also citizens who know more or less. And therefore less able to be played by were in power but hand in hand with that, you also need renewed. American. Leadership abroad, you need America to be working with its democratic allies who by the way are also under siege in terms of their elections and their electoral process. He's work with them in seeking to detect Russia's ongoing operations to interfere in their elections or ours, and then when those operations are detected to hit. Back against Russia not just by one country but rather by a coalition of Democracies that can show multilateral force and show Putin that the potential cost of these operations will outweigh the potential benefits and unfortunately were neither their domestically Nor in terms of our foreign policy, we have democracy standing alone right now I mean I was struck while doing the interviews for my book, the President of Montenegro roughing intelligence tried to assassinate said to. Me You know we're standing alone. We we need help. We WanNa work with our allies here and I think if we can do that if we could stand with other democracies in favor of the Democratic model and against his operation or foreign policy of tearing down Democratic Systems, we'll also shoring up our own society, our own polity. We'd be far better position to confront this threat where than we are now where we're neither imposing. Substantial costs on. Russia. Nor are we addressing the fact that Americans live in two different realities and are effectively you know each other's throats so I hope that we'll be able to make that kind of progress in the years ahead but for now, I think it's about just managing this threat and getting through this coming election before hopefully being able to have more substantial and comprehensive policy response to this very important national security threat..
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on The Lawfare Podcast
"I am old enough to remember what you alluded to a moment ago, which is that you know there have been times when both the I see and members of Congress preferred to do briefings orally, and the reason from the I sees side I suppose was lack of you know less capacity for leaks particularly, leaks documents the reason from the congressional side was you know frankly more plausible deniability that is if you were were briefed on something orally, you could in a kind of Jim Sensenbrenner kind of way pretend you didn't. See the brief thing or you didn't know about it and you're shocked anyway that this activity is going on and on the other hand I it allows for if you get if you have a piece of paper, you accountable for knowing what was on the sheet of paper. So is this a situation where Congress is doing? A kind of grass is greener thing if they get the oral briefings, they want the written briefings. If they get the written briefings, they want the oral briefings or are they really losing something here? Good intelligence oversight should get both and as much as there is tension from the intelligence community of historically in terms of briefing Congress. It has become the norm that the intelligence community will provide written and oral briefings to Congress I've spoken with all of the DNA is up until this one and to a person I think all of them would say that they don't enjoy briefing Congress they don't enjoy the grilling and the tough questions and the possible politicization, and certainly in the open testimony the feeling that there's always the possibility of something sensitive being revealed don't think they relish the experience but I think to a person, all of But this is what we do in. This is a part of the job to do it both in terms of written responses to questions and oral briefings when requested the oddity of this experience Ben, is that ratcliff putting out the logic for providing only written products a non oral briefings that there have been too many leaks and the acting chairman of the Senate Committee Marco Rubio followed this up with a statement calling the leaks recently vile in grotesque well that may be true but if so the logic then would be come in. and provide us the oral briefings and not the written briefings because a written document. Any member of Congress can take and read it directly to a reporter or photocopy it and give it to somebody in oral briefing is not hard to leak, but it's a little bit harder to leak the details and the nuances than it is when you have the written document that you keep with you. So it is a little bit odd to see the logic of preventing leaks being applied in the opposite way that it has usually been applied. All Right Margaret. So David's talked about this from a intelligence community perspective. Let's talk about it from a congressional perspective rackliff of course, is reasonably sophisticated about both he was only very recently a member of Congress. Why do you think he wants to limit the communication this way surely, he knows that what David just said is correct that if you if you create a paper trail that doesn't reduce the capacity for leaks, arguably increases it and it in any event increases the accountability in the sense that if you know if you whisper something in my ear in an oral. Briefing and I go spill it. You can claim you never set it or you can say that I miss characterized it. But if you give me a