Hearings to examine the nominations of Aaron Lukas, of Arkansas, to be Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Kent, of Washington, to be Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and John Andrew Eisenberg, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice.

1[Senate Hearing 119-110]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                        S. Hrg. 119-11056                             OPEN HEARING:7                    NOMINATIONS OF AARON LUKAS TO BE8                 PRINCIPAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL9                INTELLIGENCE, JOSEPH KENT TO BE DIRECTOR10                OF THE NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER,11                   OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL12                INTELLIGENCE, AND JOHN ANDREW EISENBERG13                    TO BE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL14                  FOR THE NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION,15                         DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE16=======================================================================1718                                HEARING1920                               BEFORE THE2122                    SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE2324                                 OF THE2526                          UNITED STATES SENATE2728                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2930                             FIRST SESSION3132                               __________3334                             APRIL 9, 20253536                               __________3738      Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence3940[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]4142        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov4344�                               __________4546�                  U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4760-886                    WASHINGTON : 202648=====================================================================�4950                    SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE5152           (Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong. 2d Sess.)5354                     TOM COTTON, Arkansas, Chairman55                MARK R. WARNER, Virginia, Vice Chairman5657JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon58SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine              MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico59JOHN CORNYN, Texas                   ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine60JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado61JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York62MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota            JON OSSOFF, Georgia63TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  MARK KELLY, Arizona64TED BUDD, North Carolina6566                  JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Ex Officio67                CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York, Ex Officio68                ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi, Ex Officio69                  JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio70                              ----------7172                       Ryan Tully, Staff Director73                  William Wu, Minority Staff Director74                     Kelsey S. Bailey, Chief Clerk7576                           C O N T E N T S7778                              ----------7980                             APRIL 9, 202581                           OPENING STATEMENTS8283                                                                   Page84Tom Cotton, U.S. Senator from Arkansas...........................     185Mark R. Warner, U.S. Senator from Virginia.......................     386Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, U.S. Representative from Arkansas.....     587Christopher C. Miller, Former Acting Secretary of Defense........     688John Cornyn, U.S. Senator from Texas.............................     88990                               WITNESSES9192Aaron Lukas, Nominee to be Principal Deputy Director of National93  Intelligence...................................................     994    Prepared Statement...........................................    1295Joseph Kent, Nominee to be Director of the National96  Counterterrorism Center, Office of the Director of National97  Intelligence...................................................    1698    Prepared Statement...........................................    1999John Andrew Eisenberg, Nominee to be Assistant Attorney General100  for the National Security Division, Department of Justice......    22101    Prepared Statement...........................................    24102103                         SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL104105Nomination Material for Aaron Lukas106    Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees........    46107    Additional Pre-Hearing Questions.............................    60108    Post-Hearing Questions.......................................   109109Nomination Material for Joseph Kent110    Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees........   115111    Additional Pre-Hearing Questions.............................   133112    Post-Hearing Questions.......................................   164113Nomination Material for John Andrew Eisenberg114    Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees........   178115    Additional Pre-Hearing Questions.............................   201116    Post-Hearing Questions.......................................   238117118OPEN HEARING: ON THE NOMINATIONS OF AARON LUKAS, TO BE PRINCIPAL DEPUTY119 DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; JOSEPH KENT, TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE120   NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER, OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL121   INTELLIGENCE; AND JOHN ANDREW EISENBERG, TO BE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY122   GENERAL FOR THE NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE123124                              ----------125126                        WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2025127128                                       U.S. Senate,129                          Select Committee on Intelligence,130                                                    Washington, DC.131    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:55 p.m., in132Room SH-216, the Hart Senate Office Building, the Hon. Tom133Cotton, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.134    Present: Senators Cotton (presiding), Warner, Risch,135Collins, Cornyn, Young, Budd, Wyden, King, Bennet, and Kelly.136137             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM COTTON,138                  A U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS139140    Chairman Cotton. This hearing will come to order.141    I want to welcome our nominees: Aaron Lukas, to be142Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence; Joe Kent,143to be Director of the National Counterterrorism Center; and144John Eisenberg, to be Assistant Attorney General for National145Security at the Department of Justice.146    As an initial matter, Committee rule 5.4 states that unless147otherwise ordered by joint determination made by the Chair and148Vice Chair, no confirmation hearing shall be held sooner than149seven calendar days after receipt of the background150questionnaire, financial disclosure statement, and responses to151additional prehearing questions. While the Committee received152most of the nominees' materials at least seven days in advance,153we received a final batch of documents within that seven-day154timeframe. Nevertheless, the Vice Chairman graciously has155agreed to a joint determination to hold this hearing so we can156get them done before our upcoming recess.157    Also, I would like to remind all those in attendance, that158while you are welcome to observe today's hearing, Vice Chairman159Warner and I are in agreement that we will not allow160disruptions by the audience.161    Audience members may not verbally or physically distract162from the hearing, including by shouting, standing, raising163signs, making gestures or blocking the view of the other164members of the audience or otherwise annoying the Chairman.165Those who do so will be immediately escorted from the room.166    Our goal in conducting this hearing is to enable the167committee to begin consideration of the nominees'168qualifications and to allow for our Members' thoughtful169deliberation. Each nominee here has provided substantive170written responses to dozens of questions presented by the171committee. Today, of course, Members will be able to ask172additional questions and hear from the nominees.173    The nominees before the committee today are exceptionally174well qualified, capable, and impressive individuals with175accomplished careers in public service. Their records and176achievements speak for themselves.177    First, Mr. Lukas has made an outside impact on our national178security through his service as a career CIA officer and179station chief and through joint duty rotations at the National180Security Council and the Office of the Director of National181Intelligence. With more than 20 years of intelligence182experience, Mr. Lukas has the knowledge, know-how, and183expertise needed to assist Director Gabbard in returning our184intelligence community to its core mission of aggressively185stealing secrets from our adversaries. He is joined today by186his wife.187    This Committee is eager to see the return of the ODNI to188its original size, scope, and mission, which is why I am189pleased to support President Trump's decision to nominate Mr.190Lukas to be the Principal Deputy Director of National191Intelligence.192    Next, Mr. Kent's 20 years of military service during the193War on Terror provides him with the experience and knowledge194needed to lead the fight against terrorism as the Director of195the National Counterterrorism Center. Serving as a Green Beret196and later CIA officer, Mr. Kent has dedicated his entire career197to courageously hunting down terrorists and keeping Americans198safe. He knows firsthand the threat that terrorism presents to199our homeland and the devastation it causes. His first wife,200Shannon Kent, was killed while serving in Syria in 2019, for201which we all express our continued sympathy and gratitude for202her service.203    Mr. Kent is a soldier and patriot. He is the right person204to lead the National Counterterrorism Center.205    Last but not least, Mr. Eisenberg's national security206expertise as legal counsel has proved indispensable to the207President and senior government officials. In the first Trump208administration, Mr. Eisenberg served as the legal advisor to209the National Security Council, assistant to the President and210deputy counsel to the President for national security affairs.211    He also previously served at the Department of Justice212where he advised the Attorney General and numerous other senior213officials on complex matters, including counsel in the214intelligence community. I commend President Trump for215nominating Mr. Eisenberg, who has the experience with national216security and foreign relations law necessary to serve as the217Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division218at the Department of Justice.219    Finally, I want to note that Mrs. Lukas, Mrs. Eisenberg,220and Mr. Kent's family are here today to support our nominees.221They have also supported our nominees in their years of service222to our country, and I thank them all for being here.223    I now recognize the Vice Chairman for his opening remarks.224225           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK R. WARNER,226                  A U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA227228    Vice Chairman Warner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I229apologize to the Committee, I thought we were going to wait230until after the third vote--my mistake--although, obviously,231the Democrats didn't fully push it. And I come running in and I232think, I just saw Chairman Crawford last night and now Chris233Miller. Did you guys switch up on me in the 11th hour? I know234you are here to introduce the nominees and the nominees are235behind us and I did promise the chairman that I will maybe cut236my rant by a minute or two because of my tardiness.237    A minute or two only, Jim Risch.238    I want to welcome our witnesses and congratulations. As the239chairman said, you have all been nominated to serve in very240important positions and you have obviously provided service to241our country before.242    I do want to remind you and I find this to be terribly243important. When you raise your hand to serve, you are taking an244oath not to one person, but to the Constitution. And every245single American who has put their trust in that document. These246three positions are all terribly important. They were all247created after 9/11 to make sure we wouldn't have that type of248tragedy again.249    To make sure that we prevent that, I think you all will250have to both ensure that you are able to maintain trust not251only with the American people but also quite candidly with our252allies and partners. You are going to have to inspire a253workforce that candidly has been locked in the opening days of254this administration. And most importantly, and I will try to255drill down on this, you have got to be willing to speak truth256to power, even if that means costing your job.257    Mr. Kent, you have been nominated to lead the Agency most258central to our fight against foreign terrorists. Echoing what259Senator Cotton said, I would like to thank you again for your260willingness to serve once again and after such a long career in261both the military and IC, and echoing the loss that your family262took defending our Nation.263    Given your background, you clearly have the experience to264do this job. I have no question about your patriotism or your265commitment. I do have some questions about your judgment, and266we will get into that in this hearing.267    As I said, when we met, I have particular concerns you made268during your congressional campaigns where you called for269defunding the FBI and cutting the CIA. Or when you called270Zelenskyy a thug--``a thug installed by a U.S.