Open Hearing: Nomination Hearing for John Dever to be General Counsel of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence; Matthew Kozma to be Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis, Department of Homeland Security; George Street to be Director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center; Peter Thomson to be Inspector General of the Central Intelligence Agency; and Christopher Fox to be Inspector General of the Intelligence Community

S. HRG. 119–111
OPEN HEARING: PENDING NOMINATIONS OF JOHN DEVER, TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF
THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; CHRISTOPHER FOX,
TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY; MATTHEW A. KOZMA,
TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; GEORGE WESLEY
STREET, TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY CENTER, OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; AND PETER THOMSON, TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

HEARING
BEFORETHE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
OFTHE
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION

JUNE 25, 2025

Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

S. HRG. 119–111
OPEN HEARING: PENDING NOMINATIONS OF JOHN DEVER, TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF
THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; CHRISTOPHER FOX,
TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY; MATTHEW A. KOZMA,
TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; GEORGE WESLEY
STREET, TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY CENTER, OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; AND PETER THOMSON, TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

HEARING
BEFORETHE
OFTHE
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION

JUNE 25, 2025

Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Intelligence
(
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
60–887 WASHINGTON : 2026

(Established by S. Res. 400, 94th Cong. 2d Sess.)
TOM COTTON, Arkansas, Chairman
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia, Vice Chairman
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
JOHN CORNYN, Texas ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
JERRY MORAN, Kansas MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota JON OSSOFF, Georgia
TODD YOUNG, Indiana MARK KELLY, Arizona
TED BUDD, North Carolina
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Ex Officio
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York, Ex Officio
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi, Ex Officio JACK REED, Rhode Island, Ex Officio

RYAN TULLY, Staff Director
WILLIAM WU, Minority Staff Director
KELSEY S. BAILEY, Chief Clerk
(II)

C O N T E N T S

JUNE 25, 2025
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Tom Cotton, U.S. Senator from Arkansas ……………………………………………………. 1
Mark Warner, U.S. Senator from Virginia …………………………………………………… 3
WITNESSES
George Wesley Street, Nominated to be Director, National Counterintelligence
and Security Center ………………………………………………………………………………… 5
Prepared Statement …………………………………………………………………………….. 7
Christopher Fox, Nominated to be Inspector General, Intelligence Community ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9
Peter Thomson, Nominated to be Inspector General, Central Intelligence
Agency ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13
Matthew Kozma, Nominated to be Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis, Department of Homeland Security …………………………………………………… 18
John Dever, Nominated to be General Counsel, Office of the Director of
National Intelligence ……………………………………………………………………………….. 23
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Nomination Material for George Wesley Street
Questionnaire for Completion by Presidential Nominees ……………………….. 44
Additional Pre-Hearing Questions ………………………………………………………… 60
Post-Hearing Questions ……………………………………………………………………….. 88
Nomination Material for Christopher Fox
Nomination Material for Peter Thomson
Nomination Material for Matthew Kozma
Nomination Material for John Dever
(III)

OPEN HEARING: PENDING NOMINATIONS OF JOHN DEVER, TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL
OF THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; CHRISTOPHER FOX,
TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY; MATTHEW A.
KOZMA, TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS, DEPARTMENT
OF HOMELAND SECURITY; GEORGE WESLEY
STREET, TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY CENTER, OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; AND PETER THOMSON, TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 2025
U.S. SENATE,
SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:05 p.m., in Room SH–216, the Hart Senate Office Building, the Hon. Tom Cotton, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Warner, Cornyn, Lankford, Budd, Wyden, King, Ossoff, and Kelly.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM COTTON, A U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS
CHAIRMAN COTTON. You may be seated. We will be starting momentarily.
Good afternoon. This hearing will come to order. I would like to welcome everyone to today’s hearing to consider the following nominations: Mr. George Wes Street, to be Director of National Counterintelligence and Security Center; Mr. Christopher Fox, to be the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community; Mr. Peter Thomson, to be Inspector General of the Central Intelligence Agency; Mr. Matthew Kozma, to be the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis at the Department of Homeland Security; and Dr. John Dever, to be the General Counsel of the Office of Director of National Intelligence.
(1)

First, I would like to thank the nominees for their willingness to answer the call to public service—most of them, once again, and for their many years of public service that have brought them here today. I would also like to recognize their families, many of whom are here with us today, for offering their support and encouragement throughout the process.
The nominees before the Committee are qualified, capable, and impressive professionals who are well suited for the roles to which they have been nominated.
The first is Mr. Wes Street, who is presently serving as the Department of Defense Deputy Director of the National Counterintelligence Task Force. In 1992, Mr. Street joined the United States Army which took him on overseas deployments to the Balkans and the Middle East. Mr. Street has served in numerous roles in the Army, including as Counterintelligence Special Agent in Europe; as Special Agent In Charge of the Army Counterintelligence Field Office in Monterey, California, and as the Army Counterintelligence Supervisory Special Agent LNO and task force officer to FBI headquarters.
Next we have Mr. Christopher Fox, who is now a senior adviser to the DNI and the Acting Chief of the ODNI Information Management Office. He has extensive experience as a business owner, a Judge Advocate specializing in national security for the Virginia Army National Guard, and as a Specialized Skills Officer with the CIA. Additionally, Mr. Fox served in the United States Air Force as a Special Warfare Airman and deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in Tactical Air Control Party and Joint Terminal Attack Controller positions.
Next is Mr. Peter Thomson, a partner of Stone, Pigman, Walther and Wittman in New Orleans. As a co-chair of the firm’s Criminal Law and Information Security Practices, Mr. Thomson is an expert in government investigations, corporate compliance, and white-collar criminal defense. Previously, Mr. Thomson spent more than two decades as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Louisiana and taught trial advocacy at the Tulane University School of Law for 20 years, as well as served as the Deputy Sheriff in his home parish.
Mr. Matthew Kozma, who is currently Global Account Manager at Intel Corporation, has a long career of public service. A graduate of the United States Air Force Academy, Mr. Kozma served as the Intelligence Community Chief Information Officer during President Trump’s first term. Among his responsibilities in this role, Mr. Kozma worked to modernize IT infrastructure and investments within the Intelligence Community and streamline intelligence sharing capabilities.
Last, but not least, Dr. John Dever is currently Special Adviser for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. He has wide- ranging experience protecting our national security in both the private and public sectors. This includes Dr. Dever’s work as the anti- money laundering chief at UBS; his role as the head of Financial Crimes at Wells Fargo; his service as an Assistant U.S. Attorney at the Department of Justice, and his time as an Assistant General Counsel in the Counterterrorism Division at the FBI.