piece of paper with five sentences on at night, I read those five sentences to the press. You can't tell me you never said them and so what are you understand Ratcliffe to be trying to do here So I'm going to be much less even-handed. Maybe than David is I think that ratcliff is trying to limit the amount of information and nuance that members of Congress get specifically with respect to what Russia is doing probably right now to interfere in the two thousand, sixteen election I suspect that what Russia is doing is more sophisticated than what was done in two thousand sixteen and that sits very active that they've they learned from what their successes and failures of they're doing even more. And I think that ratcliff is trying to limit the amount of information that gets to Congress and to the public about those reality is and that's consistent with president trump's goals it would seem so I'm not usually so impolitic, but you know for me and for folks that I talked to on a regular basis, this this decision has been characterized to me by people on the hill as fucking crazy people are are pretty apoplectic about it and it's being viewed by many as again this. Sort of very deliberate mechanism for not having members ask tough questions and the reality is when I was on the hill, I did do a number of these classified briefings you have to to prep your boss really well for these because other types of briefers, the brief Ersan, the intelligence community they they're very good. They're very knowledgeable, but typically, they will only answer the very specific question that a member or a staffer asks them. They are not people who embellish or or give you. Lots of context or anything like that. So in that sense, the member or a staffer you have to know you have to have a very specific question to ask and you have to know which questions ask if you don't have specific opportunity to ask questions, you don't know what you don't know, and so to me this definitely reads as a full-frontal attempt to limit what members can ask about an understand about what is going on with respect to interfere in the twenty, twenty election and. Just to to take a few minutes, you know you ask the in the beginning about what's the story here? For me that the story begins back on July, twenty th when William Evans, who's the director of the National Counter Intelligence and Security Centre issued a pretty calm milk toast assessment of foreign interference in the twenty twenty election. It makes it a vague references to China and Russia members of Congress were very unhappy with it and said, this is unhelpful. It doesn't give Americans. Any sense for you know what's really going on or how they can protect their vote in the two thousand election as a result of that and another briefing that occurred the director of national counterintelligence. Security Center. Issued another come update to it on August seventh was essentially said you know we're updating this. We're going to be more specific about the efforts of Russia China and Iran and in that particular document members of Congress then criticized that documents saying you know this assessment incorrectly puts Russia and China on this team plane in terms of what they're doing to interfere in the twenty twenty election and based on members classified briefings up to that point that was not their impression at least the the Democratic members that that came out and said something about that so. For me this story about what rack does. rackliff letter is specifically tied to this series of events. The relate to briefings to members, of Congress and their reactions to it. And I. Think this is it's an extremely bad velopment. It's going to cause so much mistrust between the branches and something has really been lost here. Something something valuable has been lost and. It's bad. It's really bad. Okay. So before I get David to respond to that I just want you to flesh out. What the difference is between the world in which this is a the mode and the world of oral briefings so I imagine it's you know it's briefing time now and your the I see and I'm the congressional staffer or member how does it work now and just walk me through how how I am losing verses before. So look I've never encountered this kind of situation where you know you're allowed to view some sort of intelligence product but there's there's no possibility of talking to anyone about or getting someone to come up and brief about it. So it's a little bit of a strange sort of world for me but. I imagine what what happens now is is you know the the icy will say, okay well, we just just notifying people we sent over something you can go take a look if you'd like members or staff whatever can go down, read a document and it seems like what they're saying at least respect to this election security bucket is. You know that's it. There's not gonNA be any briefings. You can maybe right right some questions back the agency and hope that they that they respond. So it's it's just pretty limited. I. Think. I don't want to under sell how much I think members do get from that live back and forth with. Members of the intelligence community and one of the ways that these types of briefings are unique actually because they are behind closed doors. Members tend to ask lots of questions that are factual in nature in other words..