-backed counter-271revolution,'' and obviously, I hope you will clarify those272comments in your statement and in your questioning.273    Mr. Lukas, as a former CIA officer who has served in the274field, you understand better than most the importance of275building trust. I've got to ask you, though, how can our allies276and partners be expected to trust our world when we do things277like threaten to kick Canada out of of the Five Eyes or impose278tariffs even with the new delay on partners like Australia who279we actually have a trade surplus with.280    I worry when we see that reliance on our partners when281sometimes classified information has been treated so casually282and carelessly that literally this information was getting out283about an attack on the Houthis while the pilots were flying. It284concerns me greatly. And the fact that nobody has been held285accountable, that continues to bother me.286    And lastly Mr. Eisenberg, your role will take on increased287importance in the coming year as your team will be responsible288for the reauthorization of FISA section 702. We know that 702289makes up about 60 percent of the President's Daily Brief and290obviously it has challenges. I think we made strong reforms,291but taking that role is going to be a challenge.292    If confirmed, the three of you will not have easy tasks.293The world has obviously become more complicated and dangerous.294And I question at times the fact that it appears the295administration, particularly vis-a-vis our friends and allies,296is actually making America less prepared to take on this297challenge.298    I have shared with my colleagues and I have not had a299chance before in a public setting, I was deeply concerned when300the President fired the Director and Deputy Director of the NSA301and several senior staff at the NSC, including, I would argue,302a number of well respected Republican staffers, staffers who303worked for Members of this Committee, all because of this304individual, Laura Loomer, who claimed that 9/11 was an inside305job; claimed that a weather machine controlled by Nikki Haley306caused snow storms in Iowa or Italy; that the First Lady of307Florida, Casey DeSantis, lied about her cancer; and that school308shootings are staged. I don't know that any administration309would let anyone with those views within 100 yards of the Oval310Office, let alone giving the President a hit list of who to go311after.312    We also know that one of the President's first actions was313celebrating the arrest of the terrorist who planned the Abbey314Gate bombings; but the truth is, the President before that time315fired the FBI leaders who were in charge of that investigation.316I question how any of these actions make our country safer.317    They were firing the folks who were responsible for the318security of our country's nuclear stockpile or I increasingly319worry about the firings and the potential additional firings at320CISA when we still have China and potentially other countries321deep into our telecom networks and taking advantage of those322vulnerabilities.323    We have also obviously seen, and I know there are more324firings to come at like the CIA. We finally documented that325close to $400,000 to get a CIA officer through security326clearance and training. And just firing folks because they have327been hired in the last two years, as a former business guy,328makes no sense to me.329    We also know, and again, we have litigated this at times,330but the notion that the information--classified information331that was relayed on Signal is enormously troubling to me that332there has been no accountability. We still don't know if the333phones used have been scraped for malware; and we have learned334subsequently that there were 20 additional group chats that335included discussion of matters like Ukraine and Gaza. Why was336that done and why hasn't there been any accountability?337    Again, as I mentioned earlier, the firings of people like338General Haugh at NSA and Admiral Chatfield at NATO.339    I will skip the part where I was down in Hampton Roads340where the Truman had been deployed from. I am not going to skip341any of this. The community there was frankly incensed about342this information getting out because they have loved ones on343the Truman and they know if that information had gotten out and344gotten into the hands of the Houthis it could have been a real345tragedy.346    Again, we know and you all as intelligence professionals347and the folks who are going to introduce you know that we are348made safer by our collaboration with our allies; and I worry349whether our allies are going to continue to share information350with us when we don't keep classified information classified--351and we will never know for sure what they haven't been willing352to share.353    So I think the actions of this administration--I appreciate354your willingness to serve, but I will continue to come back to355that point, that will you be willing to speak truth to power,356even if it costs your job, because that is the only way having357an independent nonpolitical IC can we actually guarantee358national security.359    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.360    Chairman Cotton. Thank you.361    As the Vice Chairman alluded to, there are ongoing votes on362the Senate floor and in addition there is at least one other363committee meeting. So if Senators are coming and going, it is364not because we find you boring, it is because we have to get365through other business and maybe we think that you are going to366be easily confirmed on a large bipartisan vote.367    Before we get to the witnesses, we do have three368distinguished officials to introduce them. For Mr. Lukas, we369have the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and370Congressman from the finest State in the Union, Rick Crawford.371    Take it away, Rick.372373         STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,374              A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM ARKANSAS375376    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.377    I appreciate the opportunity to introduce the Committee to378Mr. Aaron Lukas, the nominee for Principal Deputy Director of379National Intelligence. As I am sure you would agree Mr.380Chairman, as with oversight of the intelligence community, what381our IC today needs is more leadership from Arkansas.382    Aaron grew up in Jacksonville, Arkansas, where his family383moved before his first birthday. He attended school right next384to Little Rock Air Force Base, which likely influenced his385interest in serving his nation on the frontlines of our386national security challenges.387    Aaron attended the University of Texas. I will try not to388hold that against him. He traveled the United States and began389to expand his understanding of foreign cultures and languages390by traveling and teaching English in former Warsaw pact391countries.392    Like many in his generation, the al-Qaida attacks on393September 11, 2001, drew Aaron to public service. An economist394by trade, he began work for the U.S. Trade Representative and395was subsequently recruited by the Central Intelligence Agency396to work as an analyst. Wanting to expand his service, Aaron397moved to the CIA's Directorate of Operations and served398globally, with distinction. After proving himself in the field,399Aaron was called to leadership, serving in the Office of400Director of National Intelligence and the National Security401Council staff. Aaron has served under multiple administrations402from both parties with the appropriate integrity of an403intelligence officer. It certainly will be good to have someone404with his operational background in the ODNI leadership. Mr.405Chairman, I am confident your committee will give him proper406review given his extensive and honorable public service, and407with that it is my pleasure to introduce and recommend to the408Committee Mr. Aaron Lukas.409    Chairman Cotton. Thank you, Mr. Crawford.410    You are welcome to stay for all of our festivities. I know411you would find them fascinating. But I also know that there is412a lot of business in the House and you need to get back over413there.414    For Mr. Kent, we have the former Director of the National415Counterterrorism Center as well as former Acting Secretary of416Defense, Christopher Miller.417    Mr. Miller, take it away.418419             STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER MILLER,420               FORMER ACTING SECRETARY OF DEFENSE421422    Mr. Miller. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Vice423Chairman, and Members of this incredibly important Committee: I424am Chris Miller. I had the privilege of being unanimously425confirmed by this Committee and the Senate in August 2020 to426serve as the seventh Director of the United States National427Counterterrorism Center.428    When I left public office in 2021, I vowed never again to429appear before Congress but when your Army buddy Joe Kent, an430Army buddy who is universally known in the Fifth Special Forces431Group, that was the organization that we served together in, he432was known as the best soldier in the unit. When he asks you to433introduce him for this confirmation hearing for the same434position I once held, it was incomprehensible for me to say no.435    Joe, this is an honor of a lifetime. Thank you for your436willingness to reenter public service after an enormously437impactful career as an Army Green Beret and a member of our438Nation's most elite counterterrorism and hostage rescue task439force, followed by continued service in harm's way after your440retirement from the Army as a CIA paramilitary officer.441    I was beyond gratified when after you left public service,442you decided to run for Congress to represent a new generation443of Americans that surely understand the life and death444consequences of the decisions that are made in these chambers.445Your willingness to run for elected office when you experienced446the essence of our political experiment that those sitting447before me know all so well was an act of commitment and moral448courage that oftentimes concerned me. I was frankly mortified449as your good name and stellar reputation for principled450leadership and selfless service were attacked. I am sure there451were times when embroiled in political combat you thought you452would rather be in foreign fields of strife in battle. But I453was always reminded of President Theodore Roosevelt's thoughts454about being in the arena and it is not the critic that counts.455    Thanks for being the defining leader of your generation.456And thank you, the Members of this important committee, for457your willingness to be in the arena and your service to our458Nation in this time of profound change and risk. It is with459enormous honor and humility that I introduce Joe Kent for your460consideration to be the next Director of the National461Counterterrorism Center, one of the most unknown yet impactful462organizations in the intelligence community.463    Established by this Committee after al-Qaeda's 2001 assault464on America, it has developed the most cutting-edge tools,465processes, and procedures undergirded by a fervently dedicated466cadre of analysts to guarantee that our Nation never suffers467such a cataclysmic attack again.468    But the most dedicated and skilled people, technology or469standard operating procedures and frankly support of this470Committee are meaningless without thoughtful, purposeful, and471principled leadership. With your foresight and support, that472leader will be Joe Kent, of the State of Washington. A former473Army Green Beret Special Operator and paramilitary officer who474has not only consumed intelligence on the ground throughout the475world, but has conducted all aspects of the intelligence cycle.476He is uniquely qualified to bring an operator's view to the477halls of the NCTC.478    But he also has a unique perspective on what happens when479our intelligence community fails. On January 16, 2019, his soul480mate and wife Shannon, a senior Navy Chief Petty Officer and a481trail blazer in our