As you can see, all of these men before the Committee today are patriots and professionals.
Again, thank you all for your decades of service and thank you once again for continuing to want to serve your nation. With men like you working on behalf of the American people, I am confident the nation will continue to be strong, proud, and free for generations to come.
I will now recognize the Vice Chairman for his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK R. WARNER, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA
Vice Chairman WARNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And let me join the Chairman in, first of all, congratulating each of our witnesses on your nominations. Each of you has been nominated for positions of great public trust, many of which were actually created in response to significant intelligence failures in the past.
For example, the current construct of the CIA Inspector General was created by Congress in 1989 to create a more independent IG after Iran Contra. And the ODNI and DHS were created to ensure better coordination of foreign and domestic intelligence as we all know in the wake of 9/11.
As I have said to every IC nominee that has come before me, the most important test you will face is whether you can provide credible, objective, and unbiased intelligence to policymakers and be willing to speak truth to power. Unfortunately, over the last few months, we have seen disturbing examples of senior intelligence leaders failing this most basic task.
At ODNI, a top political appointee pressured career intelligence officers to alter an analytic assessment—not improve its accuracy, but to ensure that it wouldn’t be, ‘‘used against the DNI or POTUS.’’ And when those career officials refused to bend the truth, they were fired.
At FBI, some of our most experienced agents have been fired reportedly for their political affiliations or for being friends with individuals the President deems to be political enemies. What is sad is that many of these agents were not only doing their jobs, but they were doing a damn good job at it.
The now fired former head of FBI’s Counterterrorism Division helped bring to justice the terrorist mastermind of the Abbey Gate bombing in Afghanistan that killed 13 U.S. servicemembers—a prosecution that the President himself praised in his State of the Union address.
The Director of National Security Agency, after serving 30 distinguished years in uniform, was fired reportedly at the behest of an online conspiracy theorist who among other things claimed that 9/ 11 was an inside job.
Those kinds of actions are not just inappropriate, they are direct attacks on the integrity of our Intelligence Community.
Finally, after Director Gabbard testified to this very committee that ‘‘Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.’’ We have then seen, after the DNI statement, senior administration officials later move to discredit those findings.
Did we get it wrong or is the Director right?

He claimed she was wrong, dismissed the intelligence, and then invoked the specter of Iran building a nuclear weapon to justify launching air strikes, all without briefing Congress, let alone seeking any kind of approval.
Just yesterday, we saw the public reporting that despite the administration’s claims of total obliteration—and we are not going to comment on any of the intelligence, but the intelligence may not be as rosy.
Now, it is still in the early days and I am hoping all of us, all of the Senators that are coming to the briefing tomorrow will answer some of the questions that I know not just I have but a number about this discrepancy. But this repeated pattern of manipulating and shading intelligence to support a political narrative is deeply alarming, and we have all seen in our history where this road leads. Politicized intelligence doesn’t just distort policy, it puts American lives at risk. We saw the tragic consequences of that when flawed and politicized assessments paved the way for a war in Iraq that I think most Americans in retrospect agree needed a second look.
Now, all of you here are not going to hold Cabinet titles, but in many ways your roles are even more critical, because the credibility and objectivity of the IC workforce rests on your shoulders.
Mr. Fox and Mr. Thomson, as IGs, it will be your job to protect whistleblowers, to identify areas of abuse in your agencies and to have the courage to defend your independence when it is challenged.
Mr. Dever, as the General Counsel for the DNI, it will be your job to provide clear, objective legal guidance and help advise Director Gabbard on what is and what is not permissible under law regardless of political pressure.
Mr. Kozma and Mr. Street, as leaders of large organizations, it will be your responsibility to ensure that you set a culture where speaking truth to power is actually celebrated and not punished, and where honest, objective analysis is valued.
I don’t underestimate the difficulties of these responsibilities, but if you are each confirmed, the men and women you will lead and the American people demand nothing less than your absolute devotion to the truth. Today, in my questions, I am hoping to hear from each of you how you will clearly demonstrate your plan to uphold that commitment.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COTTON. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman.
Gentlemen, before we move to your opening statements, we have a series of customary questions the Committee asks to all nominees. You may collectively answer yes or no. Please speak loudly. Head nods or shakes are not recorded for the record. And to give you a study guide, if you answer no, we will have to stop and you will have to explain yourself individually.
One: Do you agree to appear before the Committee here or in other venues when invited?
The PANEL. Yes.
Chairman COTTON. If confirmed, do you agree to send officials from your office to appear before the Committee and designated staff when invited?

The PANEL. Yes.
Chairman COTTON. Three: 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?
The PANEL. Yes.
Chairman COTTON. Will you ensure that your office and your staff provide such materials to the Committee when requested?
The PANEL. Yes.
Chairman COTTON. Finally, do you agree to inform and fully brief to the fullest extent possible all Members of the Committee of intelligence activities and covert actions, rather than only the Chairman and Vice Chairman?
The PANEL. Yes.
Chairman COTTON. Thank you. You all passed.
After the hearing today, it is my intention to move to convene a committee business meeting promptly following our Fourth of July State work period to vote on these nominations and report them to the Senate for full consideration.
For the benefit of Members, I note that we have a vote scheduled at 4:15. My goal will be to push through and try to wrap up the hearing by 4:35, to allow Senators to reach the floor to vote.
We will now proceed to opening statements, after which I will recognize Members by seniority at the gavel for 5 minutes each.
Mr. Street, we will start with you, and then we will move to my right, your left, down the panel for opening statements.
STATEMENT OF GEORGE WESLEY STREET, NOMINEE FOR THE POSITION OF DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY CENTER
Mr. STREET. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, Members of the Committee: I am humbled to present myself before you today for consideration as the nominee to be the Director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center. I am grateful to President Trump for nominating me for this position, and thankful to Director Gabbard for her confidence in me.
I would not be here today without the support of my wife Stephanie and our three children. They have persevered through long deployments and my extended periods away from home. I am forever grateful for their unwavering love, sacrifice, and support. I’d be remiss if I didn’t also recognize this storied institution that allowed me the opportunity to build 30 years of counterintelligence expertise across the globe, the United States Army, ‘‘This We’ll Defend’’.
I am fortunate to have served my nation as a United States Army soldier, and as a civilian Counterintelligence Special Agent for a total of nearly 33 years. This has allowed me to build expertise in nearly all aspects of the counterintelligence and security enterprise. From overseas assignments, including multinational peacekeeping and combat deployments to leading complex interagency investigations here at home, I have executed or managed nearly every aspect of my discipline.
I have developed key relationships with international partners, who are similarly victimized by adversarial intelligence efforts. I fully understand the importance of collaboration with partner nations.

Our adversaries are consistently innovative in the avenues they use to exploit our nation to achieve intelligence, military, and economic advantages for their own dastardly purposes. Adversarial elements work with near impunity in the homeland. They penetrate our critical infrastructure, telecommunications, and cyber networks, exploit our academic communities, infiltrate our research efforts, and victimize our private industries. Our defense industrial base and non-title 50 U.S. Government organizations are targeted and often represent the soft underbelly of our protective security efforts.
Our adversaries do not limit themselves to traditional means, but have evolved non-traditional collection methods to exploit third country nationals, co-optees, business relationships, and unmanned systems. China utilizes a whole-of-society approach to exploiting the United States and our partners. China aggressively and unapologetically flew a spy balloon across the American heartland without remorse.
Chinese law mandates that all Chinese companies and citizens cooperate with the intelligence services of the Chinese government. This means that Chinese companies and students studying at U.S. universities, often working on U.S. Government funded research, are obligated to cooperate with the intelligence services of the Chinese Communist Party on demand. We must work to address this emerging form of exploitation by China, while simultaneously defending the civil liberties of the American people.
Unlike other the other intelligence disciplines, the nation lacks a ‘‘center of gravity’’ for the counterintelligence community—a nerve center that enables field elements to enact the National Counterintelligence Strategy and conduct synchronized interagency efforts against the insidious threat posed by foreign intelligence.
If confirmed, I will work to establish the NCSC as that center of gravity for the counterintelligence fight. I will strengthen the relationship between the NCSC and the National Counterintelligence Task Force. This will enhance linkage with field elements and improve information sharing to close the seam between the Intelligence Community and federal law enforcement organizations.
If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed by the Senate, I will work with the U.S. counterintelligence community to enable their efforts to identify, report, detect, deter, investigate, exploit, and neutralize adversarial threats to our nation and impose cost on the adversaries targeting the United States, partner nations, and our equities across the globe. I firmly believe that to achieve these objectives, the NCSC, under the direction of President Trump and DNI Gabbard, must consistently and transparently work with the Congress to remain agile in the counterintelligence fight.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, Members of the Committee, I thank you for your time and consideration of my nomination. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of the witness follows:]