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on Buzz Burbank News and Comment
"A Million Kentucky voters requested absentee ballots exponentially more than the usual fifty thousand requests. The votes from that primary are still being counted. The Postal Service was able to handle the volume of mail. But County election officials were not prepared for the avalanche. In states coast to coast, they are still unprepared. The TV networks and the American public are also likely unprepared. To wait patiently for the final results. At what point does too early to call become too late. As always in person votes will be counted immediately and those numbers will be available on election night. But some states laws prohibit officials from counting the absentee ballots until election day the key state of Michigan's one of them. Mailed ballots take longer to count than in person votes a few states Florida surprisingly one of them allowing mailed ballots to be counted up to a month before election day so they'll be ready. With so many Democrats voting by mail Biden votes will be counted more slowly allowing trump to claim victory before the counting is over. And if the final vote that arrives later gives the win to Biden. Trump's already laid foundation to declare the election was rigged and its results illegitimate. Law Professor who specializes in election law Richard Hasten UC Irvine agrees with that scenario. And what will the networks report that night? What will the Fox News Channel report as we wait for the absentee and mail in votes to be counted Expect trump to claim a rigged election if the electoral college outcome is in any way close. Dozens of lawsuits from both parties would likely follow and that could actually tie up the results for months. Unless and until the Supreme Court, gets the case as it did in the Bush Gore election of two thousand. The Democrats have an army of lawyers to to match that of the Republicans. They will fight over mailed ballots. They will fight over ballot drop boxes and they will fight over the details of absentee voting rules. A long delay with no clear winner would further erode faith in our elections to ensure a government by the people. Hoping for a landslide is probably a good idea for more than just partisan reasons working to make it happen by voting is an even better idea. Trump has made it clear that like the world's dictators. Use. Every trick and every tool to hang onto power. To avoid his fury. That's the reason US intelligence had to soften its report on foreign interference. In this election the New York Times reports that US intelligence edited the truth edited the facts to avoid his fury. Trump doesn't wanNA hear about Russian interference on his behalf. Last year after finding with certainty that Russia was again clearly working to help trump intelligence officials changed the wording to read that quote Russian leaders probably assess the chances to improve relations with the US will diminish different president. Former acting CIA director Michael Morell tweeted this quote the first example, the public knows of the intelligence community tailoring written product. To avoid angering potus. To avoid his fury. US intelligence softened its language about Russia. Trump doesn't wanNA hear about Russia. He doesn't WANNA. Hear that now as in two thousand, sixteen, Russia is working for his campaign with false propaganda about Democrats especially, his opponent Joe Biden trump doesn't wanna hear that US intelligence finding that Russia is once again working to undermine our confidence in the democratic process. Trump does want to hear the US intelligence finding that China and Iran are also interfering pushing propaganda they hope will help trump blues the twenty twenty election he loves tying in China. So the new trump intelligence officials made sure to include that part. But as one senior American official told The Washington Post between China and Russia. Only one of those two is trying to actively influenced the outcome of this election. When Dan Coats. Was Director of National Intelligence under trump. He was fired for refusing to alter the facts just to avoid angering the boss. Coach Replacement Vice Admiral Joe. McGuire agreed to alter the facts but his deputy director told the House Intelligence Committee that yeah, Russia was helping trump again. Trump does want to hear that. So McGuire and his deputy were the next to be fired. Now. Trump has one of his own in the job the completely unqualified John Ratcliffe a former congressman from Texas who was a fierce trump defender during the house impeachment hearings. Radcliffe had no problem with softening the truth to avoid trump's wrath. He no problem replacing the truth on behalf of Donald Trump. But a new report from the head of the National Counter Intelligence and Security Centre warns the public that US intelligence has found rushes using a range of measures to interfere in the two thousand twenty election William Ebony. Anna also reports that the Kremlin has enlisted a pro Russian lawmaker from Ukraine who has been passing along. It's propaganda to both trump lawyer, Rudy Giuliani and Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. If the rest of the intelligence community was now bowing trump and softening its language, the national counterintelligence security. Center. Wanted to warn the public about what's really happening. The President who had solicited foreign intervention on his behalf both publicly and with extortion. was getting what he had requested. and. Once again, that help is coming from Vladimir Putin with whom trump has spoken eight times since the start of his election year. The State Department meanwhile has been texting cell phones in Russia and Iran offering rewards of up to ten million dollars for information about people trying to hack you as voting systems. The Russian government says the effort would not work, and that most Russians would just find the texts annoying. It's been forty eight days since we learned that trump had been informed that Russia was paying bounties for the deaths of Americans in Afghanistan forty eight days later, he has still said or done nothing about it. Will maybe he hasn't but Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo has quietly and under the radar to avoid the wrath of the president. After trump had called the bounty story a hoax a New York Times reports pompeo warned Russia against the boundaries in a phone call on July thirteenth, delivering that warning the Kremlin officials Sergei Lavrov. Bomb. Pao's reportedly livid about the bounties. Times reports Palmdale made clear to Laverov these strong US opposition to the bounty program and about crossing red lines. Trump said last week he's never mentioned the bounties in his many phone calls with Putin since the body story broke. Repeating that quote from trump that was a phone call to discuss other things and frankly that's an issue. Many people said was fake news. Mike, Pompeo doesn't think so. Mike pompeo is one of trump's most loyal cabinet members and yet he like others has acted in ways contrary to the president's publicly stated policy. But unlike trump POMPEO has condemned some of Russia's mischief including its takeover of Crimea and the shadow war continues to conduct in Ukraine. Bomb peyot reportedly has his eyes on a presidential bid in twenty twenty four. Was it only four years ago. That the NRA could afford to pump thirty million dollars into the trump campaign. Yes that was two thousand sixteen when the National Rifle Association spent seventy million on political efforts including thirty one million for trump three times. What he did spent on Mitt Romney four years before that. Those were high times for the lobby..