Special Operations community, and most482significantly, birth mother of their two sons, was killed in483northeast Syria when a human intelligence meeting was484compromised.485    Guaranteeing that no other family ever experiences that486unfathomable heartache is Joe Kent's professional purpose in487life. Boys, thanks for being the joy of your father's life and488his inspiration. Heather, thank you for serving in our Nation's489Army and now in your next career, thank you for your love and490support of Joe and the boys and being the foundation of such a491wonderful family.492    I don't need to tell this Committee that we are in the493midst of an epical change of the global order and our national494security enterprise is woefully behind in transforming to keep495pace with the threats. There is no one, and I mean no one, more496qualified in this nominee to lead the National Counterterrorism497Center into this next era.498    This Committee is vital to overseeing the essential eyes499and ears of our national security enterprise so we maintain500deterrence through world-class intelligence capabilities to501provide decision makers such as yourself and our field502commanders with decisive advantage. But the old ways of503throwing more money and people at a problem after catastrophic504surprise will no longer suffice. We need people with vision and505experience. Joe Kent is that person of vision and experience to506lead the women and men of the little known treasure of the507National Counterterrorism Center in the future.508    Joe Kent is a man of enormous courage, integrity, morality,509and understands better than anyone in this room the meaning of510sacrifice and importance of accountable leadership. It is with511enormous gratitude to our great nation in this Committee that I512present to you for your constitutionally mandated role Mr. Joe513Kent of Washington for your consideration for service as the514ninth Director of the National Counterterrorism Center.515    Thank you very much for your time.516    Chairman Cotton. Thank you, Mr. Miller.517    And for Mr. Eisenberg, we have our own distinguished518colleague, Senator Cornyn.519520                STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CORNYN,521                   A U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS522523    Senator Cornyn. Thank you, colleagues.524    I am pleased to introduce John Andrew Eisenberg, President525Trump's nominee to serve as Assistant Attorney General for526National Security at the National Security Division of the527Department of Justice.528    Mr. Eisenberg currently serves as the senior counsel to the529Attorney General, Pam Bondi. During President Trump's first530term, he served as assistant to the President, Deputy Counsel531to the President for National Security Affairs, and as a legal532adviser to the National Security Council.533    But his government service did not start there. Mr.534Eisenberg has a long history of government service,535particularly in national security matters. Between 2004 and5362009, Mr. Eisenberg served at the Department of Justice as an537Associate Attorney General in the Office of Deputy Attorney538General, as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General, the Office of539Legal Counsel, and as Counsel to the Assistant Attorney540General, and as a Special Assistant for Counterterrorism.541    He was a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence542Thomas and for Michael J. Luttig on the U.S. Court of Appeals543for the Fourth Circuit. He earned his Bachelor of Science544degree in mathematics from Stanford and his law degree from545Yale. His wide breadth of experience will serve him well for546the challenges that lie ahead.547    Our Nation and the Department of Justice face many548challenges from unrelenting foreign adversaries who want to549weaken the United States. I am confident that Mr. Eisenberg550understands the gravity of these threats. He knows firsthand551the constant vigilance required and the authorities needed in552order for the Department of Justice alongside of the553intelligence community to successfully and effectively protect554Americans and American interests.555    One such example is his understanding of the Foreign556Intelligence Surveillance Act, section 702 authority, and its557value in the interests of the United States. I have had558discussions with FBI Director Patel and CIA Director Ratcliffe559about this on a number of occasions and how we must not560willingly or inadvertently impair law enforcement and the561intelligence community's ability to identify national security562threats in real time. Mr. Eisenberg shares these views and I am563grateful for that.564    This is just one compelling example of the depth of565knowledge and experience that Mr. Eisenberg will bring to this566important role in President Trump's administration. I am567confident that he will serve our country honorably and always568put America first.569    Mr. Eisenberg, congratulations on your nomination, and I570look forward to voting for it at the first opportunity.571    Chairman Cotton. Thank you, Senator Cornyn.572    If our witnesses could please take your seats at the table.573    Gentlemen, before we move to your statements I need you to574answer five routine questions that the Committee poses to each575nominee who appears before us. They require a simple ``yes'' or576``no.''577    First, do you agree to appear before the Committee here or578in other venues when invited?579    (Chorus of Yes.)580    Second, if confirmed, do you agree to send officials from581your office to appear before the Committee and designated staff582when invited?583    (Chorus of Yes.)584    Third, do you agree to provide documents and any other585materials requested by the Committee in order for us to carry586out our legislative and oversight responsibilities?587    (Chorus of Yes.)588    Fourth, will you ensure that your office and your staff589provide such material to the Committee when requested?590    (Chorus of Yes.)591    Fifth, do you agree to inform and fully brief to the592fullest extent possible all members of this Committee of593intelligence activities and covert actions rather than only the594Chairman and Vice Chairman?595    (Chorus of Yes.)596    Thank you all very much. After the hearing today, it is my597intention to move quickly to convene a Committee business598meeting to vote on the nominations and report them to the599Senate for a prompt vote there as well.600    We will now proceed to opening statements, after which I601will recognize Members by seniority at the gavel for five602minutes each. We will start with Mr. Lukas, followed by Mr.603Kent, and concluding with Mr. Eisenberg.604    Mr. Lukas.605606   STATEMENT OF AARON LUKAS, NOMINEE TO BE PRINCIPAL DEPUTY607               DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE608609    Mr. Lukas. Chairman Cotton, Vice Chairman Warner, and610distinguished Members of the Committee: It is an honor to611appear before you as President Trump's nominee for Principal612Deputy Director of National Intelligence. I want to thank the613President for his confidence in me. I also want to thank the614Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, for her615outstanding leadership of the organization so far.616    Finally, and most of all, I am grateful to my wonderful617wife Carrie who is here today, and to my five children who,618unfortunately, could not attend. Without their steadfast love619and support over the years, I have no doubt I would not be620sitting before you right now.621    I will confess, it is a strange feeling to be in the public622spotlight today. For the past 20-plus years, I have worked as a623CIA operations officer in the shadows, never calling attention624to my real work, staying away from social media, and being625active on the frontlines of intelligence. I've lived my covers,626sometimes even operating under different names.627    I was honored to serve my country in this past capacity, to628support America's political leaders and warfighters alike with629unbiased, apolitical intelligence and I was privileged to work630with many, many dedicated patriots at the CIA and across other631U.S. Government agencies.632    Not long ago, Director Gabbard sat before this Committee633and discussed her determination to rebuild an intelligence634community with a laser like focus on our essential mission,635ensuring the safety, security, and freedom of the American636people. I whole-heartedly share this vision as do countless637other career intelligence officers.638    What I have seen from the inside, unfortunately, is an IC639that is too often aimless, bloated, risk averse, and640disconnected at times from the core mission of intelligence. My641aim, if confirmed, is to support Director Gabbard by giving a642voice to those unknown and unsung officers doing the hard work643of intelligence every day: the operations officers, the644analysts, the covert action specialists, the technical645collectors, and all those people who support them.646    The men and women of the U.S. intelligence community do647dangerous, important work that is critical to our Nation's648security. But that doesn't mean that all is well within the IC.649Over the decades, America's intelligence agencies have morphed650into large bureaucracies in which the majority of people have651little to no direct connection to how intelligence is652collected, analyzed, and presented to policymakers.653    Reporting chains have grown unwieldy at times, paralyzing654even simple decision making. Managers are incentivized to avoid655risk and not rock the boat. Huge sums of taxpayer money are656spent on technology projects that at times are outdated before657they are deployed or worse, lack any connection from the658beginning to the actual need of operators and analysts.659Priorities that have nothing to do with intelligence have taken660center stage, at times distracting us from mission.661    President Trump and Director Gabbard have already taken662important steps to reverse the decline of the IC, most notably663by getting rid of a toxic diversity, equity, and inclusion664political dogma that at best was a distraction and at worst665pitted IC officers against one another. I will never forget the666first Chief of Station seminar that I attended where the senior667most directorate of operations human resources officer blithely668informed the attendees that ``It does not matter how good your669operations are in station. Unless you advance a major DEI670reform, you will not get promoted.''671    Think of that. Chiefs of Station, who also serve, by the672way, as DNI representatives are supposed to be in those673positions because they have proven they are capable field674officers, because they are the best at doing real intelligence675work, working with our partners at stealing vital secrets. And676until the recently, the official message was: ``Your job really677is to advance a political agenda, not to protect the country.''678    As one of those field officers and a former analyst, I can679tell you there are huge numbers of dedicated patriots in the IC680who are thrilled we have an administration that just wants them681to get back to work. It wants them to use their talents and682skills to protect the American people, to keep politicization683out of intelligence, to have high expectations and take684reasoned risks. An administration that understands that risky685ventures mean there will at times be failures, but that686timidity is not an option.687    To those dedicated professionals in the IC, I promise you:688If confirmed as PDDNI, I will always have your backs even when689you fail, as long as you are doing your best for the American690people. And I will be supporting a Director who feels exactly691the same way.692    ODNI has a unique role to play in the IC. It is the693institution where all streams of foreign intelligence and law694enforcement information come together. The DNI is the695President's principal intelligence advisor and the ODNI696presents the President's Daily Brief. Taking direction from the697White House, it sets collection priorities, deconflicts on698budgets, works to fund and deploy cutting-edge technology,699ensures agencies are respecting the privacy and civil liberties700of Americans, and keeps Congress informed so that legislative701oversight is meaningful.702    These are all important tasks. But since its creation, many703have asked whether the ODNI should even exist. My answer to704that question is yes, but like the other IC elements, it must705be focused on its unique mission. Too often, ODNI has grown706without regards to that mission and has engaged in business707that properly should be conducted by other agencies. Director708Gabbard has said she is committed to ensuring ODNI is focused709only on what it can do which will make it a stronger and a more710effective leader of the IC. If confirmed, I will give her my711full support in this endeavor.712    I want to be clear. My aim is to make ODNI better, not to713undermine it. What I bring to this role is the perspective of714an intelligence officer who has worked both on the frontlines715overseas and as a consumer of intelligence at the National716Security Council.717    For every program, every position, every taxpayer dollar718that is spent, I will ask: How does this advance the