Chairman COTTON. Thank you. Mr. Fox.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER FOX, NOMINEE FOR THE POSI-
TION OF INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY INSPECTOR GENERAL
Mr. FOX. Chairman Cotton, Vice Chairman Warner, distinguished Members of this Committee: I am honored and humbled to appear before you as you consider my nomination to be the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community.
First, I want to thank President Trump and Director Gabbard for placing their trust and confidence in me. I am joined today by my wonderful mother Jessica and my stepfather Scott, and also behind me is Major Fox, an incredible Army nurse who happens to be my wife and the true north of my heart.
To my family and friends here and at home, thank you for your love and support. I am also grateful to the Air Force and the Army who sharpened me into the man I am today, to the warfighters with whom I served, and to those who shed their blood for our Nation and never made it home.
I also want to recognize the fact that Mr. Street and Mr. Dever, and I are combat veterans who were prior enlisted combat veterans and became commissioned officers. I am proud to be by their side today. Most importantly, I am grateful to my Lord and savior Jesus Christ, for His grace and blessings on this journey leading to this moment.
I have spent nearly 20 years on the front lines and behind the scenes of national security as a Special Warfare Airman, clandestine CIA officer, Army JAG officer, and in various other positions crafting and executing U.S. policy. Along the way, I built a technology startup and I led intelligence professionals in the private sector.
Since April of this year, I have served as a Senior Advisor to the Director of National Intelligence and as Acting Chief of ODNI’s Information Management Office, where I oversee FOIA compliance, records management, and declassification efforts, including the provision of records to Congress.
I have worked within and alongside the Intelligence Community in many capacities, from operations to policy and analysis, and I understand the stakes. My approach to oversight is shaped by hard experience. I have made split-second decisions under fire, and I have developed strategic policies to keep Americans safe. I have witnessed intelligence operations succeed spectacularly; and fail because of fear, bureaucracy, and politics. I have challenged careerists who wanted to play it safe and avoid risk in their own self- interest. And I have fought to stop bad decisions, even when I risked my own career and reputation.
The mission of national security demands integrity and moral courage, and in my professional life, I have always sought the difficult right over the easy wrong. If confirmed, I will bring that same principle-driven leadership to the role of the IC IG.
My priorities will be straightforward: First, I will protect whistleblowers—not just in principle, but in practice. Whistleblowers are often the only ones willing to come forward when there is an issue that could have been resolved before it developed into a crisis. They deserve our respect, protection, and prompt action.
Second, I will align our investigative and oversight activities with the real threats faced by our Nation—from Chinese cyber operations, to nuclear brinksmanship by Russia and Iran, to transnational cartels pushing fentanyl across our borders. Oversight should ensure the IC is addressing these threats effectively and efficiently, not distract from the mission.
Third, I will bring the IC IG out of the shadows. Too many officers and contractors in our Intelligence Community do not know who the Inspectors General are, what we do, or how we can help. I plan to fix that. Our teams should be in the field, not just behind a firewall—known, trusted, and accessible.
And finally, I will modernize the IG’s resources, especially with respect to technology and information systems. Oversight cannot be static. Today’s IG needs state-of-the-art case management systems and robust coordination between all 18 IC elements. By improving workflow and optimizing human capital, the IC IG will be better positioned to provide clear and timely congressional reporting with more valuable context and an increased emphasis on calling out both misconduct and excellence.
I am not a political actor or a DC insider. I worked hard for everything I have. I have made mistakes and I know what it means to earn back trust. That same lesson grounds me today. Integrity is what you do when no one is watching. And oversight is that same ethic scaled up for the institutions that hold our Nation’s secrets.
If confirmed, I will strive to ensure the IC’s moral compass is properly calibrated. I will never throw someone under the bus for being honest and acting in good faith, but I will make sure people are held accountable for their actions, and that the IC learns from its mistakes, to improve efficiency and effectiveness, and to rebuild trust with the American people. I will be independent, impartial, and fair. I will listen to the workforce, not just the leadership. I will question previous assumptions and make pragmatic decisions to advance the mission.
The IC IG has an important role in handling significant issues across the IC. If confirmed, I am committed to keeping Congress fully and currently informed so you have the facts you need to conduct your important oversight role. I thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today and I look forward to your questions.

Chairman COTTON. Thank you. Mr. Thomson.
STATEMENT OF PETER M. THOMSON, NOMINEE TO BE INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Mr. THOMSON. Chairman Cotton, Vice Chairman Warner and distinguished Members of the Committee: I am honored to appear before you today as the President’s nominee to be Inspector General of the Central Intelligence Agency, and would like to thank President Trump and CIA Director John Ratcliffe for the confidence they have placed in me with regard to this very important position.
I also wish to thank my dear wife Patricia, my daughter Kaylin, for their unwavering patience, love and support throughout this process.
The CIA has a responsibility of collecting, analyzing, and disseminating timely and accurate foreign intelligence to the President, Congress, and other senior policymakers and consumers, and conducts covert actions when necessary. I firmly believe that CIA officers including those who serve in the Office of Inspector General, regardless of their background, political affiliation, or philosophical beliefs are united at their core by a deep love of our country and a strong desire and commitment to protect the American people.
The CIA’s Office of Inspector General or OIG for short plays a crucial role in advancing the mission of the CIA through independent oversight. Although the CIA Inspector General reports to the CIA Director and is accountable to Congress, the OIG must independently plan and execute all of its oversight work with regard to the Agency. Independence means that the work of the Inspector General must be performed in an unbiased and impartial manner, free of undue or inappropriate influences. Should I be confirmed, I can say with absolute confidence that doing the work of the IG in an unbiased and impartial manner will be my absolute top priority.
One of the most important programs within any Inspector General’s office is the whistleblower program. As Inspector General, if I am confirmed, I will work with Agency leadership and OIG staff to maintain and strengthen a culture of trust for Agency employees and contractors who have information exposing fraud, waste, or abuse, violations of law, or other deficiencies or problems that should be corrected within the Agency. I will also work to maintain and where appropriate, improve and strengthen all of the component programs and policies which define the CIA OIG whistleblower’s program.
I give you my solemn promise that if confirmed, I will protect the independence of the CIA Inspector General’s office and consistently seek to follow the law and approach all of its work with honesty, integrity, fairness, and impartiality.
If you entrust me with this critical role, I look forward to working with this Committee, Agency leadership, and OIG staff to fulfill the CIA oversight obligations of the Office of Inspector General.
Thank you for this opportunity, and I look forward to your questions.