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on Stay Tuned with Preet
"Before we leave the intelligence issue generally, we've got another kind of piece of more breaking news in the intelligence world, and that's this most recent assessment articulated by Bill Evans of the national counterintelligence. Center and about foreign election interference and far from kind of promoting a unified view and summoning kind of unified purpose against foreign election interference it's really throwing a bit of a hand grenade into the into the environment here and kicked up quite a quite a load of dust. It was interesting Ability Nina is the head of the NC SC, which is the national counterintelligence security center. And he Issued A. Sort of a threat assessment about election interference for the upcoming election in he says that they're primarily concerned with China Russia on Iran anything goes through what each of them. The interest of China Interest Russian interest, Ron, and trying to possibly disrupt our election in various ways in it's interesting. One of the things that has cut cut some criticism before is that it sort of puts Russia on a par with these other two, and of course, Russian interference is been controversial issues is twenty sixteen. and. So some of seen in the way Russia's put on a parody with China and Iran. As an effort to sort of the emphasize that risk Andy emphasize the role of Russia and attacking our elections but you know look the no question to China and Iran have every intention of China damage our elections in China for example I, remember when I was homeland. Security. Adviser during the campaign between McCain and President Obama. Came to our attention to China. was, hacking into the. databases and the computers both McCain and the Obama. Campaign's and the decision was made to to brief oath campaigns. Do a defensive briefing. Yeah. I remember that you don't hire umbrella I was chief of staff the FBI at the time and I called a guy by the name of Dennis McDonough. I'll be darn. Yeah. At the time he was the kind of chief national security aide to then Senator Obama who's obviously the Democratic nominee and I called up Dennis had never met him before. I said listen you don't know me but I'm Bob Muller Chief of staff and I WANNA. Tell you. You're going to get a call from from a nice. Guy By the name of Shawn Henry who has an FBI agent head of the Cyber Division at the FBI and he wants to come and talk to about how China's trying to infiltrate the campaign and that was my first introduction to Dennis and she and I have chuckled over that introduction many many times over the years. But of course that was China infiltrating for Intelligence Collection Right? Right. It was It was them trying to just get Intel on understand what you know on the campaigns and on the candidates and their platforms, etc.. And interesting I hadn't realized that you were on the other end of this. Because I was in the Oval Office when the President and his Josh Bolten talked about that intelligence and said, absolutely got a brief campaigns. And, then you got the word though knowing the FBI maybe already done before. Getting. Anyway. US I wouldn't be unprecedented. But. It's A. It was looking at, you know in hindsight. It was kind of quaint. It was just good old intelligence gathering, and of course, in two thousand eight, it went from foreign governments gathering intelligence to know full on disruption efforts and. Efforts to influence The American people and that is one of the reasons why people are concerned about the seventy-nine statement because the concern is that it really doesn't educate the American people about the threat were facing. And while in the context of the China intelligence operations in two thousand eighteen that can be addressed by telling the campaigns. Hey, they're trying to hack into your systems you know, and then you just build your defenses. When when the malign efforts by a foreign government are not just that but actually go to trying to spread misinformation to the American people. The way to build defences to that is with the American people, and you can only do that only bill does depends if you tell the American people to be wary of misinformation and influence efforts. and. The concern is that we that this statement and any other efforts that we've seen today haven't of been the clarion call that that is needed to tell the American people watch out. Be careful when you read things be careful. They might the actually source to the Russians or two Iranians of the Chinese and might not actually be true and that's the only way the about that and I am concerned that there's not enough public. We're not since ties in the public to that threat enough, and we might now have a rerun at twenty sixteen if we're not careful well, and you know it's just a replay of. Having this be waged on partisan grounds, right so Avenida has issued this intelligence assessment Democratic leaders have criticized it as being. So generic as to be you know not helpful. Now unfortunately, that criticism is coming only from one side of the political aisle. So immediately puts all of this into a political Maelstrom, right but there can be good reasons for not sharing everything that the government knows about what the efforts of these countries in these militias actors. Are. Right, you don't want to disclose perhaps how much you know and how you know it. Right. But to your point I, think we really do need to lean forward in describing what it is. We know about these efforts so that the American people can make. Decisions about the types of information they're seeing in their twitter feed in their facebook feed. And really going into this kind of is Eyes Wide Open. and that's that's the danger of either not. Sharing Information, and having this all be discussed solely through a partisan lens. It's worth going back and thinking about how you and your colleagues handled this situation back in two thousand, sixteen were you faced a very difficult choice? Which, I've had had occasion to learn about both. Reading the papers and also through some of my representations of former officials where you all had to wrestle with the dawning realization of this, really comprehensive effort on the part of the Russians to spread information, influence the American voters but do so in the run-up to an election. Aware obviously, you had a democratic nominee up against Republican nominee in anything that you said publicly would be seen through the prism of the politics of the election. An interpreted by some not as an effort just to protect the integrity election but maybe as an effort to sway the election. I know that was a tough spot to be in. You know look I. think There's been a lot that's been written and said about how the Obama Administration we in the Obama Administration responded to the Russian efforts to influence the election in two thousand sixteen and to sow discord in the electoral process. You know I come away from that with a number of things that I think are lessons we should have learned one that. You'd need a unified bipartisan response to the Russian effort to sow discord amongst us. Right they were. They did then and I think we'll continue to do and are continuing to do so now to trying to sow discord and use our divisions and play up our divisions and use them against us and the best antidote to that is a unity right and bipartisan being we unfortunately. We're not able to get that in two, thousand, sixteen, I fear we're not better poised now to have a bipartisan unified approach to foreign influence and the other thing is to your point, give more information to the American people and do so in as apolitical away as possible we struggled in two thousand sixteen was when and how to articulate what we saw the Russians doing. We ended up issuing a a kind of very unusual statement by the then director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Homeland Security on October seventh of two thousand sixteen that laid out that The Russians were trying to sow discord and probe state election systems and It was a very unusual unprecedented statement at the time but it quickly got drowned out and we said in that statement that it was being directed by the. Highest levels of the Russian government right? We didn't say the words, Vladimir Putin, but we might as well have right because of the way that.