IC's core719mission?720    How does it serve policymakers; and, if it doesn't, why are721we doing it?722    I believe asking these questions is how we make the IC723stronger and better able to do our duty to protect the American724people.725    Once again, I thank the Members of the Committee for their726consideration, and I look forward to any questions.727    [The prepared statement of Mr. Lukas follows:]728   [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]729730    Chairman Cotton. Thank you.731    Mr. Kent.732733 STATEMENT OF JOE KENT, NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL734                    COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER735736    Mr. Kent. Thank you, Chairman Cotton, and thank you, Vice737Chair Warner. I want to thank the President of the United738States and DNI Gabbard for the trust in my leadership and for739giving me this opportunity to continue my service to our Nation740and what I view as the fight of my lifetime and the fight of my741generation, and that is the fight against terrorism. Before we742get into that, I want to thank Chris Miller for coming here743today and saying all those great and wonderful things about me.744Twenty years ago, Chris was my battalion commander in Iraq. We745were knee deep in that fight, and today, this fight still746continues. And it is in the honor of all of those who gave747their lives in our nation's longest war, in the war on terror,748our generation's war, that I continue this fight for my wife749and everybody buried in section 60 at Arlington National750Cemetery.751    Before I talk about my vision as the leader of the National752Counterterrorism Center, I really want to thank my family: My753wife Heather is here. Heather served in Iraq, served in754Afghanistan. And after we lost my late wife Shannon in a755suicide bomber attack in Manbij, Syria, Heather came into our756lives. I truly think she is a gift from God. I have been757blessed twice. First, by Shannon who gave me my sons Colt and758Josh, and then by Heather, coming in and helping us pick up the759pieces so we could continue to serve our country. So, I760couldn't be more grateful that she is here with us today.761    Of all the titles I have had in my lifetime, as Green762Beret, as a Special Missions Unit Operator, as a CIA763paramilitary operations officer, the best title I have is Dad.764And Colt and Josh bless me with that every single time they765call me dad. They are here today, too, and I couldn't be more766honored. My father Chris Kent is also here. My dad basically767has had my back and been my role model for my entire life. So I768couldn't be more honored to have my dad here. My mom is tuning769in somewhere on C-Span as well. She is taking care of my niece770who just joined the world. Amber Grace is the newest addition771to the Kent family. So I have got a whole slew of Kents out772there watching us on C-Span. So I appreciate all their support773and love as well.774    Joining us from the great State of Washington, we have got775a couple of our local sheriffs that are here as well. We've got776Sheriff Garcia and Sheriff Swank. So I can't thank them enough777for being here to support us.778    I couldn't be more honored to be by President Trump and I779think this is a very critical time for us to continue to fight780against terrorism. I would like to say that, hey, we have781accomplished our mission and terrorism is fading into the rear-782view mirror. I know a lot in our national security783establishment and I know a lot of people in America are sick784and tired of us talking about terrorism and the threat that785terrorists face to our country and pose to our country.786However, the fight continues and, as a matter of fact, I think787the threat posed by terrorists is even worse than it ever has788been in years previous to this.789    For the last 4 years we have had a wide open southern790border thanks to the policies of the Biden administration. That791let in countless terrorists from newly designated foreign792cartels and also from violent gangs that have gone so far as793taking over entire apartment complexes inside the United794States. This is a direct result of the wide open southern795border policy that Joe Biden had. And President Trump is796committed to identifying these cartels and these violent gang797members and making sure that we locate them and we get them out798of our country. We deport them by any means necessary. And I am799honored to support his quest to do that, to secure our country800once more.801    We also have massive terrorist threats coming from overseas802and a lot of this is due to the debacles of the Biden803administration. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was804catastrophic. It was a horrible way to end one of our Nation's805longest conflicts; however, it has given terrorists sanctuary806to ISIS and to several other terrorist groups right now that807are exploiting that ungoverned space and the leadership of the808Taliban.809    We also had the Biden administration's horrible debacle810where they brought tens of thousands of unvetted Afghans into811the United States of America. NCTC has done their job and they812have identified over 1,400 of these Afghans as having ties to813ISIS and other terrorist groups. Yet, Biden let them into the814interior of the United States.815    Same thing with a bunch of ISIS-affiliated Tajiks and816Uzbeks who came into the United States of America as well.817There is around 600 of them that were also identified by NCTC818that are here in America right now because the Biden819administration has allowed them to stay inside of our country.820Locating these Afghans--locating these Tajiks, Uzbeks, and821anyone else who has come into our country who have any ties to822any foreign terrorist organization will be one of my top823priorities so that we can locate them and we can get them out824of our Nation to keep our country safe.825    Another major challenge that we have that I am honored to826support President Trump's prioritization of is actually827securing our border. NCTC plays a vital role in screening and828vetting anyone who seeks to come into our country and maintain829that database and being able to look into the IC's data and830being able to look into local law enforcement data to make sure831that we connect all the dots and we don't let any known or832suspected terrorists into our country. This is something that833the President takes very seriously, and I look forward to834supporting him in securing our country and making sure no more835terrorists come into the United States of America.836    The third mainline of effort that we have in NCTC and I837think as a counterterrorist enterprise in general, is we have838got to be proactive against the terrorist threats that are839emanating from overseas. I already talked about Afghanistan. We840have a major terrorist sanctuary there. Due to the failed841regime-change policies in Syria, we now have an al-Qaeda842affiliate that is being paraded around as the representative of843the Syrian government that is actually being led by a former844member of al-Qaeda who was hand-selected by Ayman al-Zawahiri,845one of the 9/11 attack planners, who has now been installed as846the President.847    This sanctuary in Syria poses a major threat to our848national security that we have to address, and we have to849address this in a very pragmatic way. The past 20-plus years of850endless wars and endless deployments overseas have quite851frankly not addressed the terror threat that we faced after 9/85211 and the terror threat that we face right now.853    We have to find a way to strike a reasonable balance and854have sustainable counterterrorism efforts that mostly focus on855enabling partners, allies, surrogates, and proxies. And856underpinning all of this is accurate intelligence. And that is857what NCTC and the intelligence community can provide.858    Accurate intelligence will prevent us from having more859endless wars. It will tell us exactly where the terrorists are860overseas so we can take them out before they come here.861Accurate intelligence will stop terrorists from coming into our862country and accurate intelligence is going to help us run down863every single terrorist, every single cartel member that is864inside the United States of America and get them the heck out865of here.866    Again, I an honored to be here. I am honored to be867supported by President Trump and DNI Gabbard, and I look868forward to our discussion today.869    [The prepared statement of Mr. Kent follows:]870    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]871872    Chairman Cotton. Thank you.873    Mr. Eisenberg.874875    STATEMENT OF JOHN A. EISENBERG, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT876      ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION877878    Mr. Eisenberg. I would like to begin by thanking you,879Chairman Cotton and Vice Chairman Warner, for holding this880hearing, and I would like to thank Senator Cornyn for his881gracious introduction. I would also like to thank President882Trump for the honor of this nomination and the Attorney General883for her support and her confidence in me.884    I am so fortunate to have the love of my life and my best885friend here, my wife Kathryn. Somehow, she manages to have a886full-time job and take care of the rest of the family. It is no887exaggeration to say I wouldn't be here without her support. Her888support and encouragement throughout most of my life and during889the hardest times have made all the good things in life890possible and have made the rest of it livable.891    My son Paul and my eldest daughter Sarah couldn't miss892school today. I don't remember having that view when I was893their age, but that was theirs. My youngest daughter Evie can't894be here with us because she has something called 22Q disorder,895which is a microdeletion on chromosome 22, and causes896developmental delays among a lot of other things. Evie is an897inspiration to everyone who knows her. She doesn't let her898disability get in the way and she greets just about every day899with delight. Paul and Sarah aren't that bad either. Kathryn,900Paul, Sarah and Evie are the joys of my life, and without them901life itself would be unimaginable to me.902    I learned the importance of family from my mom who is about903five feet tall and is the most powerful woman that anyone has904ever met. No one ever wanted to mess with Rhoda. Because of905her, my sister Nancy, my brother Ethan and I couldn't be906closer. While my mom passed away more than 10 years ago, I am907fortunate to have a stepfather and father who are actually here908today who are very supportive. I also count a small number of909friends as family, and they know who they are.910    I would like to say something about colleagues. There are911too many to name here, and I have had the privilege of working912alongside in all my years of government service and during my913time in private practice. I am truly blessed to have worked914with so many who are the embodiment of dedication, blazing915intelligence, and integrity. Serving with them has been an916honor of a lifetime and I am so grateful to know them.917    National security is the thread that runs through my918professional life. I was in Alexandria on September 11, 2001,919when terrorists attacked our Nation, resulting in the deaths of920some 3,000 people in coordinated attacks on the World Trade921Center and the Pentagon. I think it is hard for people who922weren't adults in 2001. At least I think it is hard for people923who weren't adults in 2001 to understand the effect these924attacks had on so many of us. It is easy to forget that follow-925on attacks were thought to be very likely. Indeed, our success926in thwarting other attacks of that magnitude led many to wonder927if the threat had been overblown.928    But I can't forget that day. I heard explosions caused by a929commercial aircraft colliding with the Pentagon and I saw smoke930rising from that building. My wife couldn't come home from her931office in Washington for hours because the necessary Metro932lines go through the Pentagon, and that was still burning. I933saw F-16s trailing commercial airliners, I suppose escorting934them out of the area. My country had really become a935battlefield.936    In my past government jobs, I focused on national security.937The events of 9/11 instilled in me the need to be part of a938response to terrorism. My recent government service has shown939me the importance of protecting a nation from myriad threats,940and I am deeply committed to the rule of law and the941Constitution. But I also believe that the government has a942solemn obligation to do what it can within those limits to943protect the Nation and its people.944    I was in the Department of Justice when it stood up the945National Security Division, and I was part of a team that946helped propose and implement the necessary changes to bring NSD947into the world. It would be a great honor to lead that Division948and the dedicated public servants who go to work there every949day and who do so because they share the vision of which I950spoke to protect this Nation.951    To everyone in NSD, I look forward to working together,952should I be confirmed, to protect this great nation and its953people from the range of national security threats facing