Open Hearing: Nomination of Christopher C. Fonzone to be General Counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and Brett M. Holmgren to be Assistant Secretary of State of Intelligence and Research at the Department of State

[Senate Hearing 117-82] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] S. Hrg. 117-82 OPEN HEARING: NOMINATIONS OF CHRISTOPHER C. FONZONE TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL FOR THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; AND BRETT M. HOLMGREN TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND RESEARCH, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE ======================================================================= HEARING BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION __________ TUESDAY, MAY 18, 2021 __________ Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 45-488 WASHINGTON : 2021 SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE [Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong., 2d Sess.] MARK R. WARNER, Virginia, Chairman MARCO RUBIO, Florida, Vice Chairman DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California RICHARD BURR, North Carolina RON WYDEN, Oregon JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico SUSAN COLLINS, Maine ANGUS KING, Maine ROY BLUNT, Missouri MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado TOM COTTON, Arkansas BOB CASEY, Pennsylvania JOHN CORNYN, Texas KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York BEN SASSE, Nebraska CHUCK SCHUMER, New York, Ex Officio MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky, Ex Officio JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma, Ex Officio ---------- Michael Casey, Staff Director Brian Walsh, Minority Staff Director Kelsey Stroud Bailey, Chief Clerk C O N T E N T S ---------- MAY 18, 2021 OPENING STATEMENTS Page Warner, Hon. Mark R., a U.S. Senator from Virginia............... 1 Rubio, Hon. Marco, a U.S. Senator from Florida................... 3 Klobuchar, Hon. Amy, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota............... 4 WITNESSES Fonzone, Christopher C., to be General Counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.......................... 6 Prepared statement........................................... 8 Holmgren, Brett M., to be Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research, U.S. Department of State............ 10 Prepared statement........................................... 12 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Nomination material for Christopher C. Fonzone Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees........ 34 Additional Pre-Hearing Questions............................. 62 Post-Hearing Questions....................................... 97 Nomination material for Brett M. Holmgren Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees........ 113 Additional Pre-Hearing Questions............................. 128 Response from Brett M. Holmgren to Question for the Record submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein...................... 154 OPEN HEARING: NOMINATIONS OF CHRISTOPHER C. FONZONE TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL FOR THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; AND BRETT M. HOLMGREN TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND RESEARCH, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE ---------- TUESDAY, MAY 18, 2021 U.S. Senate, Select Committee on Intelligence, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 p.m., in Room SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark R. Warner (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. Present: Senators Warner, Rubio, Feinstein, Wyden, Heinrich, King, Bennet, Casey, Gillibrand (via WebEx), Risch, Cotton, Cornyn, and Sasse. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK R. WARNER, A U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA Chairman Warner. I'd like to call the Committee to order. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to our nominees Christopher Fonzone and Brett Holmgren and welcome to your families here or watching from home. Congratulations on your respective nominations to serve as the General Counsel for the Office of the DNI and as Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research. These are both critically important positions in the Nation's Intelligence Community at a time of significant challenges and also opportunities for America. In a moment, I know we're going to be joined by our colleague, Senator Klobuchar, who will be introducing Mr. Holmgren. Gentlemen, you both have distinguished records as public servants in the fields of national security. Mr. Fonzone, who is currently in private practice, previously served as Deputy Assistant and Deputy Counsel to President Obama and legal adviser to the National Security Council. Before this, he was senior counsel to the General Counsel--that's a lot of counsels--of the Defense Department and also served in the Department of Justice. Mr. Fonzone, as General Counsel for the ODNI, you will advise the Director on the letter and spirit of the law, including the legal obligation to keep this Committee fully and currently informed on all key intelligence matters, while ensuring that the civil liberties and privacy interests of all Americans are protected. As we've seen in recent years, this position carries with it the responsibility to make some tough calls. To do so you will need the judgment and ethical compass to make the right decisions, even in the face of political or policy pressure. In recent years, we've seen patriotic individuals who have come forward as whistleblowers sidelined, fired, or even retaliated against; and I would like to hear your thoughts on how you will work to ensure that such IC whistleblowers are protected going forward, regardless of who is in the White House. Specifically, I'd like to hear your thoughts on whether there are any circumstances where it would be appropriate for a General Counsel to intercede to prevent a whistleblower complaint from going to Congress. More broadly, after four years during which the expertise and judgment of American civil servants and intelligence professionals were at times discounted, belittled, or outright ignored, I'd like to hear your thoughts on what you will do to help restore the morale and install the utmost level of integrity in the IC workforce. Turning to Mr. Holmgren. Brett Holmgren also has an impressive resume, having been Special Assistant to the President and senior director for Intelligence Programs at NSC. Before this, he was senior policy adviser to the assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and special assistant to the deputy secretary of Defense. If confirmed, Mr. Holmgren, you will be inheriting a long institutional history at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research. INR's well-deserved reputation for not bending to political pressure was cemented by its famous dissent to the IC's assessment of whether or not Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs. INR assessed he did not, stuck to their guns, wouldn't budge, despite the immense pressure and they were ultimately proven correct. INR's stance has become a model for all intelligence analysts. Whether it's China, Russia, North Korea, or the global pandemic, our alliances will be vital to confronting the many challenges we face around the globe. Our Foreign Service officers, ambassadors, and the Secretary of State all rely on the INR to provide them with the best intelligence assessments to help them understand the world and advance American diplomacy and foreign policy. Should you be confirmed, fulfilling this Committee's oversight obligation to require transparency and responsiveness from both of you, we may ask you and your staff difficult questions from time to time and we expect honest, complete, and timely answers. But we also encourage you to come to the Committee when our partnership is needed. You can always count on us to hear you out, treat you fairly, usually without partisanships we sometimes see elsewhere. One concrete example of this partnership, Mr. Fonzone, will be in examining and eventually reauthorizing critical FISA authorities that are set to expire in 2023. This is an area where early engagement with Congress and this Committee will be extremely important. Now, after the Vice Chairman and I give our opening statements, Senator Klobuchar, who I think will shortly be here, will say a few words and our witnesses will then give their statements. After this, Member questions will be for five minutes in order of seniority at the gavel. Thank you again for agreeing to step forward to serve our country. I look forward to your testimony and I now recognize the distinguished Vice Chairman. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, A U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA Vice Chairman Rubio. Thank you. And I join the Chairman in welcoming both of you today to the hearing. Mr. Fonzone, Mr. Holmgren: Congratulations on your nomination and thank you for your willingness to serve. Mr. Fonzone, the General Counsel of the Office of Director of National Intelligence has to make sure that the Intelligence Community, together with the Department of Justice, have the authorities and the capabilities anytime to take collection and surveillance that is critical to our national security. So we look forward to hearing in your testimony how you will provide the sound legal counsel to the intelligence agencies and community on those important issues. Importantly, I note that in your prior written responses and communications with our Committee, you disclosed past work that you performed on your law firm's behalf for the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China and for Huawei Technologies. I appreciate your candidness in reporting this and the details you provided us. I expect that I, or maybe some of our Members, as I told you personally, will follow-up with some questions in that regard. Mr. Holmgren, our Committee trusts that the State Department intelligence element has a leader who engages with the Intelligence Community's ongoing and substantive work. Collaboration is important to assess and focus on the threats facing our Nation. And we expect the Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research to take on that mandate from day one and to keep