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on Target USA Podcast by WTOP
"From podcast one coming up in this episode of target USA previously on target in USA and so one night around midnight midnight shitting this tent and Had these cyber professionals from eight different countries in there and I asked him I said hey go in this room has never had the Chinese in your networks on inviting everybody. Just kinda looked around as I thought. Okay who in this room is never had the Russians uninvited in your networks works. No hands at the risk of sounding overly dramatic. They're everywhere and one place. The governments of Russia China Iran and Non Nation State hacktivists. I want to be is inside voter. Registration databases in the US. We could see adversaries interested in that information for what we would consider. Traditional Intelligence and espionage purposes Shelby Pearson is the intelligence communities top election security security official and she points out. The twenty twenty election may not be the big prize for these actors. So it's not just about the actual vote casting. It's acquiring valuable demographic data so how are they going after this data and the all important question. What are they going to do with it if they get it? That's coming up on this edition of target. USA National Security podcast from WTO in Washington in DC this is target USA. Russia could render a huge arm to this country North Korea's secret missile capable originally the whole of the United States dangerous terrorist. DC is repeatedly mentioned as someplace they would like to seek an attack. Cyber Criminals Successful in America has a target on its back and on this program. We investigate the threats the people behind them the agencies fighting them and the impact on you this is target. USA The national security podcast. I'm JJ Green. Thanks for joining us. It's no secret. Russia China Iran and Non Nation State hacktivists are actively attempting to interfere in the US twenty twenty presidential election. But what's not well known is that may not be their ultimate goal exfiltration exfiltration of voter profiles data from registration databases is according to the intelligence communities top election security official a very very likely objective. We talk about this and many more significant problems concerns and issues and the outlook with Shelby Pearson. And she's the election threats executive in the office of the Director of National Intelligence. Thank you so much for being here. The first thing I'd like to ask ask is if you could explain what it is that your title in your position are designed to do sure I think certainly as many of your listeners know the office so the director of National Intelligence was created several years ago to further integrate the intelligence across the community and in fact My position is as an extension of that same goal albeit focused around the challenges of election security which includes both cyber threats to election related infrastructure as well as a threats related to malign influence and influence operations here in the states so my position is really designed to galvanize the expertise resources and capabilities of the intelligence community to focus on this topic. And how do you do that. But what are the practical steps that you take. I really appreciate that question because it's it's actually more about leadership style. And how do you motivate people to focus on on work work and goals that are potentially beyond that of their own organization for me One I've had the luxury of a peer group of executives across across most of the agencies that I think I've worked with for a period of time certainly from two thousand sixteen to two thousand eighteen so I think there's a bit of speed core but I also think We we focus on articulating very clear goals for example. How do we make sure that the intelligence community communicates with one voice and we then then work towards practices and behaviors? That accomplish those goals. So I think it's it's really a matter of Being transparent so I think all of the agencies know exactly what our goals are and what we're trying to accomplish and really Motivating all the agencies to understand. What their role? Liz relative to those goals and can you give me a basic idea of how many people are on your team and how they're broken up up just briefly. I don't want you to get too far into the weeds. That could take a long time to do right. I'm assuming generally speaking within the deny