them.954    I look forward to answering your questions.955    [The prepared statement of Mr. Eisenberg follows:]956    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]957958    Chairman Cotton. Thank you.959    Mr. Lukas, Congress created the Office of the Director of960National Intelligence to eliminate stovepipes of intelligence961and to ensure integration across the elements while working962hand in hand with the Under Secretary of Defense for963Intelligence and Security. That's the Director of Defense964Intelligence and the principal adviser to the DNI on defense965intelligence to ensure that national and military intelligence966needs are met. Congress also sought to ensure analytic967objectivity standards were set and they were met.968    Will you commit to working with this Committee to restore969the ODNI to what it was originally intended to be?970    Mr. Lukas. Yes, Chairman, if confirmed I would commit to971that.972    Chairman Cotton. In your experience is ODNI on the path of973becoming just the bureaucracy that it was created to eclipse?974    Mr. Lukas. Thank you, Chairman. As I said in my opening975remarks, I had seen ODNI grow over the years, often without976regard to its original mission. So, yes, I would agree with977that statement. As I said earlier, I believe ODNI has an978important role to play, but we need to ensure it is focused on979that role and not left to business that is properly left to980other IC agencies.981    Chairman Cotton. Thank you. One point in particular is the982relationship between the IC, the intelligence community, and983the Department of Defense. I am not aware of many processes or984procedures, at least effective ones, for ensuring the needed985collaboration between the DNI and Under Secretary of Defense986for Intelligence and Security. What are your thoughts on how we987can improve that relationship?988    Mr. Lukas. Senator, I do agree that is a critical989relationship. The DOD brings a lot to the intelligence990community--a lot of resources, a lot of individuals, a lot of991power.992    My understanding is that currently there is a weekly sync993between the Director's advisers for military affairs and OSD,994INS. If confirmed, I would certainly expect that I would also995have regular communication with that same office, with the996Under Secretary, and I would be willing to work with the997Committee to look at whether we need any sort of formal998processes or procedures to put in place to ensure that999coordination is continuing as it should.1000    Chairman Cotton. Thank you. Let's turn our attention to1001China. This year's Annual Threat Assessment stated ``China1002stands out as the actor most capable of threatening U.S.1003interests globally.''1004    There is of course bipartisan support in Congress for1005ensuring that the Chinese Communists don't achieve their goals1006in replacing the United States as the world's dominant economic1007and therefore military superpower.1008    What is your opinion on whether the intelligence community1009is currently properly postured to address the threat posed by1010Communist China?1011    Mr. Lukas. Thank you for the question, Senator.1012    I have seen over many years as an intelligence officer that1013the IC has assessed that China is a key adversary and has1014placed a high priority on collecting and analyzing information1015to provide to policymakers regarding China's plans and1016intentions. If confirmed, I would certainly look forward to1017working with the IC agencies themselves to ensure they are1018adequately resourced and are placing those resources in the1019areas that they need to be, vis-a-vis China. That is of course,1020if I am confirmed.1021    I lack that bird's eye view, quite frankly, right now about1022which agency is doing, but certainly that would be a priority1023for me if confirmed.1024    Chairman Cotton. Thank you.1025    Mr. Kent, I want to turn to the threat of terrorism. China1026is without question our most serious long-term threat--the only1027nation that has the size and wealth and power to potentially1028replace the United States as the world's dominant power. But as1029you say in your opening statement, the threat of terrorism1030remains serious and ongoing. To borrow from a quote sometimes1031attributed to Trotsky: You may not be interested in terrorism1032any more, but terrorism is still interested in you.1033    Is that correct and something that Americans need to1034understand?1035    Mr. Kent. Thank you, Senator. I think that is 100 percent1036accurate. I mean, look. We have real threats that come from the1037Chinese Communist Party and other traditional state actors.1038However, terrorists want to kill us right now in this moment,1039and tragically, many of them are already here inside the United1040States. And there are countless other adversaries we have that1041are terrorists overseas that are planning to kill us right now.1042So we have to stay vigilant.1043    Chairman Cotton. Thank you.1044    Vice Chairman.1045    Vice Chairman Warner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again,1046gentlemen, thank you for your willingness to serve again.1047    Mr. Kent, you are currently acting chief of staff to1048Director Gabbard, right?1049    Mr. Kent. Yes, Senator.1050    Vice Chairman Warner. Was Director Gabbard consulted before1051General Haugh was fired as NSA Director?1052    Mr. Kent. I was not aware of any conversations that took1053place, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.1054    Vice Chairman Warner. I just feel like if she wasn't, I1055just would be even further concerned that you are taking a 30-1056year career veteran that had, I believe, almost uniform1057support, and I think the firing was uncalled for and I would be1058concerned if the director hadn't been notified.1059    And we talked about this before, but I just want to go1060through it again. You participated in a group chat that was the1061subject of the Atlantic article published by Jeffrey Goldberg1062on March 24, 2025, correct?1063    Mr. Kent. Was I in the chat?1064    Vice Chairman Warner. Yes.1065    Mr. Lukas. I was, Senator.1066    Vice Chairman Warner. You were on the chat?1067    Mr. Kent. Yes, I was.1068    Vice Chairman Warner. Did you use a personal phone or a1069government phone during that chat?1070    Mr. Kent. There is currently ongoing litigation, Senator,1071so I really can't give any more details.1072    Vice Chairman Warner. I am pretty disappointed by that1073answer. What about this: Do you know whether your device has1074been actually taken and scanned for any malware that might have1075been put into it?1076    Mr. Kent. We followed all the security procedures and took1077all security precautions.1078    Vice Chairman Warner. You took all security procedures and1079did everything appropriate?1080    Mr. Kent. (Nods in affirmative).1081    Vice Chairman Warner. Again, I don't question your1082patriotism and commitment, but I find that an astounding1083answer. I mean, there have been reports that there were 201084other group chats that Director Waltz had that included1085subjects like Ukraine, China, Gaza. Were you involved in any of1086those chats?1087    Mr. Kent. I was not.1088    Vice Chairman Warner. So any of the other 20 that have been1089reported, you didn't participate at all?1090    Mr. Kent. As I said, Senator, there is ongoing litigation1091right now, so there is not really much more I can say.1092    Vice Chairman Warner. Has anyone with classification1093authority reviewed the information--and I don't have to read1094through the comments you made in that chat, but others--are you1095stating before this Committee that information relaying the1096timing of an attack from American Forces that if it had been1097discovered could have cost our pilots' lives, and you are still1098making the statement that none of that was classified?1099    Mr. Kent. There was no classified information in the chat.1100And all the circumstances around it are currently under ongoing1101litigation. So there is not much I can say, Senator.1102    Vice Chairman Warner. Again, as I said at the outset, I1103don't doubt your patriotism, but I really doubt your judgment1104on that.1105    I will go to you, Mr. Lukas.1106    You also said and I was really kind of astounded in your1107prequestioning hearing, quote, ``Based on your experience, the1108information presented in the media related to The Atlantic1109article could reasonably have been deemed unclassified.''1110    You have been a CIA agent a long time. Are you familiar1111with other times when a Defense Secretary was willing to share1112impending military operations on unsecured devices before the1113operations took place?1114    Mr. Lukas. Thank you, Senator. I am a career intelligence1115officer, I am not a military officer, so I have not been privy1116to any war plans in any form, classified or unclassified, so1117that is really not a question I can comment on.1118    Vice Chairman Warner. Let's put it this way: If you as a1119CIA officer had released this kind of information or put it on1120an unsecured device, wouldn't you have been reprimanded or1121fired?1122    Mr. Lukas. Senator, really all I can say is both the White1123House and Department of Defense have said that the information1124in that chat had not gone through a classification process. I1125have no reason to doubt that. So otherwise, I----1126    Vice Chairman Warner. Giving out--Sir, again, I respect1127your service. But giving out on an unsecured commercial1128connected device information that relays the specifics of an1129American attack on a foreign adversary, that if had gotten1130out--I would love both of you gentlemen to come down to1131Virginia Beach and meet with the 800-plus Virginians who I met1132with who many of them knew sailors on the Truman and the crowd1133was 90 percent veterans.1134    Gentlemen, your answers would not stand. They would hoot1135you out of the room when that kind of information is so1136carelessly handled. Again, I can't believe any of the three of1137you would on your own have ever done this and I find it really1138disappointing that you are still standing by the flimsy,1139careless behavior and somehow defending it.1140    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1141    Chairman Cotton. Senator Collins.1142    Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1143    Mr. Kent, you have an extraordinary career serving your1144country, 20 years in uniform in the war against terror. You1145also have worked at the CIA. You are now acting chief of staff1146at the DNI. So with all that experience, when you were part of1147the group chat on Signal, did it occur to you during the1148conversation that: Hey, maybe I should say something. Some of1149the information that is being talked about could jeopardize our1150warfighters or be useful to the Houthis, or did you have that1151thought at any point during the discussion?1152    Mr. Kent. I did not, Senator.1153    Senator Collins. So that raises in my mind whether there is1154routine use of the Signal application platform in order to have1155conversations about very sensitive information. Maybe it hasn't1156gone through a classification review, but if you are talking1157about war plans, that's pretty sensitive information. Is Signal1158used commonly to your knowledge for those kinds of discussions?1159    Mr. Kent. Signal was installed on my government work phone1160when I received it, Senator. And Signal has pretty adequate1161two-way encryption, so Signal is routinely used and approved by1162the chain of command.1163    Senator Collins. Does it concern you that one of the people1164on the group chat was in Russia at the time? We know that1165Russia is trying very hard to penetrate our communications1166systems?1167    Mr. Kent. There was no classified information discussed on1168there, Senator, so that was not a concern to me.1169    Senator Collins. Well, I hope this is something, should you1170be confirmed, that you will take a hard look at.1171    I, too, have the Signal application on my phone, but I1172don't use it to discuss highly sensitive information. And I1173think we need perhaps guidelines that are clearer to members of1174the intelligence community and to the Department of Defense to1175make sure that we don't have a repeat of this. I know that at1176least you must be concerned that there was a reporter on the1177phone--does that concern you?1178    Mr. Kent. Most certainly, Senator.1179    Senator Collins. I wanted to turn to a different issue, and1180as I left to vote you were starting to get into this.1181    When I look at the most imminent threats facing our Nation1182right now, to me it is the counterterrorism attack. And ISIS is1183growing. It is operating in Somalia, Afghanistan, ISIS K,1184Pakistan, where over 700 attacks in Syria in 2024 alone. Al-1185Qaeda is reemerging as well. We know about the Houthis' attacks1186on our naval ships on the international shipping.1187    My concern is that we have had a shift away from focusing1188on counterterrorism and instead on great power competition,1189which certainly is important. But if I look at what I am most1190worried about happening tomorrow is a terrorist attack. Could1191you comment on that issue and how you think we balance the1192competing needs?1193    Mr. Kent. Certainly. I share your concerns and I