this Committee fully informed. I hope with the significant changes announced at U.S. Embassy Moscow, the Department of State will work in earnest to reduce counterintelligence risks at the Embassy and to work to achieve reciprocity in visas. And with no excuses, moving forward, like we have seen in the past. Our hearing today comes at a time when the threats from China, from Russia, from Iran, from North Korea, and global terrorism are complex and at times divisive. And our hope is that your testimony will describe how you will ensure that, if confirmed, you will provide the leadership, integrity, and impeccable judgment to lead your respective Intelligence Community components. We also want to hear from you as to how you will be responsive to our Committee's inquiries and requests and how you will support our oversight obligation. So we have a lot of issues to cover today. I want each of our Members to have the opportunity to ask their questions. And I look forward to today's conversation. Again, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Warner. I think we will go ahead and administer the oath at this moment and then when Senator Klobuchar comes she will deliver an introduction. Will the witnesses please stand and raise their right hand? Do you solemnly swear to give this Committee the truth, the full truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. Holmgren. I do. Mr. Fonzone. I do. Chairman Warner. Please be seated. The Committee poses five questions to each nominee who appears before us. They just require a simple yes or no answer for the record. And we can do this, I believe, jointly, unless there was disagreement on the answers. First question, do you agree to appear before the Committee here or in other venues when invited? Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Chairman Warner. If confirmed, do you agree to send officials from your office to appear before the Committee and designated staff when invited? Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Chairman Warner. Do you agree to provide documents or any other materials requested by the Committee in order for it to carry out its oversight and legislative responsibilities? Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Chairman Warner. Will you ensure that your office and your staff provides such material to the Committee when requested? Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Chairman Warner. Do you agree to inform and fully brief to the fullest extent possible all Members of this Committee on intelligence activities and covert actions rather than only the Chairman and the Vice Chairman? Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Chairman Warner. So far you guys are doing pretty well. I was going to turn to your opening statements but luckily, with impeccable timing, our colleague, Senator Klobuchar from Minnesota, has arrived to introduce one of the nominees, Senator Klobuchar, welcome. STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, A U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA Senator Klobuchar. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to Vice Chairman Rubio as well and distinguished Members of this Committee. I am glad to be here to introduce a friend and a fellow Minnesotan, Brett Holmgren, as President Biden's nominee to be Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research. Because of the pandemic, Brett's family is unable to join us in person but his parents, Mike, and Mary; and his siblings, Ryan, Krista, and Stacie are all back in Minnesota and I know are waving at him right now. While they can't be here, I know that they are probably supporting Brett back from our home state. Brett grew up in Blaine, where he was raised by parents who showed him the value of public service from a young age. For nearly 40 years, his mom taught at Coon Rapids High School, and his dad worked as a teacher and administrator in the Mounds Public Schools. My mom was a public teacher, too, so I know from experience that teachers raise their kids with a drive to always do better, a drive that has stuck with Brett through his years working in national security. He embodies our Minnesota values of hard work and service that we need in our leaders. Those values came to the forefront on 9/11, which Brad has said was a life changing moment for him. As our Nation grappled with the grief, and the shock, and the disbelief, like so many in his generation, Brett felt the call to service. After graduating from the University of Wisconsin Madison, he joined the Defense Intelligence Agency as a counterterrorism analyst and later went on to become a senior analyst at the CIA. His work helped to disrupt plots against American interests around the world and to degrade al-Qaeda. He served in war zones and provided support to the military and intelligence operations. He understands how intelligence informs and supports our military, policymakers, and diplomats. After eight years in the Intelligence Community, he went on to serve in policy roles at the Pentagon and the White House, where he held the most senior intelligence position on the National Security Council staff as special assistant to the President and senior director for Intelligence Programs. In those roles he managed and provided leadership on some of the most pressing national security issues, from cyber technology to covert action and counterintelligence. He also learned from incredible leaders, like Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, who embodies the integrity Americans deserve. Brett has said that she taught him how to lead with humility and showed him the importance of staying calm under pressure, both qualities will serve him well as Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research. Brett's accomplishments have earned him several recognitions including the Secretary of Defense Meritorious Civilian Service Award, the Director of National Intelligence Superior Service Award, and the CIA Hostile Actions Service Medal. In every conversation I've had with him, he has demonstrated a deep understanding of the role of the Intel Community and the importance of Congressional oversight. I know he will be able to offer the State Department both his expertise and an abiding commitment to speaking truth to power, a commitment that has defined his career. His experiences, judgment, and integrity will be in value, both to the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the State Department, the Intel Community, and most importantly, the American people. I'm confident you will see those qualities over the course of this hearing, and I urge the Committee to support his nomination. Thank you. Chairman Warner. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar, for a very strong endorsement and introduction. And I know you've got to go deal with our Canadian friends so the Committee will excuse you. We'll now move to our witnesses. I believe, Mr. Fonzone, I think you were scheduled to go first. STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER C. FONZONE, NOMINEE TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL FOR THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE Mr. Fonzone. Thank you Chairman Warner, Vice Chairman Rubio, and Members of the Committee, it's an honor to appear before you today as President Biden's nominee to be the General Counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Thank you for taking the time to consider my nomination. I'm only here today because of the efforts of others. My parents, Charles and Mary Ann Fonzone, are watching today's proceedings from home in Allentown, Pennsylvania--probably pretty nervously. They instilled in me and my brother Steve from a young age the importance of working hard and always trying to do the right thing, and I think often of their guidance. My wife Jill is here today and I can't thank her enough for her love, counsel, and patience, and for always being able to make me smile. Her support and encouragement-- even though she already knows what it is like to be married to someone who works in a SCIF--is one of the main reasons I am prepared to undertake this challenging role. I'm also very thankful to President Biden and Director Haines for placing their confidence in me. The Intelligence Community plays a vital role in keeping the Nation safe, but it can only operate effectively if the American people have confidence that its activities are lawful and consistent with the Nation's values. If confirmed, I pledge to do all I can to assist Director Haines in leading an Intelligence Community that earns the American people's trust. I know this is a serious and important responsibility. Legal advice provided in Washington can have far-reaching effects, including for Intelligence Community personnel doing dangerous and difficult jobs far away from headquarters. If confirmed, I would thus strive to provide advice that not only ensures the Intelligence Community carries out its important mission consistent with the law, but also is mindful of context and useful to the recipient. In short, my goal would be to work with the dedicated and talented career lawyers in the General Counsel's Office to be a partner to the Director and to all ODNI employees, providing them with timely, practical, and sound counsel on the issues and challenges they face, while remaining unafraid to deliver tough advice, when necessary. Another key focus of mine, if confirmed, would be to maintain an effective working relationship with the Congress-- and this Committee, in particular. Under the Constitution, the institutions of our government are ultimately accountable to the American people. For this reason, I think the Intelligence Community should be as transparent as it can be about the legal basis for its activities. But much of the Intelligence Community's work is necessarily secret, and it is therefore crucial for Congress to have the information it needs to exercise its oversight functions, particularly with respect to legal matters. If confirmed, I would thus endeavor to be a partner to this Committee and maintain open lines of communication on the range of legal issues that may arise during my tenure. Finally, if confirmed, I would also look forward to working with lawyers from across the Intelligence Community. National security lawyers often have to confront novel questions for which traditional legal sources do not provide clear answers. In