on my team specifically I think I have Ten which would include me and then I also have partners in the National Intelligence Manager for cyber the national Counterintelligence Security Center. I know you've talked to my colleague. Bill Vena before And colleagues that work in other areas of the cyber enterprises while within oh DNA. So I would say on any given day inside of the O- deny I'm looking at a cohort of colleagues that are maybe fifteen to twenty people. that that help us accomplish Odeon is mission in the space and then I have colleagues across the community as I mentioned led by my Peer Group and at any given time We probably have I think a cohort of a few hundred folks and then of course those that work in the broader disciplines of counterintelligence cyber and regional expertise and operations all across the community. That help us with this. Let's get into some more specific and harder core questions You mentioned the twenty twenty election clearly is a part of why you and your team. Your team exists What and A and we're worried and have been for wild about some pretty pernicious in serious insidious threats? So what are those threats. I think uh-huh as we have tried to Continue to communicate. These threats across the board We are certainly looking at the traditional actors. Thor's of Russia China and Iran Also non-state actors hacktivists and frankly even domestic actors which of course the FBI by on ds would lead on Going into twenty twenty and so as I mentioned earlier I think those threats can focus on both of potential. The threats to the infrastructure related to casting votes or voter rolls or voter registration databases as well as Malign influence or or influence operations who sponsorship is not known to the target or the recipient getting a little deeper into the threats election roles databases etc.. How are they presenting as threats? How are they going about trying to meddle interfere or impact those those those elements? I think it's really important to be clear to your listeners. That at this juncture we do not have any intelligence information to suggest that adversaries have have sought to compromise voting tallies or change voting numbers. I think that's a really important point. Two Foot stomp however as The the cyber world is very broad and deep we certainly see adversaries Looking at a broad swath of infrastructure which would include a that which is related to election infrastructure. I think one Area that we have focused on voter registration databases And some of that is frankly a JJ as you know publicly available and or or available for sale. So I think we're working very closely with us in the states to understand and what's already readily available Openly and then is are there aspects of information that we see that would suggest that they acquired that information clandestinely for me. One thing that I wanNA point out To your listeners is that those cyber Interest areas particularly voter registration. Asian databases may not be specifically to antagonize the outcome of the twenty twenty election. We could see adversaries. Interested in that information for are what we would consider traditional intelligence and espionage purposes but also I think to enable more focused and more effective targeting of influence campaigns. So it's not just about the actual vote casting. It's acquiring valuable demographic data about the American American political landscape that then can enable the influence operations that I talked about previously been. How do you see them leveraging that information if and once they get it I think that as I mentioned I think it enables a level of accuracy and specificity and efficiency in how they they look at specific populations in the United States to influence through a bride a broad swath? Excuse me of measures which could include everything from social media to traditional influence. have you seen any Evidence on social media of them. Some sort of exercising activities operations. I suppose with information like this. Certainly I think we have. I've communicated very broadly how the Russians continue to continue to sponsor presence on Very popular social media media platforms to promote Narratives that they're interested in continued to sow discord in the United States. I also think it's important to point out that We as the United States try to learn from a very broad swath of activity that might occur for example in Taiwan or might occur her in Ukraine or the Balkans and so looking at the.