Chairman COTTON. Thank you. Mr. Kozma.
STATEMENT OF MATTHEW KOZMA, NOMINEE TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. KOZMA. Good afternoon. Chairman Cotton, Vice Chairman Warner, distinguished Members of this Committee: It is an honor to appear before you here today. Thank you.
I am truly grateful for and humbled by the distinct honor to be nominated by President Trump to be Under Secretary of Intelligence and Analysis at the Department of Homeland Security. Should I have the privilege of being confirmed for this position, I look forward to further serving our great country, the greatest country in the world, the United States of America. If I may, I would like to recognize those who encouraged me to be the Christian patriot I am today. I would be remiss if I didn’t first thank our Heavenly Father for all of His blessings, not only for me and my family, but especially for America.
I would like to recognize and honor my parents Matthew and Barbara Kozma who are with me here today. Their selfless sacrifices provided me with the types of opportunities that they could only dream of as children. They instilled in me a strong faith in our lord, duty to our country, a strong work ethic, courage to press forward despite adversity, to be a lifelong learner, and to always seek the truth. Their example taught me to strive to put others first and to ensure their safety and security and prosperity. Because of their encouragement, hard work, support and continued prayers, I was blessed to attend and graduate from the United States Air Force Academy with a double major in both electrical engineering and applied physics and patriotically serve America in uniform for over 30 years.
I would like to recognize my siblings Lisa, Mark, and Laura, and their families, who unfortunately could not be here today. No matter the distance or circumstance, they, too, continue to be bastions of love, support, and encouragement.
I’d especially like to recognize my wife and our three children who are here with me today. I am eternally grateful to my beautiful, tenacious, and talented wife Bethany, for her love, support, and encouragement, and without whom I wouldn’t be sitting here today. We were blessed by God with our three incredible and talented children Madeline, William, and Caroline. I am proud of each one of them and grateful to be their dad. It is for them and their futures and for all Americans that I’ve served in the security and defense of America in one manner or another for over 30 years and, should I be confirmed, I eagerly look forward to continuing that endeavor as Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis.
I recognize and am humbled by the awesome responsibilities entrusted to this position by the President and the Congress. If confirmed, I look forward to upholding the Constitution, continuing to serve my fellow Americans with integrity, and vigilantly helping to protect the sovereignty and safety of the American homeland.
Strong committed leadership is vital to best protect our borders and ensure the safety and security of all Americans. Sadly, America continues to face challenges and threats to our homeland. Yet, I firmly believe that if we always seek God, we will prevail in defending America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
If confirmed I will not enter into this endeavor lightly, as the safety and security of America is paramount. The purpose of government must always be to protect its citizens and promote their peace and prosperity. With this in mind, I fully anticipate challenges with this solemn undertaking. In doing so, I look forward to your candor, your confidence, and your counsel.
As I consider how best to execute the roles and responsibilities entrusted to this position, I reflect on four areas that have served me well over the years. From my earliest experiences as a cadet, through my military service experience and later as former Intelligence Community Chief Information Officer, and most recently in industry, I submit that technology, technique, team, and trust are all critical for achieving success.
Technology. Technological advantage has been the foundational pillar of America’s prosperity. We must vigilantly leverage American ingenuity and innovation to always be strides ahead of our adversaries. America must continue to thrive and lead in all fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and actively protect our critical infrastructure that propels those endeavors. If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring that our analysts and fellow DHS counterparts are equipped with and using state of the art technology to efficiently and effectively execute their mission each day.
Technique. Technology without technique is useless. It is imperative that I&A’s analysts be informed, educated, and trained on the latest know-how and toolsets to optimally apply available knowledge, insights, and acumen for mission accomplishment. Our intelligence and analytical tradecraft requires a unique combination of skill, curiosity, dedication, vigilance, and trustworthiness to ensure the information and intelligence we extract and timely share is correct, comprehensive, and corroborated.
Team. When it comes to Homeland Security we are all one team as Americans, regardless of our backgrounds. Talented and dedicated people are our greatest assets and deterrence against those who wish and try to do us harm. It is critical to actively invest in, encourage, and recognize those individuals who strive daily to secure and safeguard our Nation’s borders, our critical infrastructure, and all Americans from the threats and destruction of terrorism.
Trust. Underscores all roles, responsibilities, and facets of the Office of I&A is the trust of the American public, Congress, and this Committee is key to America. I look forward, if confirmed, to build and strengthen the transparency and trust vital to the checks and balances crafted by our Founding Fathers to ensure a free and vibrant society, securing ‘‘the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.’’
Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to answering your questions.

Chairman COTTON. Thank you. Mr. Dever.
STATEMENT OF JOHN DEVER, NOMINEE TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE
Dr. DEVER. Chairman Cotton, Vice Chairman Warner, Members of the Committee: It is an honor to appear before you today as President Trump’s nominee for General Counsel of the Office of Director of National Intelligence. I would like to thank President Trump and Director Gabbard for their trust and confidence in me.
Being here today feels like the culmination of the American dream. My mom is a first-generation American from Spain and my dad was a second-generation American from Ireland—only in America. Like most kids, I didn’t know how fortunate I was to have the parents I did. Their focus on education as well as their ever- present kindness and love remains a constant blessing. Thank you for everything, Mom, and I know Dad is watching down and smiling.
Thank you to everybody who helped prepare me for today, especially my potential future colleagues at the Office of Director of National Intelligence, Office of the General Counsel, and the Office of Legislative Affairs, with special thanks to Tommy Bryan and Amber Keyser. Thank you to our family and friends who have traveled to be with us today. It means a lot to me and Bridget.
Most importantly, I would like to thank my wife Bridget and my son Johnny. Bridget, without your love and encouragement, none of this would be possible. Thank you so much for wholeheartedly supporting our most recent but certainly not our last adventure. Johnny, you mean the world to me. We are so proud of you, and I can’t wait to suffer through some White Sox games together this summer.
As a former soldier, both enlisted and commissioned, I understand firsthand the repercussions of flawed intelligence. How it can be used to let slip the dogs of war and change the course of history on a global scale. How it could mean wasting our most precious national resource, and closer to home, how it means to my friend Tom Casey who will never see his family again.
I am very grateful to the Army for what it taught me as well as for the incredible soldiers with whom I served, including Alex Bustamante, Shawn Harkins, Gary Bilsky, Wes Street, Josh Eaton, Louis Dinatalli, and now Chris Fox.
I saw firsthand during multiple combat deployments that it is during the most dangerous and stressful times when under tremendous pressure when cool heads and reasoned judgment is most needed. How we comport ourselves at those critical moments is what truly differentiates us from our enemies. During those difficult times, and always, the Constitution of the United States must be our guiding light.
At the FBI I learned the tremendous array of tools and power of the Intelligence Community and how important it is to wield that power in a lawful way. I met many talented and dedicated public servants and will work hard in support of Director Gabbard’s goal of earning back the trust of the American people. As a Federal
prosecutor, I worked on data exfiltration cases and began to fully understand the existential threat posed to the United States of America by the People’s Republic of China.
As Global Crisis Management Leader at General Electric, I led large multinational teams, honing my risk management skills through every conceivable kind of disaster—natural, financial, reputational, and regulatory. That experience reinforced the importance of culture—critical when working with 18 different agencies, each with a unique culture of their own.
I spent a considerable amount of time as a compliance executive at large financial institutions. I learned to build, assess and govern compliance programs in highly regulated and complex environments. This skill is sorely needed in the IC to ensure we are conducting ourselves in accordance with our statutory requirements and the expectations of the American people. I worked for a wonderful and very gifted leader, Lourdes Paredes, together with an amazing team we de-risked very large banks of individuals abusing the U.S. financial system, to include Russian oligarchs. Such de- risking was often very unpopular, but it was always the right thing to do and we did it. During this time I helped establish the Center for National Security and Human Rights Law in Chicago.
Most recently, my brother James and I started an enterprise risk management and cyber security company. We helped clients protect themselves against advanced persistent threats, nation-state actors, and transnational criminal organizations. I spent a considerable amount of time co-leading a nonprofit dedicated to help veterans obtain family-sustaining jobs in cybersecurity. Those experiences position me well to provide advice and thought leadership on technical issues where the law lags behind.
If confirmed, I look forward to leading the dedicated and talented lawyers and support staff in the General Counsel’s Office in providing Director Gabbard and the ODNI with timely and accurate counsel on the many challenges and opportunities we face. I also look forward to collaborating with lawyers across the Intelligence Community to address novel legal issues and help ensure that the Community’s equities are represented effectively.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and Members of the Committee, I commit to you, if afforded the opportunity to serve again I will do my best and do everything in my power to carry out this mission to the best of my ability and earn the Nation’s trust every single day. Thank you again for your consideration and I look forward to your questions.

