Graham slams Russia, defends intelligence community
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) called for stronger measures against Russia for interference in the U.S. elections, putting him in direct opposition to the incoming Trump administration.
“It is time not to throw pebbles but to throw rocks,” he said, adding that Russian President Vladimir Putin “is up to no good and he better be stopped.”
Trump has cast dispersion on the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia tried to influence the outcome of the election by hacking into the email servers belonging to the Democratic National Committee and top Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta’s and leaking them.
Graham, a former presidential candidate and leading defense hawk, also defended the intelligence community’s assessments.
“They’re the best among us and they’re trying to protect us,” he said.
Kaine: Investigating Russian hacking isn’t about changing election results
Updated 12:22
Tim Kaine (D-Vir.), the former Democratic vice presidential candidate, argued for the non-partisan importance of the election hacking investigation well beyond the election results.
Kaine opened his remarks comparing election hacking to Watergate.
“It was not an investigation driven because something affected the election. The 1972 election was the most one-sided in modern history,” he said. “But it was a high moment for Congress because Congress in a bipartisan way stood for the principle that you couldn’t undertake efforts to influence an American presidential election and have there be no consequence.”
Kaine has nearly unparalleled authority to ask to separate the debate over Russian hacking from the debate on how it affected his opportunity to become VP. If election hacking did affect the outcome of the election, he lost the second most.
Clapper: ‘People with glass houses’ shouldn’t counterattack over cyber espionage
Updated 11:23
During questioning on the U.S. response to the OPM hack, Clapper pulled out an old saw to explain why retaliation is not always in order.
“Nobody seems intimidated by us,” said Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), later adding “We’re showing it will not be costly to hack the files of 22 million intelligence officers.”
Clapper responded, “As I say, people in glass houses need to think about throwing rocks. This was an act of espionage. And we and other nations conduct similar acts of espionage.”
McCaskill: US adversaries benefit from Trump’s ‘trashing’ US intelligence community
Updated 11:01 a.m.
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) said the “biggest benefactors” of President-elect Donald Trump “trashing” the intelligence community are U.S. adversaries.
“[Who is] the benefactor of someone who is about to become commander in chief trashing the intelligence community?” she asked at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with top intelligence leaders.
“I assume the biggest benefactors [are] Iran, North Korea, Russia and [the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria],” she said.
Trump has cast doubt on the conclusion of the intelligence community that Russia interfered in the presidential elections on behalf of the president-elect by hacking the emails of Democratic National Committee and top Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta and leaking it to Wikileaks.
Trump has bolstered his claim by saying the intelligence community got intelligence in the lead-up to the Iraq War wrong.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told McCaskill there is a difference between “healthy skepticism” and disparagement.
“I think there is a difference between skepticism and disparagement,” he said.
However, he added, “The intelligence community is not perfect. We are an organization of human beings,” We are prone sometimes to make errors…I don’t think the intelligence community gets the credit it’s due for what it does day in and day out to keep this nation secure.”
Obama hacking report will address Russia’s motivations
Updated: 10:51 a.m.
The Obama administration’s report detailing Russian interference in the U.S. election — due in unclassified form early next week — will address the question of Russia’s intentions.
Clapper told lawmakers that the report “will ascribe a motivation.”
“There’s actually more than one motive,” Clapper said. “That will be described in the report.”
He declined to provide further detail on Thursday.
Officials up until now have described the attacks on the DNC and Podesta as an attempt to “influence” the U.S. election, but have stopped short of describing it as an explicit attempt to help elect Donald Trump.
The distinction has been one of the flash-points in the debate over Russian hacking. Trump has treated any suggestion of Russian interference as an attack on the legitimacy of his victory.
The classified version of the report was reportedly delivered to President Obama today. Clapper said Thursday that he intends to make as much of the report public as possible.
Clapper: No talks with Trump about ODNI
Updated: 10:24 a.m.
Clapper told lawmakers that he has not been involved in any discussions with Donald Trump’s transition team to overhaul his office.
The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday night that Trump is weighing slimming down the Office of the Director of National Security (ODNI) and cutting CIA staff in Washington in favor of placing more personnel overseas.
ODNI was created after the Sept. 11 attacks to smooth information sharing between intelligence agencies, but has faced criticism that it has merely added a layer of bureaucracy.
Current CIA Director John Brennan last year restructured the CIA to combine analysts with spies into so-called “mission centers.” The move faced some internal criticism for undermining the agency’s human intelligence mission.
Hacking report prepared by three agencies
Updated 10:24 a.m.
The Intelligence Committee’s report on Russian hacking is primarily being prepared by three agencies: the CIA, the FBI and the National Security Agency, Clapper
The report, which was reportedly delivered to Obama today, is intended to provide a comprehensive view of Russian interference in U.S. elections going back multiple years.
Clapper: No way to judge impact on election
Updated 10:12 a.m.
The Intelligence Community has no way to determine the impact of Russian hacks on the outcome of the election, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told lawmakers.
“They didn’t change any vote tallies,” Clapper said, but “We have no way of gauging the impact that — certainly the Intelligence Community can’t — the choices that the electorate made. There’s no way for us to gauge.”
Assange has zero credibility with panel
Assange made news this week by saying that the emails from the Democratic National Committee published by his organization did not come from Russia.
Clapper: We won’t discuss Russian hacking report
“We plan to brief the Congress and release an unclassified version of this report to the public next week with due deference to highly sensitive sources and methods,” DNI James Clapper told lawmakers.
“We’re not really prepared to discuss this beyond standing by our earlier statements.”
The ODNI, along with the Department of Homeland Security, issued a public statement in October blaming Russia for the attacks on the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and other political organizations. Officials called the attacks an attempt to interfere in the U.S. election but provided little other information.
Updated: 9:48 a.m.
One big difference between Democrats and Republicans has been whether a select panel should be appointed to investigate Russia’s actions in the U.S. election.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the ranking member on Armed Services, called for the formation of a select panel in his opening statement.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has ruled out a select panel.
Today’s hearing is a hot ticket. The room is packed.
McCain: Election is settled
Sen. John McCain opened a highly anticipated hearing on Russian hacking by saying that the presidential election has been settled.
The chairman of the Armed Services Committee noted that both President Obama and President-elect Donald Trump have said it is time to move on, and he said he did not mean for the hearing to question the election’s result.
The careful comments are a sign that McCain doesn’t want the hearing to be viewed as an attack on Trump, something consistent with his other public comments.