share your1194view. The terrorist threats posed by al-Qaeda, by ISIS, by the1195Iranian threat network, they are countless and they are1196unrelenting. And as you pointed out, they have only grown in1197recent years because of all the different sanctuary countries1198that terrorists have been able to cultivate. So I think we have1199to strike a balance where we have constant vigilance. And I1200think a lot of this ties back into who we let into our country.1201I think right now all the lights are blinking red because we1202had open borders for the last four years and we don't know who1203is in our country.1204    When NCTC did what they were supposed do and they1205identified terrorist threats, they were ignored by the last1206administration. So this is why I am concerned.1207    So focusing heavily on making sure that we locate all the1208terrorists inside of our country, including the cartels and1209criminal terrorist gangs, getting them out of our country,1210securing the border. That is essential. And making sure we keep1211a finger on the pulse overseas, and we do that by enabling our1212intelligence community.1213    Senator Collins. Thank you.1214    Chairman Cotton. Gentlemen, as I alluded at the outset,1215there is other business on the Senate floor to which I have to1216attend. I am going to step away and I am going to put the1217Committee in the capable hands of Senator Budd who graciously1218agreed to stay for the duration of my absence. I cannot say how1219long it will be. I guess it depends in part on how persuasive1220my Democratic colleagues find me over in the Senate. So it may1221be a long time. But in the meantime, I will recognize Senator1222Kelly for his five minutes and turn the gavel over to Senator1223Budd.1224    Thank you again.1225    (Senator Budd assumed the Chair.)1226    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1227    Mr. Kent, on May 2, 2011, the U.S. conducted Operation1228Neptune Spear in which Seal Team 6 shot and killed Osama bin1229Laden. That occurred in Abottabad, Pakistan.1230    Mr. Kent, you are a Special Operator; is that correct?1231    Mr. Kent. That's correct, sir.1232    Senator Kelly. Would it have been appropriate for the Obama1233administration to share on an unsecured app 2 hours prior to1234that mission that Navy Special Operators were in-bound to1235Pakistan to conduct that specific operation?1236    Mr. Kent. On an unsecured app, absolutely not.1237    Senator Kelly. Absolutely not. OK. I just wanted to clarify1238based on what the Chairman just asked you.1239    Mr. Kent. Signal is a government-approved, two-way1240encryption app that wasn't available in 2011.1241    Senator Kelly. That is an unsecured platform. It's an1242application available to the general public. And if you have1243any experience with the intelligence community, which I think1244you do, Mr. Kent, is that correct?1245    Mr. Kent. That's correct.1246    Senator Kelly. You would understand that it is not a secure1247platform.1248    I want to go on to something else. This concerns January12496th. Do you believe that the violence on January 6th was1250intentionally organized or directed?1251    Mr. Kent. That is still under investigation. We are looking1252into whether elements of the government could have enhanced the1253criminal acuity of some of the rioters that day.1254    Senator Kelly. You said on Twitter that the FBI and the1255intelligence community were involved in planning and directing1256the riot; is that correct?1257    Mr. Kent. Sounds like something I said, yeah.1258    Senator Kelly. What evidence do you have for that claim?1259    Mr. Kent. So we have already identified that there were1260multiple confidential human informants ran by the FBI and other1261law enforcement agencies that were present in the crowd that1262day directing, removing barriers, those types of things. This1263has been investigated widely. We are continuing to look into1264it.1265    The intelligence--I would say the FBI and other elements of1266the law enforcement apparatus attempted to suppress the fact1267that there was undercover confidential HUMINT informants that1268were part of these different groups.1269    We also had intelligence leading up to January 6th that1270there was going to be violence that day. So that speaks to some1271degree of intelligence infiltration into some of these1272organizations.1273    Senator Kelly. Who within the FBI?1274    Mr. Kent. We are looking into that right now.1275    Senator Kelly. Which departments of the FBI?1276    Mr. Kent. Probably the Washington Field Office.1277    Senator Kelly. So you believe the Washington Field Office1278was involved in the planning of the violence in the building1279next door on January 6th?1280    Mr. Kent. It is being looked into. I mean, we had----1281    Senator Kelly. And who is looking into it?1282    Mr. Kent. We are in the intelligence community. We are1283looking into it right now.1284    Senator Kelly. Do you believe that the IC conducts actions1285of this nature against Americans?1286    Mr. Kent. Does the IC--both the FBI and other law1287enforcement agencies entrapping individuals?1288    If you look at who was running the Washington Field Office1289during January 6th, it was Steven D'Antuono. He was also1290running the field office in Michigan where many of the1291defendants were let go after they were accused of attempting to1292kidnap the Governor because of the vast majority of them were1293undercover FBI confidential informants. So unfortunately this1294behavior does happen by members of law enforcement and the1295intelligence community, and it is incumbent upon us to make1296sure we are transparent with the American people.1297    Senator Kelly. Mr. Kent, would you be willing to share this1298evidence of this investigation with this Committee?1299    Mr. Kent. I look forward to it, Senator.1300    Senator Kelly. Are you aware that procedures for1301considering candidates for U.S. security clearances have long1302considered attempts to overthrow the government as a serious1303red flag?1304    Mr. Kent. Yes.1305    Senator Kelly. Would you have concerns about giving a1306security clearance to someone who participated in violent acts1307at the Capitol on January 6th in an attempt to overturn an1308election?1309    Mr. Kent. I have consistently condemned anyone who used any1310act of violence against law enforcement or anyone else.1311    Senator Kelly. So in your current role as chief of staff to1312the DNI, you would not be in favor of approving any kind of1313clearance for somebody who participated in any violence against1314the United States?1315    Mr. Kent. No, if you commit an act of violence against a1316police officer or anybody else, you've got nowhere to go. You1317get your day in court and that is it.1318    Senator Kelly. Traditionally, the IC's counterterrorism1319efforts have focused on foreign terrorist organizations, FTO1320designated groups. The cartels have now been similarly1321designated.1322    Would you seek to expand that to other groups you have1323proposed treating like terrorists?1324    Mr. Kent. We have our work cut out for us right now with1325imminent threats coming from ISIS, al-Qaeda, the Iranian threat1326network. The cartels and violent gangs were just designated.1327So, I think if another group rises to the threshold of1328presenting a threat we present that to the President and give1329him the option of designating them.1330    Senator Kelly. Do you think there are other groups that1331have risen to that level?1332    Mr. Kent. As of right now, no, I do not.1333    Senator Kelly. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1334    Senator Budd. Senator Cornyn, you are recognized.1335    Senator Cornyn. Mr. Lukas, as you and I discussed in my1336office, one of the problems we have had, the U.S. Government1337has had generally is a lack of trust in our government and1338government institutions because of the misconduct of1339individuals who have created a lack of confidence in our1340intelligence community, including the CIA and other agencies.1341But my hope is that now that the new administration is in place1342that that will no longer be the concern that it was previously.1343    Specifically, you and I talked about FISA 702, the Foreign1344Intelligence Surveillance Act, 702. In your lengthy experience1345as an intelligence officer, have you found that authority to be1346useful?1347    Mr. Lukas. Thank you for the question, Senator, and I1348appreciated our chance to chat in your office. As a career CIA1349officer, I used information collected under FISA section 7021350information on a very regular basis. As I expressed to you in1351our previous chat, I believe that this authority is critical to1352U.S. national security. I believe that while valid concerns1353have been raised at various points about how the process is1354used, that the reforms that were undertaken last year largely1355addressed those concerns, and that this is an essential tool1356that should be reauthorized.1357    Senator Cornyn. And you don't see a need for any additional1358reforms at this time?1359    Mr. Lukas. Senator, I would just commit that if confirmed1360that I would be happy to work with the oversight committees to1361look at whether additional reforms are needed; but personally,1362I am confident that sufficient safeguards currently are in1363place to ensure the privacy and the civil liberties of1364Americans are respected.1365    Senator Cornyn. Thank you.1366    Mr. Kent, let me ask you, Senator Kelly talked about1367foreign terrorist organizations. As you know, the cartels in1368Mexico have now been designated as such. And obviously the1369scourge of fentanyl is the leading cause of death of young1370people between the age of 18 and 45 in this country.1371    Unfortunately, Mexico has a serious problem with the1372cartels and the fact that corruption makes it exceedingly1373difficult for us or for the Mexican government itself to deal1374with this threat. How would you prioritize the threat of drug1375trafficking organizations like the drug cartels in Mexico?1376    How would you approach that and are there things that are1377not being done now that you think should be done?1378    Mr. Kent. Thank you, Senator. I agree with President Trump1379that we have to take on these cartels like we take on1380terrorists. The cartels have killed hundreds of thousands of1381Americans over the years with fentanyl, so I am glad we are1382finally taking this seriously.1383    So No. 1, I think supporting what is taking place right now1384on the southern border and making sure we have strong border1385security so we can prevent the fentanyl from coming into the1386country. That is essential. I think we also need to work hand-1387in-hand with the Mexican government. I think most of us in the1388intelligence community have been pleasantly surprised to see1389how cooperative the Mexican government has been. It seems they1390want to take out these cartels as well. So working with the1391Mexican government, enabling them to take out these cartels,1392these cartel leaders.1393    But then I do think we need to trace the precursor trail1394back to where it originates. Much of the precursors, the1395ingredients, for fentanyl are coming from China. Some of it is1396coming from India. We are going to need hard diplomacy. We are1397going to need to use economic leverage to make sure that we cut1398off the fentanyl precursors from actually entering Mexico as1399well.1400    Senator Cornyn. Mr. Eisenberg, do you agree with me that1401the People's Republic of China under the control of President1402Xi and the Chinese Communist Party endeavor to undermine the1403United States at nearly all costs in order to achieve their1404ambitions of dominance?1405    Mr. Eisenberg. Senator, yeah, I certainly agree that China1406is our main and most existential long-term competitor.1407    Senator Cornyn. With that in mind, should American entities1408be investing in sensitive technologies in China only for them1409to develop, deploy, and weaponize them against us in1410furtherance of their goals?1411    Mr. Eisenberg. That is a difficult question that actually I1412just never looked into.1413    Senator Cornyn. I know it is a difficult question, that is1414why I asked you.1415    Mr. Eisenberg. Can I phone a friend? [Laughter.]1416    Senator Cornyn. Why don't you lean forward a little bit so1417that I can hear you.1418    Mr. Eisenberg. Yes, that is something I would look into if1419I were confirmed. I can see issues on both sides of it. Why1420obviously there is a good reason to not do that if you are an1421American company, for example; but I can also understand why1422engagement is also a reasonable strategy. But if I were an1423American company, I would be very, very hesitant to get1424involved with that.1425    Senator Cornyn. Unfortunately, the attraction of the huge1426Chinese market and the money that would be generated from that1427seems to drive decisions about investments in China. But we1428have, as you may know, the FIGHT China Act, the Foreign1429Investment Guardrails to Help Thwart China Act, is one that1430would provide some outbound investment transparency,1431particularly with the extensive technologies that we are1432working on with the administration. Right now we are working1433with the Treasury Department and