Chairman COTTON. Thank you.
Let me start with our two Inspector General nominees, Mr. Thomson and Mr. Fox. I suspect that some of my colleagues will speak at length about recent developments in of the Office of Inspector General at the ODNI. What I want to say up front is that many Members of this committee have had concerns for sometime predating this administration about partisanship and bias within the offices of the Inspector General.
Gentlemen, if confirmed, do you both commit to leading your respective offices in a nonpartisan, unbiased, and independent manner?
Mr. Fox.
Mr. FOX. Absolutely, Senator, yes.
Chairman COTTON. Mr. Thomson.
Mr. THOMSON. Yes.
Chairman COTTON. Mr. Kozma, let me turn to you, nominated to lead the office of Intelligence and Analysis at the Department of Homeland Security. I have long had concerns that I&A overtly connects information and intelligence on Americans that is purely domestic in nature and lacks any genuine connection to foreign intelligence or foreign terrorist groups. That is not at all to gainsay the threat posed by certain domestic threats, but I believe our Intelligence Community should be focused on foreign intelligence threats while leaving domestic threats to law enforcement agencies like the FBI.
Do you believe that the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, one of 18 elements of the Intelligence Community, should collect information or intelligence on Americans who lack a connection to foreign terrorism or foreign intelligence?
Mr. KOZMA. I do not, Senator.
Chairman COTTON. If confirmed, what will you do to ensure that the Office of Intelligence and Analysis concentrates on threats with a foreign connection?
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, I look forward to collaborating with components across DHS and the Intelligence Community elements to ensure that any activities that are unlawful or insidious are appropriately handled and if and when they are appropriately transferred over to the appropriate law enforcement entity, the FBI or others.
Mr. Dever, you are nominated to be the General Counsel for the Office of Director of National Intelligence where you will be advising on a host of national security issues. One is the surveillance of foreign spies within the United States. What is your view of the constitutional rights that foreign spies enjoy inside of the U.S.? Mr. DEVER. They don’t enjoy any rights—— Chairman COTTON. Thank you.
Mr. DEVER [continuing]. Inside the U.S.
Chairman COTTON. I agree.
Should foreign spies have Fourth Amendment protections while on American soil?
Mr. DEVER. No, Senator.
Mr. Thomson, I reviewed your background material. I understand you served as a reserve deputy sheriff in your home parish of Terrebonne?
Mr. THOMSON. (Inaudible.)
Chairman COTTON. Microphone, please?
Mr. THOMSON. Yes. Not entirely accurate, Mr. Chairman. Terrebonne is not my home parish, but I served in a legal capacity as a deputy, as legal counsel to the sheriff’s office.
Chairman COTTON. And you were required to resign that position even though it was a pro bono position to take on the new role? Mr. THOMSON. My understanding, the policy would be to resign, so, yes, sir. I have agreed to resign that.
Chairman COTTON. OK. We may have more conversation about that, if it is a reserve volunteer role. We have many Members of Congress and for that matter congressional aides, for that matter the Director of National Intelligence who serve in the Army National Guard or Army Reserve and I want to make sure we are not discouraging any member of the Executive Branch from serving in those capacities as well.
Mr. THOMSON. Thank you Mr. Chairman I would be happy to talk to you privately about that.
Vice Chairman.
Vice Chairman WARNER. Thank you, gentlemen, all, for your testimony, and obviously you all have impressive backgrounds of service to our country and I appreciate that.
Mr. Dever and Mr. Fox: Last month, the Acting Inspector General for the IC notified the Committee that the DNI installed a senior adviser in the IG’s office who reports not to the IG, but reports to the DNI, but works in the IG’s office spaces.
When the then-IG counsel questioned the legal basis for the appointment, the DNI had her fired within 48 hours.
In a notification to this Committee, the Acting Inspector General described the DNI’s actions as ‘‘contrary to law’’ and ‘‘never sufficiently explained.’’
Mr. Dever and Mr. Fox, both of you currently work at the ODNI. Were either of you involved in the decision to appoint the senior adviser or fire the IG counsel?
Mr. DEVER. Thank you for the question, Senator. I was not involved in either one of those decisions.
Mr. FOX. Senator, thank you for the question. I was not involved at all in that.
Vice Chairman WARNER. Do you in light of the IG’s comments of the DNI’s actions as ‘‘contrary to law’’ and ‘‘never sufficiently explained,’’ do you believe the DNI’s actions were legal and appropriate?
Mr. DEVER. Yes, Senator, I do believe her actions were legal. As to the appropriateness, I don’t know the factual underpinnings, but she certainly acted under her authority.
Mr. FOX. Senator, to respect the advice and consent role of the Senate, I have not been involved in any personnel decisions. I am generally aware of the press reporting and the letters, but I am not familiar enough with the content to properly opine at this time, but I am happy to look into it further if confirmed.
Vice Chairman WARNER. I would, because—and Mr. Dever, I went to law school. I am not claiming to be a legal expert by any means, but it just seems to me troubling.
And I appreciate everybody’s comments and I will come to Mr. Thomson in a moment, especially about maintaining the independence of the IG and protection of whistleblowers. I just—it is so out of character to suddenly put somebody that is reporting directly to the DNI inside the IG space. And again, I am not going to weigh in on the legality, although I think the IG’s comments that it was not legal raises some questions with me. I would like to get at a subsequent time your background and why you felt that was legal.
I would say, Mr. Thomson, we have not—thankfully we have not seen that kind of action out of Director Ratcliffe, any effort to try to undermine the office of the independence of the Inspector General. And I appreciated you reiterated those points a number of times in your statement.
Again, this is is a hypothetical but if confirmed, would you consider it appropriate for Director Ratcliffe to appoint personnel to work in your office without your approval or for that matter to fire your counsel if they asked hard questions?
Mr. THOMSON. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman.
As you said, you know, Director Ratcliffe, to my knowledge, has not sought to install or even terminate anyone in the Inspector General’s office. Through my preparation I actually don’t believe that has occurred——
Vice Chairman WARNER. I am not saying—I don’t believe it has occurred.
Mr. THOMSON [continuing]. At all through the Agency.
I would say that Director Ratcliffe, in his nomination hearing before this Committee, committed to an independent Inspector General’s office. He’s also committed to a robust, strong Inspector General’s office. He has committed to a very strong and robust whistleblower’s office.
So, I do not anticipate——
Vice Chairman WARNER. Again, I just—I just would hope—and maybe we will follow up on this. I know you’ve got the appropriate background. You mentioned independence. I don’t know how you maintain independence when you got somebody working inside the Inspector General’s office that reports not to you but to some other entity, how that seems to go against the very notion of what an Inspector General should do.
Let me just get my last question in very quickly for Mr. Street and Mr. Kozma.
Echoing the Chairman, I may not agree on all the parameters, but we both think it is time for a fresh look at some of the roles post 9/11 at ODNI, DHS. You are both going to be responsible for large organizations. Do you think just at first glance—and I will start first with Mr. Street and then in Mr. Kozma—do you think your organizations will be in need of substantial reform? There has been conversation about those kind of reforms. Any opening, thoughts, both of you?
Mr. STREET. Thank you for the question, Senator. Grateful for the opportunity to clarify on that. So I do not know right now. Of course, if confirmed by the Senate I look forward to doing a com-
plete review. I frequently find with organizations that they don’t necessarily have a resource problem but a resource management problem. I would welcome the opportunity to do a review and get back to you on that, Senator.