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on KDWN 720AM
"Today. Company executives said, look, don't expecting to get any better later on in the year. Add to that the fact that Facebook's chief competitor, Google reported results that beat expectations, and it's just bad all around for Facebook correspondent Cristina Alexi President Trump is expecting the report on gross domestic product due out tomorrow. Show remarkable growth in the US economy could be very close could even happen five point three, somebody said yesterday, one of the geniuses on Wall Street said five point three. Okay. We'll take it anything with a foreign front. Slowly right new worries about cyber hacks that could damage the economy and. Security persist about election cyber intrusions from Russia the. National counterintelligence security center says economic espionage also threatens the nation's security and competitive advantage among other attacks their report. Says Iranian hackers known as rocket. Kitten repeatedly targeted, US, defense companies to try to steal info that would boost Tehran's. Missile and space, programmes Russian hackers last year also, compromised dozens of energy companies and, another Chinese group is a repeat attacker of engineering telecom and aerospace industries I'm Jan Johnson house speaker Paul Ryan says he does not. Support an effort by Republican House conservatives to impeach deputy attorney general rod Rosenstein who oversees the, motor Russia probe, the US is not expected to meet today's court deadline for. The. Reunification of those immigrant kids and their parents On Wall Street the.
"national counterintelligence security center" Discussed on WTMA
"Step at a time i'm john batchelor this is the john batchelor show patrick tucker as the defense is the technology editor of defense watt z t it's been in the news it remains in the news because it's a part of the conversation between washington and beijing over trade the idea that z t is dependent entirely on two major suppliers google and qualcomm at the same time that z t has been caught intellectual property theft but also trading with our adversaries breaking sanctions so z t's stands exposed and will be or could be punished but why is this important patrick is reporting on supply chain patrick i remind myself always that one of the cambridge five cairncross was part of the ministry of supply during the second war that was critical for the soviets to understand the capabilities of the brits it looks like it's it's critical to our adversaries today to understand supply chain what do they want with the supply chain what can they do with it well if a huge in growing worry among the counter intelligence community in the united states and we're not sure all the things that they can do with infiltrating the supply chain of chips microelectronic parts that go into us consumer devices but the threat according to the counter intelligence community and particularly the national counter intelligence security center which is part of the the office of the director of national intelligence the threat is very very ill it's part of a larger conversation that we're going to be happened having in washington for months and possibly years into the future precisely because and a lot of the stuff in there is produced by nations with whom we're experiencing escalating friction escalating tension and difficult diplomatic relations so z t donald trump astounded a lot of people with this remark that he wanted to rescue in effect z t e from from the sanctions that united states treasury department at input on them but when asked whether or not he would ever use the phone william avenue who actually leads that counter national counterintelligence security center told the senate intelligence committee back in may that he's definitely would not and there's a reason why these devices are banned among intelligence security professionals and among the military so we're going to be having this debate for a very long time because the entire kind.