others to try to provide1434technical assistance so we can get this right.1435    But I look forward to working with you and the rest of the1436intelligence community to get this done.1437    I think it is absolutely critical. Inadvertently American1438companies are providing the financial resources necessary not1439only to modernize the Chinese economy, but to help them1440modernize their weapons and their military in a way that would1441allow them then to achieve their ambition, for example, of1442taking Taiwan by military force.1443    It makes no sense to me that we would inadvertently1444encourage or allow that and be blind to the consequences. So1445thank you for your answer. And thank you, each of you, for1446being here and your willingness to serve.1447    Senator Budd. Senator King, you are recognized.1448    Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1449    Mr. Kent, thank you for your testimony. I walked in from1450voting when you were talking about the threat of terrorism and1451I am glad you identified that because I think it is a serious1452threat and I think we have sort of taken our eye off that ball.1453So I compliment you on that.1454    I did want to ask you, though, that you mentioned that1455withdrawal from Afghanistan. Do you know when that decision was1456made and who made it?1457    Mr. Kent. Withdrawal from Afghanistan?1458    Senator King. Yes.1459    Mr. Kent. It appears it was not very well coordinated and1460it probably wasn't made all at the same time but it was made1461around August of 2021.1462    Senator King. Actually it was made in February of 2020 by1463President Trump when he signed the Doha Agreement, which1464basically said we will leave Afghanistan by May of 2021 as long1465as the Taliban doesn't shoot at us. That discussion did not1466include the Afghan government. So the decision to leave1467Afghanistan was actually made by the Trump administration a1468year and a half before the actual withdrawal. You are aware of1469that, I imagine?1470    Mr. Kent. Actually, it happened in multiple phases.1471President Trump attempted to get us out ahead of that but then1472we had members of the intelligence community unfortunately and1473we had members of the media who spread an extension of the1474Russia hoax who said that Putin was putting bounties on the1475heads of American soldiers and that stopped Congress from1476allocating money----1477    Senator King. The Russia hoax?1478    Mr. Kent. Yeah, the Russia hoax.1479    Senator King. The Russia hoax.1480    Are you aware that on August 2, 2016, President then-1481candidate Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort had dinner in1482New York with an agent of Russian intelligence, Konstantin1483Kilimnik, and shared the internal polling data of the Trump1484campaign? Do you still consider that a ``hoax''?1485    Mr. Kent. Senator, the Russia hoax has been widely1486debunked. What I was talking about in Afghanistan is that we1487had an agreement with the Taliban----1488    Senator King. Not by you----1489    Mr. Kent. We fought the Taliban from the negotiating1490table----1491    Senator King. Please respond to my question. Are you aware1492of a dinner between a Russian agent and the chairman of the----1493    Mr. Kent. Myself and the American people are aware of the1494origin of the Steele dossier and probably chapter and verse of1495the Russia hoax. It has been widely debunked.1496    Senator King. You have done a pretty good job of not1497talking about the dinner. Have you ever been involved in1498politics? Do you know how significant internal polling data is?1499It tells you where your strengths are, where your weaknesses1500are, where the battleground States--where the issues are. I1501think that information being handed over to an agent of Russian1502intelligence--and by the way this was found unanimously by this1503Committee in our report on the Russian involvement in the 20161504election.1505    So let's move on. You mentioned several times there was no1506classified information in that telephone call, in that Signal1507chat.1508    So you don't consider the timing of an attack, the weapons1509being used, and when those weapons are going to be deployed as1510sensitive and otherwise classified?1511    I realize it wasn't formally classified, but if you had1512done that as a junior staffer at the National Security Council,1513wouldn't you have been fired--to hand out that kind of1514information on an unsecure public platform?1515    Mr. Kent. There was no classified information in that1516Signal chat.1517    Senator King. So--so, telling an adversary when the attack1518is going to happen, that is not classified?1519    I mean, you are saying it is not classified. You are just1520giving it a bit of semantics; but any person in this room would1521tell us that attack plans involving timing and weapons would be1522of immense value. If it had been the Houthis instead of Jeff1523Goldberg, we would have lost pilots in that strike, would we1524not?1525    Mr. Kent. There was no classified information and it is1526currently under litigation, Senator. So I can't say much more1527about the Signal chat.1528    Senator King. And you can't tell us what telephone you were1529using? What possible litigation excuse is there for not telling1530us what phone you were using?1531    Mr. Kent. The details of the Signal chat are currently1532under litigation. There is not much more I can say.1533    Senator King. What is the litigation?1534    Mr. Kent. There is litigation against multiple members that1535were in the chat group right now.1536    Senator King. You say it is not classified. If it walks1537like a duck and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is1538classified.1539    Mr. Eisenberg, the Annual Threat Assessment tells us that1540our adversaries, Russia, China, Iran, are stepping up covert1541influence, and yet in the administration in the Department of--1542I guess I would call it the department formally known as1543Justice--the administration disbanded the Foreign Influence1544Task Force and it has also stopped U.S. enforcement of the1545Foreign Agents Registration Act.1546    How is that possibly going to make this country safer in1547light of the intelligence community's assessment a month ago1548that foreign influence was a rising threat to this country? I1549call that unilateral disarmament.1550    Mr. Eisenberg. Senator, I believe the memo you are1551referring to----1552    Senator King. Could you get closer to your microphone,1553please?1554    Mr. Eisenberg. Sure. Can you hear me?1555    Senator King. Yes, please.1556    Mr. Eisenberg. The memo you referred to doesn't end all1557FARA enforcement. It limits FARA criminal enforcement to a1558specific set of works like traditional espionage with foreign1559powers. It really doesn't end all FARA enforcement. And the1560fact----1561    Senator King. It narrows FARA enforcement, does it not?1562    Mr. Eisenberg. Yes, it narrows it. And the fact that an1563entity no longer exists doesn't mean that people that have the1564skills that were previously in the department are no longer1565there.1566    Senator King. Do you know whether or not those people are1567there or have they been fired?1568    Mr. Eisenberg. I do not. I am not in ISD now and I do not1569know.1570    Senator King. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.1571    Senator Budd. Thank you. I recognize myself. Thanks to each1572of you for your service and for your willingness to continue to1573serve.1574    Mr. Eisenberg, you mentioned about the threat from China,1575but if you would elaborate a bit on that, and also talk about1576what changes or priority shifts are necessary to posture the1577U.S. to counter the threat posed by the CCP?1578    Mr. Eisenberg. I think, first of all, I should say that it1579has been about four years since I reviewed intelligence, but it1580is clear that China is our main strategic competitor in the1581world and wishes us a long and happy retirement in which we buy1582their goods and they don't sell ours there. And I think that is1583a situation in which we should use all instruments of national1584power in order to help the United States get better footing in1585that war--in that battle. What exactly that looks like is1586something I can't say at the moment. It would be something I1587would look into if I am confirmed.1588    Senator Budd. Thank you. Mr. Lukas, same question,1589particularly the part about what priority shifts are necessary1590to posture us to better counter the threat posed by the CCP.1591    Mr. Lukas. Thank you, Senator. I do recognize and the1592intelligence community recognizes that China is America's1593strategic adversary. I can assure you that the IC is currently1594postured in a way that prioritizes collection on China across1595many fronts in terms of what additional posturing we might need1596to do in that area.1597    Unfortunately, I am not in a position to comment on that1598right now. But if confirmed I would be happy to work with the1599committee and meet one-on-one to come up with a plan for moving1600forward in that area.1601    Senator Budd. Thank you.1602    Mr. Kent, I enjoyed time with you several weeks ago.1603    As an experienced professional in the counterterrorism1604fight, what do you see are the benefits of applying the CT1605mindset that you used over the years to a counternarcotics1606problem that we see coming from the southern border--or maybe1607even the northern border, just the CT to the counternarcotics1608challenge.1609    Mr. Kent. Thank you, Senator. I also enjoyed our1610conversation in your office.1611    I think we learned a lot of lessons over the 20-plus years1612about how we defeat decentralized networks, the best way to1613attack those nodes. And in particular the best way to integrate1614intelligence, intelligence fusion, and making sure that1615intelligence is getting in the hands of those who are on the1616frontlines, whether that it is guys overseas kicking in doors1617or whether it is in the hands of our patrolmen and sheriffs1618deputies that are out there patrolling in our streets.1619    Senator Budd. Thank you for that.1620    Mr. Lukas, back to you. I enjoyed your opening comments and1621also your history. So you have been there. You have done that.1622But let me get your thoughts as a potential PDDNI, if1623confirmed.1624    You are going to be responsible for the IC's budget--at1625least for crafting it. So what is your vision for making it1626more efficient while still being assured that we have the most1627effective intelligence capability?1628    Mr. Lukas. Thank you, Senator. If I am confirmed as PDDNI,1629of course, my primary role would be to support Director Gabbard1630in her overseeing of the U.S. intelligence community budget.1631    I think the key role for ODNI, the important thing to1632remember is deconfliction. That is what ODNI needs to do. We1633need to make sure from that position that the various1634agencies--the 18 agencies of the intelligence community--are1635not wasting money, spending on things that are duplicative. And1636that is the unique value that ODNI brings to that. So if1637confirmed, I pledge to you I will work with both Director1638Gabbard and with the IC's Chief Financial Officer to ensure1639that ODNI is carrying out that duty in a diligent way.1640    Senator Budd. So, I think in life having a to-do list is1641second to having a stop doing list. Do you have in this setting1642anything that you could share with us that would be on the stop1643doing list?1644    Mr. Lukas. Senator, I have over the years seen a lot of1645things that I think the IC should probably stop doing.1646Unfortunately, in this setting it is very difficult to speak1647about those because some of those are vulnerabilities and1648things that we would not like to discuss in an open hearing. I1649would be happy to come back to meet with you----1650    Senator Budd. We will talk later.1651    Mr. Lukas [continuing]. Or talk later in a classified1652setting.1653    Senator Budd. Understand.1654    Mr. Kent and also Mr. Lukas, if there is time.1655    Mr. Kent, you served at the CIA. So how important is it1656that the IC not be politicized and that policymakers and1657operations officers are receiving unbiased objective1658intelligence?1659    Mr. Kent. Nothing could be more important, Senator. We have1660to take the politicization out of the intelligence community.1661We have to make sure that the truth gets up to those who are1662making policy and to those that are on the frontlines in harm's1663way. So, if confirmed, you will have my commitment that NCTC1664will be nonpolitical and focused solely on going after our1665Nation's enemies.1666    Senator Budd. Any thoughts, Mr. Lukas?1667    Mr. Lukas. Senator, I absolutely share Mr. Kent's thoughts1668on that issue. The intelligence community has nothing if it1669doesn't have the trust of the policymakers that it seeks to1670serve. It is absolutely important and critical, in fact, for us1671to provide apolitical, unbiased intelligence that policymakers1672can rely on.1673    Senator Budd. Thank you all.1674    Senator Wyden.1675    Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1676    In my view, Mr. Kent's extremist views which are well known1677in the Pacific Northwest thoroughly disqualify him from any1678leadership position, certainly