Mr. KOZMA. Thank you, Senator, for the question. With regards to I&A, I am not at DHS presently, however I look forward to getting into the seat if confirmed.
The unique roles and responsibilities entrusted to the I&A Office by Congress are very special in the fact that they support State, local, Tribal, and territorial and public/private partnerships and that unique conduit in addition to being an element of the IC provides the opportunity to work with NCTC and with NCSC and all the other elements to ensure——
Vice Chairman WARNER. I guess I didn’t expect fulsome answers on either one of those but those are well coached responses. Thank you both, gentlemen.
Chairman COTTON. Senator Cornyn.
Senator CORNYN. Mr. Street, it is well known that the Russian Federation restricts the number of visas for American workers at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. Conversely, the United States quite generously grants visas to Russians who go either to the United Nations to the mission there or to work at NASA in Houston, the Center for Human Space Flight at Johnson Space Center because of the International Space Station.
The FBI has told us that they simply don’t have the personnel to monitor whether or not the Russians had come into each of these locations maintaining their travel restrictions, and they frankly don’t really know what they are up to. Doesn’t that strike you as a very serious counterintelligence problem?
Mr. STREET. Yes, Senator. Thank you. This is a problem across the board with many of these types of countries and activities. I would look as the Director of NCSC to collaborate across the whole of government and interagency to support our colleagues at the FBI with that; and obviously hope to work with the U.S. Department of State on vetting of potential visa entries to the United States, Senator.
Senator CORNYN. Well, part of the problem is Congress’s problem and the State Department. I am hoping that Secretary Rubio will help us out there. I suspect he will.
But we seem to have lost the principle of reciprocity in terms of the way we treat Russians here in the United States and the way Americans are treated working at the Embassy there in Moscow, and it strikes me as a huge vulnerability. The FBI has basically said they don’t have the people or the capacity to monitor those folks here which strikes me as a reason why we ought to limit the number of visas so they can adequately monitor the activities of Russians here in the United States.
Mr. Thomson, I had the honor of introducing you, I guess back during the time when we were all socially distancing back in 2020. You were reported out of the Committee favorably, and I don’t know of any reason why you shouldn’t be reported out favorably and confirmed now. But can you talk to us a little bit about your recent experience and how that will contribute to your ability to perform the work as a CIA Inspector General?
Mr. THOMSON. Thank you very much, Senator. Yes, I do feel that my recent experiences actually over many decades highly qualify me for the position. I very much appreciate the opportunity just to discuss that very briefly.
So I have, as you may know, two decades of experience investigating and prosecuting a wide variety of criminal matters, particularly complex cases, financial crimes, racketeering, murders, corruption, domestic and and international drug trafficking—cases spanning multiple jurisdictions and multiple agencies.
I have worked with many, many State and Federal, local agencies, too many probably to name—Inspectors General offices, forensic investigators, auditors and so forth.
I also have some experience governing collection of foreign signals intelligence, government cybersecurity missions. You know, at my fairly short stint at the National Security Agency, they had a lot of experience with Federal wiretap laws, surveillance laws. Importantly, I have worked for over two decades with confidential informants, particularly in Agency context, FBI, DIA, ATF, Customs, working to protect their safety and anonymity. I think that translates well with regard to whistleblowers. I will use the same values I use of commitment to protect them to the absolute fullest extent of the law. I will protect whistleblowers just as I worked to protect confidential informants.
Senator CORNYN. Thank you. I have just 30 seconds and I want to ask Mr. Fox and you to both comment on this. Do you view the job of Inspector General as the individual who brings down the hammer when somebody crosses lines they shouldn’t cross or does it involve any sort of consultation function with the employees of the various agencies to help them make sure they walk that fine line between doing what they should be doing and what they should not be doing?
Mr. Fox.
Mr. FOX. I appreciate that question, Senator.
I believe the Inspector General’s role is more dynamic than simply keeping people in fear of being hemmed up for misconduct. Instead it is also identifying areas for improvement and rewarding those officers and contractors who bring those to the IG’s attention. I also look forward if confirmed with working closer with the Director in participating in leadership meetings as appropriate to have a place at the table in discussing some future opportunities to improve efficiency and effectiveness.
Chairman COTTON. Senator Wyden.
Senator WYDEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kozma, I have a yes or no question that I think is pretty straight forward and we touched on it yesterday when you came to the office and I appreciated that.
Is it ever OK for Intelligence and Analysis to misrepresent themselves to get into private chat rooms and other private communications?
Mr. KOZMA. Thank you, Senator, for your question and concern.
As we discussed yesterday, the focus of——
Senator WYDEN. I would like a yes or no answer. Excuse me.
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, as we discussed, the short answer is it should not be misrepresentation in any manner. There are certain excep-
tions to the cases we discussed in order to protect individuals who may be detailed to I&A that would be in a covered status.
Senator WYDEN. I will tell you, as we touched on yesterday, Intelligence and Analysis is supposed to be limited to collecting publicly available information, and going into people’s private communications is spying and I think that is very troubling. I think I told you that yesterday.
Mr. Dever, where are you on the stand? We know from recent history military conflicts and other crises, real or imagined, are often used as pretext for expanded surveillance of Americans. Do you see anything in the President’s claims—we talked about this as well—in the President’s claims about the invasion of migrants and the domestic deployment of the Guard and the military in the conflict with Iran that would justify any expansion of surveillance authorities?
Mr. DEVER. Thank you for the question, Senator, and thank you for a little bit of time yesterday to speak with you. I appreciate it.
I am not aware of any such things afoot, but above all, the Intelligence Community must comply with the Constitution and all the laws of the United States, so if there were——
Senator WYDEN. I know you don’t know of anything afoot, but do you see anything in your view that would justify an expansion of surveillance authorities?
Mr. DEVER. No, Senator, I don’t.
Senator WYDEN. OK. Thank you.
Let me ask a question with respect to the Vice Chairman’s concern on this whole question of IG’s. I was on the Committee in 2009 when we passed the law that gave both the IC Inspector General and the CIA Inspector General authority over the hiring and firing of personnel. And I can just tell you all that the clear intent was to strengthen the independence of the Inspector General. It was not intended to create exceptions to the IG’s authorities.
So this would be a question for Mr. Fox and Mr. Thomson. If confirmed, will you protect all your personnel from being fired by your Director in nonsecurity cases?
Mr. FOX. Thanks for the question, Senator. I am committed to an independently Acting IG, and I look forward to working with this Committee, including looking at potential legislative solutions if that is necessary to strengthen the law.
Senator WYDEN. Mr. Thomson.
Mr. THOMSON. Yes, Senator, I agree with Mr. Fox. Under the CIA IG statute, the Inspector General has final approval, I think as you know, of all personnel decisions absent security-related matters, which fall to the authority of the Director. If something like that were to happen, I would certainly want to talk to the Director. I don’t anticipate that ever happening with Director Ratcliffe, but I would certainly speak with the Director about it, and try to resolve it, which I am sure we would.
Senator WYDEN. One last question for you, Mr. Kozma.