those cases, collaboration can be extremely helpful, and cooperation between Intelligence Community components can also help ensure that the Community's equities are presented effectively in interagency legal discussions. I recognize that there is probably no job with a mix of responsibilities identical to the ODNI General Counsel's. But I've been fortunate during my legal career to have had a number of roles--clerking at the Departments of Justice and Defense, at the National Security Council, and in private practice--that I believe provide useful experience. This experience also teaches me how special it is to serve one's country. Put simply, there's a sense of mission and purpose in working for the government that you simply can't replicate anywhere else. I also know how lucky you have to be and how many things have to break right to have the opportunity to serve in a role like the one for which I've been nominated. That's why, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and Members of the Committee, I can commit to you that, if afforded the opportunity to serve, I will do everything in my power to carry out this important office to the best of my ability; to be an effective counselor to and advocate for the Intelligence Community; to be a partner to this Committee; and to be an effective steward of the public's trust. Thank you again for your consideration of my nomination, and I look forward to your questions. Chairman Warner. Thank you, Mr. Fonzone. Mr. Holmgren. [The prepared statement of Mr. Fonzone follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] STATEMENT OF BRETT M. HOLMGREN, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND RESEARCH, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Mr. Holmgren. Chairman Warner, Vice Chairman Rubio, and Members of the Committee: It is an honor to appear before you today as the nominee to be Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Intelligence and Research. I am deeply grateful to President Biden and Secretary Blinken for the confidence they have placed in me, and to Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines for supporting my nomination. I also want to thank Senator Klobuchar for leadership in the Senate, for her kind words, and for supporting me today. I'm excited to be here alongside my friend and colleague Chris Fonzone. I worked closely with Chris when we served together on the National Security Council staff, and I can attest that while he is an exceptional lawyer, he's an even better colleague and human being. I would not be here today if it were not for the love and support of my family: my wife, Dana; our son Teddy; my parents, Michael and Mary; and my siblings Stacie, Krista, and Ryan. Each of them has inspired me to live my life with a sense of purpose, love, and humility. Like many Americans of my generation, the tragic events of 9/11 were a turning point in my life. I left my home State of Minnesota 18 years ago to pursue a career in public service to defend the freedoms, values, and liberties that we all cherish. I came to Washington with a sense of optimism and a deep and abiding belief in the ideals of this country: that America is a force for good in the world, and that all men and women are created equal with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These ideals derive from my upbringing in Minnesota, where I was surrounded by family who believed deeply in the role of service. Both of my grandfathers were World War II veterans. My parents, both of whom were public school teachers for 40 years, instilled in me and my siblings the importance of service. And I still share that same sense of optimism and commitment to public service that I brought with me to Washington nearly two decades ago. While I may be a new face to the Committee, I have a long track record of working with the Intelligence Community. As an analyst, first at the Defense Intelligence Agency and later at Central Intelligence Agency, I authored all-source intelligence products to inform policy decisions. Through deployments overseas, including in warzones, I have seen firsthand the key role that intelligence plays in shaping national security and the tremendous sacrifices of our warfighters, diplomats, and intelligence officers. Throughout my career, I have also served in policy roles at the Pentagon and on the National Security Council staff at the White House. These experiences gave me a richer understanding of the vital role and the limitations of intelligence in shaping policy. Most significantly, I gained, through these experiences, a greater appreciation for the importance of analytic objectivity and the need for the Intelligence Community to tell the policymaker what they need to know, and not what they want to hear. I have been nominated for this position at a time when the United States and its allies are facing a diverse, interconnected array of threats against the backdrop of a global pandemic that is straining governments and societies, fueling unrest, and accelerating global competition. From China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea the continuing threat of terrorism, cyber, and evolving technologies, these threats pose new challenges and opportunities for the Intelligence Community. Mr. Chairman, I believe INR has a unique role to play in addressing these challenges. As the oldest civilian intelligence agency in the United States, the Bureau has a long and proud history of providing policymakers with valuable insights into America's most pressing national security issues, while empowering our diplomats with the information and analysis they need to advance US foreign policy objectives. If confirmed, I look forward to leading this remarkable institution. I understand the role comes with important responsibilities: serving as the principal intelligence advisor to the Secretary of State and as the head of one of the Nation's 18 intelligence agencies; providing timely, objective, all-source analysis to inform consideration of foreign and national security policies; and assuring that our intelligence and sensitive law enforcement activities are consistent with, and supportive of, U.S. foreign policy objectives. If confirmed, four interrelated imperatives will shape my approach to leading INR. First, I will ensure that INR's capabilities and resources are aligned and strategically prioritized to address the most pressing challenges and opportunities, to include China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, global health security, cyber, the impact of climate change, and how to capitalize on the revolution in open-source intelligence. Second, I will prioritize investments in INR's greatest asset--its people. We must continue to attract, train, and retain top talent while placing greater emphasis on diversity and inclusion. Third, I will focus on upgrading INR's technology infrastructure to empower the analysts with the tools they need and to improve the delivery of INR's products and services to better support its customers, namely, U.S. diplomats overseas. Finally, I will insist on strong cybersecurity practices throughout INR to safeguard the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of its data, networks, and systems. In closing, I want to recognize the important role that I believe congressional oversight plays in ensuring that US intelligence activities are lawful, ethical, and consistent with our values. If confirmed, I very much look forward to partnering with this Committee as we confront the many challenges ahead. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. [The prepared statement of Mr. Holmgren follows:] [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Chairman Warner. Well, thank you, gentlemen. For planning purposes, any Members of the Committee wishing to submit questions for the record after today's hearing, please do so by 5 p.m. on this coming Thursday, May 20th. The Chair and the Vice Chair will ask questions and we'll have who came in at the gavel and then we'll go back and forth based on order of arrival for five minute rounds. Mr. Fonzone, I mean, we've seen some real challenges at ODNI over the last couple years. I think Director Haines, I'm encouraged by her early steps. What are you going to be able to do and how can you help her efforts to restore the morale and return that sense of integrity to the Office at ODNI and how do we make sure that the analysis of law is free from any political influence in the ODNI? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator, for the question. Making sure that the ODNI is a place where employees want to work and that can deliver--that can say truth to power is, I think, a fundamental part of the job of the General Counsel. And I think there's a number of ways in which I would see doing that. One is I would want to, if confirmed, engage with the General Counsel's Office and make sure they have everything they need and that they feel supported by their General Counsel so they can deliver clear and accurate legal advice to everyone in the department. I think the second thing I would want to make sure to do is that everyone--ensuring that all ODNI employees understand how, if they have any concerns about their legal advice or any politicization of the analysis they're providing, that they understand the channels that they can use to raise those concerns, whether that be through their chains of command to the ombudsman or the inspector general. And then third, I think dissent is healthy in organizations and I'd want to make sure that all people who do raise concerns would be able to do so without fear of retaliation. Chairman Warner. Let me do one more follow-up question then I'll move to Mr. Holmgren. One of the things we experienced, unfortunately, in the last couple of years was perhaps an unwillingness at the ODNI level and at the Legal Office of the ODNI to make sure that whistleblowers had the ability to exercise their, I believe, legal rights to get a report to Congress. Can you speak to us for a moment about the importance of whistleblowers and making sure their rights are protected? Mr. Fonzone. Sure, Senator. Whistleblowers play an integral part in any organization, and particularly, the Intelligence Community where so much of the work is secret and dissent has to come internally. I know that Director Haines said during her confirmation process that if the ICIG presented a whistleblower complaint on a matter of urgent concern to her, she would transmit it to this Committee and I would, obviously, support her in doing that. And more broadly, I would want to do two things, one is making sure all ODNI employees, and to extent relevant, broader IC employees, understand how they can raise complaints that they have to the Inspector General or other places where they can raise such complaints. And two, making sure that they're free from retaliation if they do so and that they're protected to the full extent of the law if they do. Chairman Warner. Thank you. Mr. Holmgren, one of the issues that this Committee is really taken on is the challenges of China. And when we talk of China, we always make clear that our beef is with the Communist Party of China and the leadership of Xi Jinping, not the Chinese people. Matter of fact, there's a bill on the floor of the Senate right now where this Committee has made in a broad bipartisan way, I think, major commitments to investing in semiconductors and competing in the realm of 5G and the next generation, so- called O-RAN. Can you speak to us for a moment about what you see is INR's role in informing the United States and the State Department policies to counter China's very aggressive tendencies in terms of technology competition? Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Thank you, Senator, for that question, and I know several of you raised this issue with me during the pre-hearing meetings. You know, first, I want to commend this Committee, in particular, for elevating the importance of the China and technology challenges and the risks that it poses, not only to our national security but also to our economic security and for American workers here in the United States. So I very much appreciate the issue. I think, you know, the Democracy Technology Partnership Act that several of you have brought forward, has great opportunities and ideas in there to implement. I think the important thing about China to understand is that their technology agenda underpins and drives their military and their economic ambitions. And so I think it's vitally important for the United States to out-compete China technologically in order to maintain our military and our economic edge. And if confirmed, Mr. Chairman, I commit to you that China will be an unparalleled priority for INR and that I will ensure we have the resources and the capabilities and the expertise to address that challenge. Chairman Warner. Well, thank you. And my time is expired. I just want to make one additional point. I won't ask for a response but one of the issues that this Committee is really also taken on in a very aggressive way recently, and again, appreciate everybody's input, is what's been referred to in the press as the so-called Havana Syndrome. And we've got a commitment from Director Burns, from the Agency, to make this a top priority. We'll expect that same kind of commitment from the INR and the State Department writ large. Senator Rubio. Vice Chairman Rubio. Thank you. Let me start with you, Mr. Fonzone because we've already talked about it and I told you I wanted to give you an opportunity to address this with the Committee as well. Look, I mean, you just heard Mr. Holmgren's answer but I think it reflects everyone else's view that, in fact, China uses its technological ambitions to further its military and global ambitions. And one of their national champions is Huawei, as an example and one of the things that we've all been focused on and one of the priorities that this country has had is ensuring that Huawei doesn't embed itself in the telecommunication infrastructure of this country and also of other countries. And so, obviously, you're going to get asked about the fact that as a partner at a law firm that represented both the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China and Huawei. You know, I understand that your position is that the work you did on this file was ``de minimis'' but I think the question is really, you know, as you worked in the National Security Council, so you were surely aware of the threat posed by China to American interests. And I think the reason why it becomes relevant is because one of things we've seen is how the Chinese Communist Party uses our own system against us, in essence, it uses powerful law firms and other entities in Washington with lawyers that are connected to go in and out of government to advance their objective, be it in court or in the lobbying realm. So I wanted to give you an opportunity to sort of address sort of the work you did, what were the options you have available to you at the time, and how that fits into the role that you've now been nominated to assume or not be relevant to it at all. But I thought it was important both to address it to give you a chance to address it because I think you could understand, seeing that there's going to be some questions coming about that. Mr. Fonzone. Senator Rubio, thank you for the question. I appreciate the opportunity to address the China-related work I did at my law firm. As I know that this is an issue of great interest this Committee. I think there are, as you mentioned, two clients that have raised the most questions as I've gone through the pre-hearing process. The first is the Chinese Ministry of Commerce. The work I did there was, as senior partner of my firm, arguing on behalf of the Ministry in the Supreme Court. It was a commercial dispute about how foreign law is incorporated into U.S. law, U.S. antitrust law. I was asked to prepare for and then participate in a moot court to prepare the advocates for the argument and I did that to help make sure that the partner or firm was able to give the court the information it needs to decide the case. And I've had no follow-up on that since then. The second representation, as you mentioned, was for Huawei and it was similar in the sense that the firm asked me to look into a question of how U.S. law works. I did a ``de minimis'' amount of work, less than 10 hours, to explain how U.S. administrative law works. I provided it to my partners and I've had no follow-up since then. Both of those occurred in 2018. I don't think either of those representations, which were consistent with my entire legal practice, which was largely around helping companies understand and comply with U.S. law, would affect my ability to give Director Haines objective advice as she serves as the DNI. Vice Chairman Rubio. Just to clarify, on the Ministry of Commerce you helped prepare a partner for oral arguments, in essence, a moot court practice situation. And on the Huawei representation, you provided internal legal research on how U.S. administrative law works. Mr. Fonzone. That's correct, Senator. Vice Chairman Rubio. Okay. I'm sure there will be more follow-up but I don't want to take all of our time on that. I know other Members may want to dig into a little bit deeper. I didn't want to skip going to Mr. Holmgren. Foreign misinformation, informational warfare is a reality. It's growing. It's always been there but we've now seen it sort of diffuse and become a real weapon used in global competition. What is or should be, through the Global Engagement Center, the INR's role in supporting the Global Engagement Center efforts? In essence, you know, how can we counter through the Global Engagement Center the impact that disinformation and misinformation campaigns are having, not just people think of Russia, I mean, Iran and others are heavily engaged now in this effort in the Western Hemisphere even. So how do you view the role of the Global Engagement Center and your role, in particular, in supporting those efforts? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Vice Chairman, for that important question. Russia's interference in the 2016, you know, election was an outrageous attack on our democracy. It was an attempt to sow discord, to exacerbate divisions in our country, and it is an effort, as the DNI has indicated, it's likely to be, you know, replicated by other Nations besides Russia moving forward. And so I think it absolutely is a serious issue that we must confront. You know, I publicly called for the need for a whole of government approach to combat foreign malign disinformation and influence campaigns. And so, Vice Chairman, to your question about the role that State and INR, in particular, would play, I would view, if confirmed, INR's role as providing support to the Global Engagement Center, but also to the recently established Foreign Malign Influence Center that the DNI created, which I think is a very positive step in the right direction to fuse a lot of the intelligence and threat information to share with policymakers. Chairman Warner. We'll now go to those Members who were here at the gavel, which is Senator Casey and Senator Cornyn. Senator Casey and then Senator Cornyn. Senator Casey. Mr. Chairman, thanks very much. I want to start by commending both of the nominees for your willingness to serve the country again. Both Mr. Fonzone and Mr. Holmgren are committing to further service and that's laudable, especially at this time. Mr. Fonzone, I wanted to highlight your Pennsylvania roots, as well as your pride in growing up in the Lehigh Valley. You told me earlier you're a graduate of Parkland High School, is that correct? And then on to Cornell and Harvard Law School? So we want to note that for the record. And I want to say hello to your parents from a distance. I don't know them. I won't wave to them; that probably is a little too much. But I want to thank them for raising you and I also want to commend your family, your wife, Jill, who I guess is here. Jill. Good to see you. And your family's commitment to public service. I wanted to start with you and I'll try to get to both of our nominees for a question each. The question relates to supply chain concerns that I have and I know a lot of people have, specifically as it relates to China. I don't think there's any question right now that the United States has capital investments that have the effect of, in a very real sense, propping up China's governmental effort to create a military-civil fusion strategy that ultimately can compromise U.S. national security. We've had for more than 40 years now the so-called CFIUS process, the Committee on Foreign Investment, which scrutinizes inbound investment. We don't have a similar or comparable method to analyze outbound investment for the same questions. So no mechanism to assess how outsourcing by U.S. companies to countries of concern may compromise our national security. So I guess my first question is, in your view, how vulnerable is the United States supply chain to dependencies on China? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator, for the question and your focus on this issue. It's an important one. Supply chain is an issue of focus for this Committee and also the Intelligence Community writ large. And I think that outbound investment is something that probably we should take a closer look at. Obviously, I'm not in government now so I don't have the latest intelligence on exactly what the risks are. I think what I can say is that, if confirmed, I would commit to engaging with experts on this issue in the Intelligence Community, at DNI specifically, and in the Intelligence Community more broadly. And then offering up my help and the help of my office, working with you or the Committee on any proposals you would have to address the threat raised by China and others with respect to supply chains. Senator Casey. I appreciate that. I look forward to working with you. I hope we can help you by way of some new legislation in this area, we hope, as well as to review with you some of the legal tools that ODNI might have to track outbound investment by companies that compromise our security. Mr. Holmgren, the ``Quad'' intelligence sharing partnership between the United States, Australia, India, and Japan is emerging as an essential tool to combating Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific region. My question for you is about diplomacy. What role can diplomacy play in getting access to critical intelligence regarding China's trade, diplomatic, and military agendas? Mr. Holmgren. Thank you, Senator, for that question. And as I indicated previously, I share the concerns about the serious threat China poses to the United States militarily, economically, and technologically. Working with our intelligence partners and allies is a vital function in the Intelligence Community generally, but especially at a place like the Department of State where diplomacy is the business. INR serves at the intersection of intelligence and diplomacy and so, if confirmed, I would view INR's role as supporting engagements of our diplomats, to include the Secretary of State, with those partners with the intelligence that they need. And second, to make sure that we are including those partners that you mentioned--in particular our closest allies, as well as the Five Eye countries--in the analytic exchanges that INR leads on behalf of the Intelligence Community. They're a couple hundred a year, where you bring in outside experts, non-governmental experts, to focus on particular issues. So I think ensuring that those partners and allies were included would be an important step to help strengthen those relationships. Senator Casey. Thanks very much. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Warner. Senator Cornyn. Senator Cornyn. Let me start by thanking both of you for your willingness to serve and for your willingness to take a cut in pay. In all seriousness, Mr. Fonzone, you and I had a chance to visit about some issues in my office and I thank you for that. I note that Sidley Austin has registered different times for representing clients in the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Have you personally had to register under FARA? Mr. Fonzone. No, I have not personally registered. I think the firm, in one of its periodic registrations, lists all the partners who were in the firm, but I have not registered personally. Senator Cornyn. Do share my concern about foreign governments hiring lobbyists on K Street with the lack of any real transparency, so that, basically, people like the Members of this Committee don't know if they're being lobbied by American citizens or by foreign governments? Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I certainly think that Congress should understand who's asking you to do things. And I can't profess to be an expert on how exactly FARA works, but I think to the extent that there are changes, if you don't feel you're getting the disclosures needed I'd be happy to, if confirmed, work with you on making sure you get the information you need. Senator Cornyn. Well, once you're on the job, I hope you'll work with us to try to figure this out. They have various disclosure registrations called the Lobbyist Disclosure Act, which then eliminates the need to register as a foreign agent. But I think this is a big concern to a number of us on this Committee and in Congress. And so I hope you'll help us work through that. I know President Biden asked the DNI to produce a threat assessment on domestic violent extremists. And we certainly recognize the importance of that. But in the United States, we don't allow the Intelligence Community to spy on American citizens, absent some proof of connection with a foreign power--being an agent of the foreign power. As you know, the FBI is the member of the Intelligence Community that basically is in charge of law enforcement and counterintelligence operations. But how do you draw the line between what is permissible and what's impermissible under our laws? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator, for raising this issue. As I've gone through the process of preparing for confirmation and talked to folks who held this job before--and others, I think this is one of the issues that would be a major focus if I were lucky enough to be confirmed. There are domestic threats and the government has a role to play in addressing them. But as you just noted, I think there's a lot of history that shows trouble can arise if the IC becomes too involved. I think the way that works out in practice is, as you noted, the FBI and DHS are in the lead. But as Director Haines noted in her confirmation process, there may be some small role the IC can play to support them. If confirmed, I can say that it would be a major focus of mine to make sure that the extent the IC is providing assistance in addressing any domestic threats, it does so consistent with its authorities and with due respect for the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens, and in particular their First Amendment rights to both assembly and speech. Senator Cornyn. As you know, China is usually the first word out of our mouths these days when it comes to our national security, economic and otherwise. In recent years, Congress has passed some reforms. For example, the CFIUS process, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, to review foreign investments for national security concerns and the like. I know that it's been a couple of years now and that Treasury, I think, was primarily responsible for convening CFIUS, has not yet completed some of the rulemaking process. And I hope you will help us figure out what--not only how to implement what we've already passed into law, but what other loopholes are there available for our adversaries, primarily China, because we know where they're relentless. Do you have any sort of plenary thoughts about things that we need to do to make that more effective? Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I know that there were the amendments to CFIUS that were passed. I'm not completely up to speed on those types of implementation. If I was confirmed, I would obviously help--to the extent that the DNI General Counsel had a role to play there--to assist that. And in looking into this and understanding how it's been implemented, identified any gaps or areas where further legislation would be helpful to address national security threats. I would obviously work with this Committee to close those gaps. Senator Cornyn. Thank you. Chairman Warner. I'd remind the panel that the Senator from Texas was the lead Senator on that CFIUS reform. We're going to continue. It's, again, based upon arrival order, so Senator King, Senator Cotton, Senator Feinstein, and Senator Sasse. Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Holmgren, I can't imagine how difficult it would be to grow up in Minnesota in the nineties when your father's got the same name as the coach of the Green Bay Packers. That must have been a challenge at times. Mr. Holmgren. It was tough, Sir. Thanks--yes. [Laughter] Senator King. Character building, however. Mr. Holmgren. Indeed. Senator King. Mr. Holmgren, Dan Coats, I think, outlined best the role of the Intelligence Community. He said our job is to seek the truth and tell the truth. And one of the most important characteristics is sometimes it's hard to tell the truth if your customer doesn't want to hear the truth. Are you willing to incur the displeasure of the Secretary of State or indeed the President or this Committee in order to defend the findings of the analysts in INR? Mr. Holmgren. Thank you, Senator, for that important question. As Chairman Warner indicated at the top of his remarks, if confirmed, I would be joining an institution at INR that has a long and proud history of speaking truth to power. And so I feel as if I would be joining an institution that's on solid foundation in that regard. Having said that, I believe it is essential that the INR workforce, this Committee, the American people have confidence in the integrity, the accuracy, and the impartiality of Intelligence Community assessments. And so, if confirmed, I think it's a multi-pronged approach to ensure that policymakers are receiving the professional judgments and candid expertise of INR analysts. Senator King. If 2003 repeated itself and the consensus in the Intelligence Community was X and the finding of INR was Y, would you inform this Committee of your findings different from those of your colleagues in the community? Mr. Holmgren. Yes, Senator. I believe that would be a significant enough issue to inform the Committee. Senator King. Thank you. I hope we don't have to face that but I think that's an important part of your role. The most important. Intelligence, bad intelligence can lead--does lead-- to bad decisions. And your job is to give us the best intelligence that you have, us being policymakers. Mr. Fonzone, this Committee really, I think, has one role and one mission. The role is oversight of the Intelligence Community. And it's an unusual one because in a democracy, secret agencies are kind of an anomaly. And all the other agencies of government have all kinds of people looking at them: the press, the specialized press, the constituents. Intelligence not so much. So this Committee has an important responsibility. The mission it seems to me is navigating the tension between the preamble of the Constitution, to ensure domestic tranquility and provide for the common defense, and the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, essentially the right of privacy of American citizens. Talk to me about how you navigate what is essentially a legal tension. Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator. I think that's a fantastic framing of the role of this Committee and an excellent explanation for why the relationship between the Intelligence Community and this Committee is so important. I think that the Intelligence Community has a very important job to play in keeping the Nation safe, but it can only do that if the American people trust that what it's doing is lawful and consistent with the Nation's values. I think that because most of the work is in secret there has to be mechanisms to ensure people of that. I think one is that---- Senator King. Especially because it's in secret. Mr. Fonzone. Especially because it's secret. And I think one is that the IC should be transparent as much as it can be. And if I was confirmed, I would be an advocate internally for being transparent about what the IC is doing, particularly about its legal basis. Two, there are internal oversight mechanisms to help make sure the IC is operating lawfully. There are Inspector Generals, there's the PCLOB, there are General Counsel offices. And third, and probably most important, there's this Committee. And if I were lucky enough to be confirmed, I would see a major focus in my role both ensuring that the Director carries out her obligation to keep the Committee fully and currently informed about significant intelligence activities, and also just making sure that I'm a partner with the Committee so that all the legal issues that come up that are significant--we're working together on those. Senator King. Hold that thought. Partner with the Committee. That's an important concept. I'm just about out of time, but I want to emphasize the importance, as the Chairman mentioned, of the whistleblower statute. By definition, whistleblowers are unpopular, certainly not within the executive branch. So they need articulate and aggressive defense. And I hope you will commit to doing so within the Intelligence Community. Mr. Fonzone. Certainly, Senator. That's something that a number of Senators have spoken to me about in the run up to this hearing. And I'm committed to, if confirmed, to ensuring that whistleblowers know where to lodge their complaints and receive the full protection of the law if they do so. Senator King. Interestingly, the first American whistleblower law was in 1778, prior to the adoption of the Constitution. The people that founded this country understood how important it was. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Warner. Senator Cotton. Senator Cotton. Thank you. Mr. Fonzone, I want to return to some of the topics about your legal work in private practice, specifically for the Ministry of Commerce in the People's Republic of China and for Huawei. You are a full equity partner at Sidley, is that correct? Mr. Fonzone. I did have some equity. I couldn't characterize myself as a full partner. But I was a partner. Senator Cotton. OK. Does Sidley have a policy to allow lawyers to decline work for clients if they find it morally objectionable? Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I took the work I did for the Ministry of Commerce and Huawei that I described for Senator Rubio. It was work that was consistent with my practice of helping companies understand U.S. law, comply with U.S. law, and or prepare for an argument--in that case, prepare for an argument before the Supreme Court. So I took it in that vein. That's why I took that work. Senator Cotton. So, I understand you took it but I'm asking you if Sidley has a policy that allows lawyers to decline work if they have objections to a client? I remember years ago firms would allow lawyers to decline work for tobacco companies, for instance, if they found that work morally objectionable. Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I don't know if there's an official policy to that end. I don't know if I would have been able to decline the work if I would have tried. Senator Cotton. Okay. Thank you. Just this morning the New York Times reported on Apple's years-long collaboration with the Chinese Communist Party to provide every piece of data from Apple's devices in China to Communist police forces, despite years, of course, of evidence of oppression and genocide. This is just one more example of Apple's deep, deep entanglement with the Chinese Communist Party. And you list in your disclosures Apple as one of your major clients. Could you please characterize the nature of the work you did for Apple? Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I did a range of work for Apple on a lot of topics. I don't recall doing anything vis-a-vis Apple with respect to its relationship with China, but I worked with them on a number of matters related to privacy and other topics. Senator Cotton. But you don't recall doing any work for Apple that was related to its relationship with China? Mr. Fonzone. Not that I recall, though I did a fair amount of work with them over the years so I--. Senator Cotton. Thank you. Thank you. I'll just say, obviously, the Committee has concerns about what's come to be known as the China lobby. And it's pervasive in this country, far more pervasive than these clients you've had. And I don't just mean registered agents for a Chinese company. It's everywhere. Multi-national corporations or small manufacturers in all our states have outsourced production to China. The CEOs of major investment banks met with China's trade negotiator right before he met with President Trump's trade negotiator. Hollywood won't have movies with Chinese bad guys because they want access to the Chinese market. University presidents will lobby us to maintain the flow of Chinese students who pay full fare at their universities. University professors still want to get money from Chinese-owned entities. So this is a very, very serious concern of the Committee and I think this is why you have Members asking you questions about the nature of this work. Mr. Holmgren, I want to turn to question what we discussed in our conversation a couple weeks ago. Nord Stream 2, which is, I'd say, right now Vladimir Putin's number-one foreign policy priority to complete. It's in the final stages of its construction. It will be completed later this year if nothing happens. It will make Western Europe even more dependent on Russian gas while also depriving Eastern European NATO allies of the concessions they get for the pipelines that come from Russia to Western Europe. Last year's defense bill greatly expanded the scope of companies subject to sanctions for supporting this pipeline. I understand the State Department has contacted some of these companies to make them aware of their potential sanctions exposure. If you're confirmed, can you commit to immediately providing the Senate with the unclassified list of companies involved in that project that the IC produced in response to last year's National Defense Authorization Act? Mr. Holmgren. Thank you, Senator Cotton. And I appreciate our conversation on this issue. Just let me say at the outset I am under no illusion that this pipeline is an economic development project as Putin claims. I believe that it is the latest example of Putin's desire to weaken Western alliances and ultimately, as you indicated, to exert influence down the road on our European partners and allies. So I appreciate the seriousness of this issue. If confirmed, I commit to you that INR will support the Department and the Intelligence Community in identifying and assessing and evaluating entities that may be involved in violating U.S.- imposed sanctions. You have my commitment in that regard. Senator Cotton. Thank you. Ultimately, this is not going to be your call. It's going to be the Secretary's call. And really President Biden's call. I've seen troubling reports today that the Administration may be preparing to waive sanctions on certain German entities. So we'd be in the very strange position where we're sanctioning the company that's trying to build the pipeline but we're not going to sanction the company that's in charge of it or the company that's going to be using it--all because we want to maintain friendly relationships with Germany, which is currently throwing our Eastern European allies under the bus over this pipeline. So it's a matter of serious concern to the Committee. Chairman Warner. I would remind the Senator, and I agreed with your comments about Apple and some of the others, the one industry that refused to meet with this Committee when we were doing our China classified road shows was private equity, which was again, I think it---- Senator Cotton. There's basically no industry and no place, no organization in America that's not potentially compromised by the China lobby. That's why it's so important that we do the work to expose the China lobby. Chairman Warner. Senator Feinstein. Senator Feinstein. Over a decade ago, the CIA engaged in the use of waterboarding and other so-called enhanced interrogation techniques during interrogations. The tactics used were not only more brutal than what's known, they did not produce actionable intelligence. This was all laid out in a Senate Intelligence Committee's 6,000-plus-page classified report and a 500-page declassified summary. While you both provided straightforward answers in the pre- hearing questions, I want to cover this topic because I believe it remains a very high priority to see that we never return to this. So let me ask you the same questions I asked Director Haines and Director Burns when they were before us. Do you agree that current law prohibits any interrogation techniques not allowed by the U.S. Army Field Manual on Interrogation? Mr. Fonzone. I do, Senator. Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Senator Feinstein. Do you agree that waterboarding and other so-called enhanced interrogation techniques are not effective? Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Senator Feinstein. Will you assure us that the IC will not be in the business of running undeclared black site detention facilities or engaging in interrogations that use techniques beyond those listed in the Army Field Manual? Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Mr. Holmgren. Yes. Senator Feinstein. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Warner. Senator Sasse and then Senator Wyden. Senator Sasse. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm not showing a light, do you hear me? Great. Thanks. Thank you both for being here. Congratulations on your nomination. Mr. Fonzone, I'd like to go back to the conversation that Vice Chairman Rubio started with, and that you and I discussed on the phone. Can you explain to me who Huawei is? Do you regard them as a private sector company? And what do you think of the role that they've played in the Chinese Communist Party's genocide in Xinjiang? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator, for the question. And I know this--we discussed this before the hearing--I'm well aware of what Director Haines has said about Huawei, about the fact that Chinese telecommunication companies pose a significant counterintelligence risk and she specifically named Huawei. I'm also aware of the amount of focus this Committee has placed on the risks posed by Huawei. If confirmed, I would obviously have access to the way this intelligence, including about Xinjiang--and that would be what would guide the factual underpinning of any legal analysis I would provide to Director Haines if I was lucky enough to be confirmed. Senator Sasse. But I'm trying to ask a different question. I'm trying to ask why would you make a decision to work for Huawei given who they are? And this isn't new news. You worked in the NSC in the Obama years. And the 2019 DOJ indictment on Huawei, on things as mundane--relative to the genocidal issues we were just talking about in Xinjiang--but as mundane as their intellectual property theft from T-Mobile from 2012 through 2014 was laid out in the indictment two years ago. And this was roughly the time that you were working for them. 2018, I think, was your legal work for them--2017, 2018. But that followed you leaving the Obama administration. Did you think Huawei was a morally neutral or a neutral or a good actor? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator. It was 2018, you're correct there. As I stated in response to Senator Rubio's question, my firm asked if I would help address some questions on how U.S. administrative law works. I did a very small amount of analysis on--with respect to that question. Less than 10 hours. Senator Sasse. But you knew it was for Huawei? Mr. Fonzone. I did know it was for Huawei and it was---- Senator Sasse. Who did you think they were? Because they're the bad guys. Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I understand the concerns you have about Huawei. Senator Sasse. Do you have concerns about Huawei? Mr. Fonzone. I'm very aware of what Director Haines has said about Huawei, what this Committee has said about Huawei, and if I was confirmed, I would be driven by what the Intelligence Community's views are of Huawei. That would underpin my analysis. I did the work I did because a partner asked me to help a company understand U.S. law, and that's the advice I provided in a very small amount of work. And there's been no follow-up with it since then. Senator Sasse. This is a company that's involved in genocide and this is a company that habitually, systematically is involved in stealing IP from U.S. companies. Helping them with rulemaking or their understanding of rulemaking is not helping a morally neutral actor and it's not helping them comply with U.S. law. It's helping them figure out how they can skirt U.S. law. You're well aware, I assume, that China's national security laws compel China's ostensibly, but not really, private sector companies to share all their information with the government, correct? Mr. Fonzone. I'm not an expert on Chinese law but that sounds accurate to me, yes. Senator Sasse. Thank you. Mr. Holmgren, INR is very important and I think those of us who feel a responsibility to not just help provide oversight for the now 18 intelligence agencies, with Space Force, but also to express gratitude for a lot of people who work in the Intelligence Community who don't have people, private citizens able to thank them often. INR is critically important. It obviously has an illustrious history. But it's also had challenges over the years in intelligence sharing with the broader community. Can you give us your sense of what INR's particular challenges are as you arrive? That you need to deal with? And how do you advance the agenda of intelligence sharing with the broader community? Mr. Holmgren. Thank you, Senator. And I appreciate those remarks about INR. Again, INR is unique in the Intelligence Community in that it is the only one of three all-source intelligence agencies that serves at the intersection of intelligence and diplomacy. And so, if confirmed, I think the major challenges that I understand INR is facing also align to the priorities I indicated at the top. But importantly in making sure that our finite resources are aligned and strategically and efficiently prioritized against the big four: China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, as well as some other important threats. Second, on the technology front, I think there's both, in my view, a need to further enable INR's technology modernization program so that it can support our customers but also the cyber security imperative to make sure that we are adequately protecting its data networks and systems. And then finally on the talent side, INR has a really long and rich tradition of attracting some of the best and brightest experts who spend their careers at INR. We want to encourage that, but at the same time make sure that we have sufficient expertise on the team to address a bunch of really challenging new technical issues in the emerging technology space. Senator Sasse. Thank you. Thanks for your charity yesterday on our schedule bumps as well. I look forward to continuing the discussions about emerging tech. I'm out of time now but I'll follow-up with you. Thank you. Chairman Warner. Thanks. Senator Wyden? Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Fonzone, we talked about whistleblowers when you came to the office. And as you know, I think the Trump administration regularly undermined whistleblowers. And to their credit, the Biden administration officials have told me that it's going to change on their watch. So I want to be very clear on a point that is critical to me. And I don't think we've gotten into this, but if the inspector general transmits to the Director a whistleblower complaint that the inspector general has said is urgent, is the Director obligated by law to forward it to the Congress? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator, for the question. I know this is an issue of concern that we talked about before the hearing. With respect to your question, the law is clear. When the ICIG presents a whistleblower complaint, it is a matter of urgent concern to the DNI. The DNI shall transmit that complain to Congress. Senator Wyden. So the answer is yes. Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Senator Wyden. Operative ``shall.'' Mr. Fonzone. Yes. Senator Wyden. Great. Thank you. Let's go to data purchases then for a moment. Again, in the office, we talked about the bipartisan legislation I have. The Fourth Amendment is not for sale where the government basically uses a credit card to throw the Fourth Amendment in the trash can. Now, I believe Americans have a right to know how the government interprets laws, and that includes ways in which the Intelligence Community goes around the courts by buying Americans' private records from these data brokers, these sleazy operators who are basically accountable to no one. If you're confirmed, will you ensure that the Intelligence Community is transparent about the circumstances in which it does this? Mr. Fonzone. Senator, during her confirmation process, Director Haines committed to seeking to articulate a framework for how the Intelligence Community purchases data so the public can understand that and what the legal basis for purchasing the data is. And I think the idea would be to make that framework public to the maximum extent you can, consistent with sources and methods. And if confirmed, I would look to support the Director in pulling that framework together. Senator Wyden. Do you agree that the public record should include information on the amount of Americans' records collected without a court order? Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I think transparency is very important to the IC. Senator Wyden. That's not the question. The question is: should the American people know the amount of records? Because this is pretty obvious. If it goes on on a very rare basis, then we're going to look at whether there was a sources and methods concern. But I think we need to know the amount of records being collected this way. And I'm interested in whether you think that the public record should include information on the amount. Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I think the IC should provide as much information as they can about the amount of information they're collecting. I just don't know enough, not being in government right now, about what the potential risks might be. Senator Wyden. Well don't you learn a little bit more in the next few days and get back to me within a week. Okay? On that point--. Mr. Fonzone. Senator, thank you. Senator Wyden. Good. Now, there's a lot of confusion about how the community interprets the Supreme Court's Carpenter case. This is the big geolocation data case. And whether it can collect Americans' geolocation information without a warrant. If you're confirmed, would you clear this up by issuing public guidance on how Carpenter applies to the Intelligence Community? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator. Carpenter is a very important decision and, to the IC, it's one of the Supreme Court's major statements about how information created in the digital age is covered by the Fourth Amendment. I know during her confirmation process Director Haines committed to engaging with IC lawyers on whether guidance on Carpenter is necessary. And if confirmed, I would look forward to working with her on understanding Carpenter and how it applies to the IC's actions and whether guidance is necessary. Senator Wyden. Why in the world would one say they need to clear up whether guidance is needed? There's tremendous confusion. The agencies are all over the map. That's a matter of fact. So I'm still not clear. Do you think guidance is necessary or not? Mr. Fonzone. Senator, I can see why guidance might be necessary. Carpenter is a very important decision. Not being in government, I don't know the state of what the different IC entities are--what their positions are on Carpenter. I know the Director wants to look into this. Senator Wyden. My time is pretty much up. Why don't you get back to me within a week on that point as well? I'm not even going to ask my other question, because given how much confusion there is, I thought that at a minimum if confirmed you would tell agencies to be transparent about what they're doing. But clearly we're not even at that point. So, I would like within a week an answer to the question of whether you think guidance is necessary for the Community on the Carpenter question, which speaks to geolocation and is right at the heart of this question about whether people are going to have their Fourth Amendment rights protected. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator. Chairman Warner. The Chairman has no further questions. Anybody else want a second round? Senator Gillibrand. Mr. Chairman, I am on via WebEx. Chairman Warner. Oh, I apologize, Senator Gillibrand. Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. Chairman Warner. That was my mistake. Senator Gillibrand. No, no. I'm good. Chairman Warner. Alright. Senator Gillibrand. Senator Gillibrand. Perfect. Mr. Holmgren, it has been reported that a growing number of U.S. personnel overseas, including State Department employees, have been targeted in a mysterious series of attacks causing significant health impacts. This has reportedly occurred in Cuba, China, and elsewhere. I cannot overstate how critical it is that we get to the bottom of who is doing this, that we hold the perpetrators accountable, and that we take care of our people. If you are confirmed, do you commit to doing everything in your power to ensure that the Intelligence Community protects these individuals, determines the origin of the attacks, and makes sure that the victims are given the appropriate medical care? And if confirmed do you commit to regularly engaging with the Committee on this issue? Mr. Holmgren. Thank you, Senator. I know this is a concern raised by several Members of the Committee during the pre-hearing meetings. And I very much share those concerns. I've spoken to victims of these egregious attacks and I know that they are suffering; I know that their families are suffering. And Senator, if confirmed, I will have no higher priority than ensuring that the Department of State and the Intelligence Community are working to protect the safety and security of U.S. personnel, their families, and U.S. citizens overseas. And as a testament to how serious I take this issue, if confirmed, I will ask my staff to provide a classified briefing on the matter on my first day in office. And to keep me regularly updated on the issue. And, of course, pledge to keep the Committee informed. Senator Gillibrand. And let me give you some guidance. It's very important with the kind of impact--disease impact that these attacks seem to have been causing, that you create experts in the field. And I would highly recommend that----at one location such as Walter Reed where you can have doctors that are read in and understanding what is at stake so that these service members and Intelligence Community members and members of the State Department are not looking far and wide for experts. With the 9/11 first responders and community members, we developed state-of-the-art care for them based on the nature of their exposure. I think we have to use what we learned there and develop a state-of-the-art-care for the men and women who have been exposed. And I'd like your commitment to working toward that end. Mr. Holmgren. Yes, Senator, and with INR specifically I commit that this will be a priority in terms of supporting the Department and ensuring that its personnel have the resources they need. I very much appreciate the issue. Senator Gillibrand. Okay. Thank you. Now with regard to Mr. Fonzone: the families of the victims of September 11th have long been seeking certain documents from the FBI related to the facilitators who enabled the perpetrators of the attacks. The last Administration blocked the release of the requested documents. Almost 20 years after the attacks, the families and the American people deserve much better. I have read these documents myself and I believe that there's additional information that can be shared with the families. I have asked DNI Avril Haines to work with me to ensure that while sensitive sources and methods may need to be protected and remain classified, that the documents undergo a full review so that we can maximize transparency with the families and the public. If you are confirmed, will you commit to work with me to ensure that all appropriate information on this topic is reviewed for declassification so that it can hopefully be shared with the families? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator. If confirmed, I would work with the Director and you on this issue. Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. And my last question--do I still have time, Mr. Chairman? Or has my time been consumed? Chairman Warner. No, you've still got time for one more. Senator Gillibrand. Okay. Mr. Fonzone, if confirmed you will be the top lawyer in the Intelligence Community. What would be your advice to the DNI regarding the role of the Intelligence Community in addressing the threat of domestic terrorism? Where do you see that line of authorities between the significant domestic national security threat, the Intelligence Community's capability, and the law enforcement community? And related, we've seen such an intense influx of cyberattacks by sophisticated foreign adversaries who have utilized U.S. computing infrastructure to mask the origin of attacks. This has also raised concerns that the perpetrators are exploiting a perceived gap in intelligence authorities that make it difficult for the IC to track cyber threats on domestic networks. If confirmed as the top intelligence lawyer in the U.S. Government, what would be your advice to the DNI regarding the intelligence authorities needed to better defend the United States from these type of attacks? Mr. Fonzone. Thank you, Senator, for the question. I think you flagged two very difficult legal issues where the threats can span the domestic to the international, and drawing a line between where the IC's authorities are and where the authorities of other entities who are responsible for addressing those threats are. If confirmed, I think both cyber security and domestic threats would be areas of major focus for me. And I would commit to you that I would both, one, try to make sure that the Intelligence Community is operating within-- ensure that the Intelligence Community is operating within its authorities. Two, be very careful to ensure that the Intelligence Community is not intruding on the domestic sphere where it should not intrude and it's respecting the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens. And three, as your question alluded to, if I identify any authority gaps where the Intelligence Community lacks the authorities it needs to keep the Nation safe, I would obviously bring those to this Committee and work with this Committee to fill those gaps. Senator Gillibrand. Yes. And I'm most concerned about the third issue, because we've had several open sessions where there are perceived gaps and perceived vulnerabilities because of the way we have aligned our capabilities. And I think it needs a deep dive and I think it needs advice. Chairman Warner. Thank you, Senator. Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. Chairman Warner. Let me just reiterate one point that Senator Gillibrand made. And it applies you, Mr. Holmgren, but I think it also applies to you, Mr. Fonzone. This Committee, frankly, has been shocked on this issue related to the so- called Havana Syndrome. That for now close to five years we've been getting reports. Many of the individuals that work for various parts of the American government appeared not to get treatment in an appropriate manner. It's fairly stunning to, I think, all of us that we still don't know four to five years in on an attribution issue: who perpetrated these attacks? We don't know what devices were used, and only recently do we feel like the individuals who-- clearly many who were harmed--were getting any kind of respected treatment. And the notion that we're asking people to serve all over the world and the--not only the actual potential--the actual threat posed by whatever actor using whatever device, but just the psychological notion that you and your family could be posted somewhere and be a victim of something that at least for a number of years it appears like the American government didn't take seriously enough in both a medical or from an investigative standpoint. I've had a number of conversations with the Director on this. IC personnel, State Department personnel, DOD personnel. It appears now people serving domestically here at home. We've got to get to the bottom of this. And Senator Rubio and I and every Member of this Committee is committed to getting those answers. And we'll expect that kind of response. I want to thank you both again, echoing what so many other Members have said about your willingness to serve. These are critical times. I think you hear from all of us, we're going to ask you hard questions. But should you both be confirmed, this Committee will have your back. But we will also expect forthright, straightforward answers. And now more than ever, it's important that the IC has the willingness to speak truth to power. And with that, the Committee is adjourned. Thank you both. [Whereupon at 3:55 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.] Supplemental Material [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] [all]

Committee Leadership

Tom Cotton

Mark Warner

All Committee Members

Recent Legislation Activity

Hearings & Meetings

Reports & Publications

Committee Resources