one that addresses who is and1679isn't a terrorist.1680    So I am going to begin with your ominous record, Mr.1681Eisenberg. While working in the Bush administration's1682Department of Justice, you contributed to memos that authorized1683illegal surveillance, yet so far you have refused to provide1684any details about this work. Even worse is that in some cases1685you have refused to acknowledge that the reforms passed by1686Congress to address these abuses are actually binding.1687    So, in 2008 Congress passed legislation reconfirming that1688the government needs a warrant to conduct surveillance in the1689United States. That was in direct response to the memo you1690helped write that said the President has inherent authority to1691conduct warrantless surveillance.1692    I sent you a question asking whether the 2008 law requiring1693a warrant is binding. You said yes, but only to the extent that1694law is constitutional.1695    So I would like to give you another chance. Is that law1696binding, or do you believe there could be some constitutional1697argument that would allow the President to get around the law?1698    Mr. Eisenberg. As an initial matter, Senator you are asking1699me things I worked on 20 years ago that I don't have access to,1700so it is pretty hard for me to remember all of the details.1701    Senator Wyden. It is not a complicated question, sir. It is1702about whether or not you are for warrantless surveillance, yes1703or no. Just tell me warrantless surveillance as a policy1704matter, because this is what it is about.1705    Mr. Eisenberg. You are asking me if as a policy matter we1706should have warrantless surveillance?1707    Senator Wyden. Yes. Certainly your answer when we got the1708response said: ``Yes, the 2008 law requires a warrant,'' and1709then you qualified it, ``only to the extent that the law is1710constitutional.''1711    So what is your position on warrantless surveillance?1712    Mr. Eisenberg. Those are two totally separate questions.1713Are you asking me as a policy matter what I think about1714warrantless surveillance or are you asking me as a legal1715matter?1716    Senator Wyden. Is the law binding or do you believe that1717there could be some constitutional argument that would allow1718the President to get around the law?1719    Mr. Eisenberg. Senator, so, without being able to talk to a1720bunch of other lawyers and think about all of the possible1721circumstances, I am just unwilling to say that a law could1722never be unconstitutional as applied. There is always a1723possibility for some application to be unconstitutional, and I1724think the careful lawyer would always note that.1725    Senator Wyden. That is not what the law says. In 2015,1726Congress passed legislation prohibiting bulk collection of1727phone and email records. This was in direct response to the1728revelation that the government had collected the records of1729millions of innocent Americans.1730    So here I ask you whether bulk collection is as Congress1731clearly intended, currently illegal. You responded that it1732depends on the facts and the law, and that it is a1733hypothetical.1734    So, again, I would like to give you another chance: Is bulk1735collection of phone and email records currently illegal?1736    Mr. Eisenberg. I can't say without thinking more about it.1737These are complicated questions of constitutional law and1738statutory interpretation. The OLC opinion on surveillance that1739we discussed earlier is like 80--70 pages or something. They1740are long and detailed arguments. It is not something I can give1741just an off-the-cuff answer with three minutes of looking.1742Those are difficult questions.1743    Senator Wyden. You have been working in these areas for1744years and years, Mr. Eisenberg.1745    The reality is these are straightforward propositions1746embedded in black letter text, and you won't give an answer.1747    I am going to hold the record open so that you can continue1748to ruminate on this, which you apparently feel is necessary to1749answer what I think is a straightforward question.1750    I will wrap up with one other and we will see what your1751response is on this:1752    In October 2022, the Department of Justice issued a policy1753restricting collection of information on journalists. Director1754Gabbard said she supported continuing that policy. She said it1755was essential to protecting press freedoms and maintaining a1756critical balance between national security and upholding the1757First Amendment.1758    Mr. Lukas who is sitting at the table with you agrees with1759Director Gabbard. So, once again, we are talking about a pretty1760straightforward policy position, and I would like to know what1761your views are, Mr. Eisenberg.1762    Mr. Eisenberg. Senator, I am sorry. I can't answer what I1763think of a policy that I have never had an opportunity even to1764review.1765    Senator Wyden. So Director Gabbard says she supports the1766policy, but that is immaterial to you?1767    Mr. Eisenberg. No, that is not immaterial. That is1768something I would certainly lean into. But you are asking for1769my opinion and I am just saying I can't do that without having1770reviewed the actual policy you are asking about. I can't tell1771you what I think of a policy I have never seen.1772    Senator Wyden. You haven't ever heard about this--this is1773an issue of first impression for you. You never heard about it1774until this afternoon?1775    Mr. Eisenberg. The devil is in the details, Senator. So I1776do not know the details of the policy.1777    Senator Wyden. This is black letter text.1778    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1779    Senator Budd. Thank you. Senator Young.1780    Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.1781    Mr. Eisenberg, the Trump administration has rightly put1782focus on disrupting and deterring China's malign influence1783within the United States.1784    From a legal perspective, and with the tools and1785authorities of the Department of Justice in mind, what do you1786see as the most urgent actions--the most urgent actions that we1787should be pursuing to stop this malign influence, disrupt IT1788theft, and economic and tech espionage?1789    Mr. Eisenberg. Thanks for the question, Senator.1790    For a more complete answer I would certainly want to be1791able to discuss it with the professionals inside the NSD space.1792    Senator Young. Okay.1793    Mr. Eisenberg. But it seems to me that making sure that we1794have all the intelligence collection that we can in order to1795find our vulnerabilities and adequate cyber security would be1796very good starts.1797    Senator Young. So, an inventory of the cyber capabilities1798and how would you go about that?1799    Mr. Eisenberg. I would talk to the people who have those1800abilities and who are in charge of those around not just in the1801Department of Justice but around the intelligence community to1802see the status.1803    Senator Young. People like----1804    Mr. Eisenberg. NSA, various other intelligence1805organizations that do these things.1806    Senator Young. If confirmed, what laws and regulations do1807you anticipate relying on in executing your role and NSD's role1808in this priority of cyber space?1809    Mr. Eisenberg. Well, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act1810would be one, to be able to collect the necessary intelligence1811to find our vulnerabilities. Essentially any tool to collect1812information that we have I think would be very important in1813order to ascertain, you know, to learn as much as we can about1814our various vulnerabilities.1815    Senator Young. And have you reviewed and are you deeply1816familiar with the laws and regulations that would govern your1817position, your conduct, and your responsibilities?1818    Mr. Eisenberg. I am quite familiar with some of them, but--1819the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, but there are quite1820a number that the National Security Division administers, so I1821am more familiar with some than I am with others but1822fortunately we have a lot of experts around the Department on1823the various other authorities.1824    Senator Young. Thank you.1825    Mr. Lukas, I think we share a view that we need more people1826from all kinds of backgrounds and experiences as we reform and1827fix the IC's analytical enterprise, bringing different1828perspectives and ideas to the fore. If confirmed, can you speak1829to what your priorities would be in attracting, recruiting, and1830retaining such a workforce?1831    Mr. Lukas. Yes, thank you, Senator and I appreciated our1832conversation in your office where we talked about this topic.1833    My view is that particularly the analytical cadre of the1834U.S. intelligence community needs a wide diversity of1835background skills and viewpoints. That is quite different than1836having a political dogma called Diversity, Equity, and1837Inclusion.1838    Part of that would be reaching out in terms of our1839recruitment efforts, looking across the country to universities1840where the IC has not traditionally been active and looking to1841just bringing in a much broader community of new analysts who1842would be able to work on the questions facing our nation.1843    Senator Young. Thank you. I find that any organization runs1844best if it is open to free exchange and an honest, even a1845brutal confrontation with the truth and have heated arguments1846behind closed doors before important decisions are made and all1847the rest. And it seems like you embrace that ethic and culture.1848Is that an accurate characterization?1849    Mr. Lukas. Yes, Senator, that is an accurate1850characterization.1851    Senator Young. What tangible directions would you recommend1852to of the Director in furtherance of good decisionmaking as it1853relates to receiving different ideas and perspectives?1854    Mr. Lukas. Advising the, Director, I think it would be1855critical for her to be in regular contact with the heads of the1856IC agencies to be understanding how they are conducting their1857recruitment, what sort of cultures they are trying to build1858based on objectivity and non-politicization of intelligence.1859She really needs to dig in and understand what problems the1860community is facing and I believe we have a Director who is1861already doing that.1862    Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.1863    Chairman Cotton. Thank you, Senator Young.1864    Senator Collins has a follow-up question.1865    Senator Collins. Thank you.1866    Mr. Kent, you had an exchange earlier about our country's1867withdrawal from Afghanistan. In fact, that withdrawal which was1868poorly executed and resulted in the deaths of 13 servicemembers1869occurred during the Biden administration, not the first Trump1870administration; is that correct?1871    Mr. Kent. That's correct, Senator.1872    Senator Collins. Thank you.1873    Chairman Cotton. I bet he is very happy you gave him a1874chance to correct the record on that one.1875    Senator Warner, I understand you have one follow-up?1876    Vice Chairman Warner. Again, I appreciate everybody's1877service. I have been pretty disappointed by some of your1878answers, and I just--Mr. Kent, again, I appreciate your service1879and you got two great boys there. And you have your absolute1880right to have the views of, you know, all these bad things1881emanated from President Biden and frankly on a number of those1882things, I agree.1883    But I just say I don't expect a response or comment, but I1884just cannot believe that if Joe Biden's administration had as1885carelessly handled classified information that you wouldn't1886have been one of the first calling for accountability and1887responsibility. And I am disappointed that that's not the case1888here.1889    And again, I will just go back to the comment I made, at1890the end of the day I imagine all three of you gentlemen will be1891confirmed. But when you take that oath, it is an oath to a1892Constitution and not a single individual. And I just hope and1893pray that when you are in these positions you will be willing1894to speak truth to power.1895    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1896    Chairman Cotton. Thank you.1897    Gentlemen, as I mentioned earlier, it is my intention to1898hold a committee vote on your nominations as soon as possible.1899Therefore, for planning purposes, any Member who wishes to1900submit questions for the record after today's hearing please do1901so by close of business tomorrow. I am confident that we can1902expect prompt answers from our nominees to those questions for1903the record.1904    I do expect, given that many of our Members were absent due1905to other business this afternoon, you may have a few more of1906those written questions than normal. So we would appreciate1907your prompt attention.1908    Mr. Kent and Mr. Lukas, I expect to move to your1909nominations when we return from our April work period in our1910States.1911    Mr. Eisenberg, you still need to appear before the1912Judiciary Committee, and we will move promptly forward once1913that appearance has occurred.1914    So, thank you all. The hearing is adjourned.1915    (Whereupon, the proceedings were adjourned at 4:28 p.m. )1916    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]19171918                         [all]