Among the many abuses that we looked at in this Committee and elsewhere committed by Intelligence and Analysis in Portland, my hometown, in 2020 was compiling dossiers on American citizens including their First Amendment protected speech. Do you think
Intelligence and Analysis ought to be putting together these dossiers?
Mr. KOZMA. No, sir.
Senator WYDEN. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COTTON. Senator Lankford.
Mr. LANKFORD. Chairman, thank you.
Gentlemen, thanks. Many of you have had very long years of service to the country. I want you to know from us and from the folks in Oklahoma, we appreciate the work. Many of you worked behind the scenes for a very, very long time. So that is much appreciated and valued.
Let me bounce a few questions off of several of you. Mr. Street, you had mentioned about being the ‘‘center of gravity’’ on the counterintelligence fight. Part of that is being in coordination with multiple other agencies including the FBI. How do you plan to do that coordination to make sure it actually works across agencies?
Mr. STREET. Thank you for the question, Senator, and thank you for taking the opportunity to meet with me prior to the hearing.
Yes, sir, at the end of the day, probably the most effective way we are going to accomplish that is by close collaboration with the FBI-led National Counterintelligence Task Force which has approximately 50 U.S. Government agencies participating which will provide us that linkage. I also intend to have very regular collaboration with the Federal Bureau of Investigation on at least a weekly basis to ensure that we are synchronized and collaborating together as a whole of government to achieve effects against the adversary.
Mr. LANKFORD. OK. We will count on that.
Mr. Fox and Mr. Thomson, I want to ask you both this question: The role of IG is a very unique role as you both know extremely well. It was created by Congress with the idea of selected by the White House but approved by the Senate. This body counts on the Inspector General to be the eyes and ideas inside of those agencies. We are counting on you to be able to look for efficiencies and improvement of effectiveness. That is not only a benefit to the Agency but it is a benefit to this Committee as well. So we really need independence. It is a very unusual role. You are literally in the building but we are counting on you to be independent of the building to be able to make sure you are bringing fresh ideas and fresh insight and looking for areas of efficiency and sharing those frequently with us and with the Agency. So what I am asking for is what is your plan to be able to maintain independence in that role even though you are co-located in that Agency and your ability to communicate back to us?
Mr. Fox, do you want to go first?
Mr. FOX. Thanks for that question, Senator. Absolutely, the independence of the IG’s activities are paramount when it comes to building trust with whistleblowers and so many other reasons— and for this Committee to trust the work that we provide. I am committed to that. I would like to think that the IG should be independent but not isolated. So I look forward to working closely with ODNI leadership while also ensuring that all of the decisions that we make and the way we conduct our activities are nonpartisan and done without fear or favor.
Mr. LANKFORD. So how do you maintain your independence in that role?
Mr. FOX. That involves oversight within the office and constant pulse checks and a review of our SOP’s to ensure that the way we conduct our business is done properly and we are not skipping any steps and we adhere to all the standards set forth by CIGIE.
Mr. LANKFORD. Thank you. Mr. Thomson.
Mr. THOMSON. I absolutely agree that independence is the foundation for the work of the Inspector General, the Inspector General’s office.
If confirmed, I know currently the OIG has a very professional, well respected workforce, but I would, you know, push down the importance of the values of being impartial and unbiased and apolitical in everything the Inspector General does.
More than anything, I think my answer could be just summed up with one phrase. We will follow the facts wherever they lead and we will follow the law. So if we follow the law we will be absolutely independent. And if we follow those values, that will strengthen the independence.
Mr. LANKFORD. That is helpful, because we will all need that. Everybody needs that poke and accountability in that process. Thank you both for that.
Mr. Dever, I want to ask you about 702 authorities we deem as being essential. How are you going to support that or articulate the issues and be able to make sure everybody is following the law in 702?
Mr. DEVER. Thank you for the question, Senator. I agree with you, 702 is absolutely critical to keeping our Nation safe. As you know, upwards of 60 percent of the President’s Daily Brief is made up of 702-related information, so it is absolutely critical.
I think there is a couple of things that are critically important in that. I think the partnership between the IC and Congress is essential to make sure we strike the right balance between national security and privacy and civil liberties and make sure that the reforms that were put in place previously, mainly in RISA, see how we are doing on those. Take a real good hard look and see whether or not those are working, those are not working, there is some additional improvements needed, or what the state of play actually is.
Senator LANKFORD. Thank you.
Mr. Kozma, thank you for the time we got a chance to spend in the office and to be able to pepper you with questions that we asked on that and I appreciate that time and thank you for your service on that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman COTTON. Senator King.
Senator KING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And first of all, I want to thank all of you for your long years of service to this country and congratulations on your nominations.
Mr. Dever, I just want to follow up. I take it from your answer to Senator Lankford that you support the reauthorization of Section 702 which is coming up next April?
Mr. DEVER. I do.
Senator KING. There may be some modifications. Do you have any ideas on what that might be or are we talking about a clean reauthorization?
Mr. DEVER. I very much look forward to studying that if I am lucky enough to be confirmed, Senator. But I think my first stop shopping would be to look at exactly how we are doing with the RISA reforms and take it from there.
Senator KING. Thank you.
Mr. Fox, is it ever appropriate for the DNI to place a person appointed by the DNI in the Office of Inspector General and answerable to the DNI?
Mr. FOX. Thank you for that question, Senator. I look forward to, if confirmed, investigating this matter a little further.
Senator KING. I am not talking about history. I am talking about in the future.
Do you believe it is appropriate for the DNI to place someone in your office, if you are confirmed, who is answerable to the DNI and not to you?
Mr. FOX. I appreciate the question. And in most circumstances, I can imagine—again, this would be a hypothetical, but it would not be generally appropriate, say, for certain circumstances. And I am not aware of the facts and circumstances in the recent case, but there could be security matters or other specific provisions of law that authorized that type of move. I look forward to reviewing that with counsel.
Senator KING. You understand that maintaining your independence is the essence of this job?
Mr. FOX. Absolutely, Senator.
Mr. Kozma, Intelligence and Analysis, Department of Homeland Security. One of the things that I have talked to nominees in any of these positions and whatever the administration is, is your willingness to tell the truth to whoever is in power, whether it is an intelligence official, the President of the United States, this Committee, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State. Are you willing—Let me put it this way. Dan Coats, who was the DNI 5 years ago, said the job of the Intelligence Community is to seek the truth and tell the truth.
Are you willing to tell the truth even though you know that it is not what the policymaker wants to hear?
Mr. KOZMA. Yes, sir, I am.
Senator KING. And that is an absolute.
Mr. KOZMA. Yes, sir.
Senator KING. Thank you. That is extremely important.
Mr. Dever, in April the DNI posted on X she had referred—this is is a quote, ‘‘referred two INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY LEAKS to the Department of Justice for criminal referral with a third criminal referral on its way which includes the recent illegal leak to the Washington Post.’’
The law requires the DNI to initiate a damage assessment in the case of this kind of situation, notify the committee within seven days if she becomes aware of a ‘‘a significant unauthorized disclosure or compromise of classified national intelligence, and imme-
diately notify the Committee on making referral to the Department of Justice.’’
Well, it is a long time since April 23rd. This Committee has never been notified. I don’t understand how the legal ramifications of this has not been attended to.
If confirmed, will you take the initiative to see that if there are leaks that they are referred to this Committee at the same time they are referred to the Department of Justice?
Mr. DEVER. Thank you, Senator. I firmly commit to keeping the Senate fully and currently informed.
Senator KING. I think it is important, and I don’t understand this case where the ODNI tweeted it. Apparently went on the news programs and talked about it, but it was never reported. And if it was important enough to tweet, it would seem to me that it was important enough to notify this Committee. So I hope that you would take a hard look at that in the future.
Mr. DEVER. Yes, Senator.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman COTTON. Senator Budd.
Senator BUDD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and congratulations to each and every one of you. I did not are expect to come here midafternoon and be inspired by opening statements but I was. So thank you for your years of service and what you are willing to accomplish if successful and confirmed.
Mr. Dever, again, thank you for being here.
So there were a lot of reforms in 702, the reauthorization, recently. Were those sufficient to protect every Americans’ civil liberties and privacy?
Mr. DEVER. Thank you for the question, Senator.
To be quite honest, I think that remains to be seen. I think we have to see. We have to see the report card. There are several reports, I think, that are being produced now, and that will give us a better sense of how successful those reforms were.
Senator BUDD. What are those reports and when do you expect those to be delivered?
Mr. DEVER. I don’t know precisely, Senator, when those will be, but I know they were being produced but I just don’t know the actual dates.
The one thing I would say is there is certainly new reforms under RISA that are critically important that we produce those well or that we perform on those. But as you well know, there is a hierarchy of authorities from statutes all the way to executive orders to Intelligence Community directives that are built to ensure that we follow the law and that we obey the Constitution.
So it is not just the reforms within RISA and the various compliance components that we have around 702. There is an entire culture that is built to do that. And I think that is important for the American people to realize, that this is not some sort of extrajudicial program. We have a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that looks very closely on a yearly basis to whether or not we permit this program to move forward, and I think that is important to note.
Senator BUDD. Thank you for that. Are the privacy and civil liberties protections that are set forth in CISA, are they strong enough to ensure that everyone’s rights are protected?
Mr. DEVER. I believe that they are, but we have to maintain constant vigilance, because just having something on the books doesn’t mean that we are doing it properly. We have to constantly check and make sure those are actually being done. And those are of course one of the significant responsibilities that Director Gabbard is charged by statute to ensure that the IC is conducting ourselves in accordance with Federal law and the Constitution.
Senator BUDD. Thank you very much.
Mr. Kozma, there have been concerns about the mission and scope of the organization for which you have been nominated to lead.
Can you describe for the American people the mission and responsibilities of the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis at DHS and how that is unique as compared to the other elements of the Intelligence Community?
Mr. KOZMA. Yes, Senator. Thank you for the question.
The Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis has a unique set of roles and responsibilities codified in law. Predominantly one of the most unique ones is the ability and the charge to share intelligence with State, local, Tribal, territorial and public sector partners.
As a member of the Intelligence Community, it has a niche to bridge both up, down, left, right, in, out, across the entire whole of government, defense, intelligence, law enforcement, and of course the State and Federal and local entities.
Senator BUDD. Thank you very much.
Mr. Street, it is good to see you again.
How do we increase counterintelligence awareness particularly at academic institutions?
We have a lot of development in North Carolina and the UNC system, Duke University, and they are performing a lot of cutting- edge innovation research for our country. How do we get more of that type of engagement, not just for North Carolina but other States and their institutions as well?
Mr. STREET. Thank you for the question, Senator. And I greatly appreciate the time you took to meet with me and discuss some of these critical issues.
The NCSC is statutorily obligated to do outreach with private sector and academia. We need to do a better job at speaking academia. Frequently with don’t speak academia. I will certainly look if confirmed to enhance our outreach to academic institutions not just in North Carolina but nationwide.
We have seen recent developments where the Chinese have have victimized our academia on a regular basis, using their own students and third country nationals to do so; and frankly, I view it as one of the most significant challenges we face today—exploitation of academia and our research and development enterprise.
Senator BUDD. Thank you. Thanks to all of you.
Chairman COTTON. Senator Kelly.
Senator KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Congratulations to all of you for your nominations.
Mr. Street, a couple weeks ago, I think it was earlier in the month, we spoke in my office about my No Work With Adversaries Act. This is legislation to counter China’s efforts to target and recruit individuals with U.S. military training. So, please share for the record your views on the importance of countering this threat and how the National Security and Counterintelligence Center can be a partner in that work?
Mr. STREET. Thank you for the question, Senator, and also thank you for the time to meet with me. I was grateful for that.
So the No Working With Adversaries is critical to our national security. Many times we have skills throughout the Department of Defense, Intelligence Community, or other critical areas, and folks when they leave the service will go and work for foreign governments which provide the capabilities that those foreign governments need to enhance their own military infrastructure, economic infrastructure, and research and development infrastructure.
The NCSC outreach programs will be very effective in that, but I would submit to you that we need to take it a step further, in terms of, if there are folks who are looking to do that sort of activity, we need to ensure that they are pre-briefed and debriefed, not by NCSC directly but within organizations within the DOD, in partnership with the FBI, and other organizations here in the homeland to get a lid on that significant challenge, sir.
Senator KELLY. And currently which country do you think is the biggest threat with regards to being able to recruit former military members?
Mr. STREET. Great question, Senator. Without a doubt, China represents the most significant recruiter of our talent—not only ours but from allied partners as well, as they attempt to improve their own military capabilities, sir.
Senator KELLY. All right. Thank you, Mr. Street.
Mr. Kozma, DHS I&A supports fusion centers across the Nation including in Arizona that work with local authorities to promote public safety and security. So, in Arizona since 2004, the Arizona Counterterrorism Information Center in Phoenix has worked with the FBI and local authorities on terrorism prevention.
What value do you see that these fusion centers bring today, and what do you envision the future for centers like this?
Mr. KOZMA. Thank you, Senator, for your question and for your support. Although I am not currently in the seat or at DHS if confirmed I look forward to the opportunity to further leverage the current fusion centers that is are already in existence at the State and local level, and enhance and strengthen the ties to both for information sharing upward and in turn downward to best protect citizens at all levels across America.
Senator KELLY. And what do you think the top threats that DHS intelligence should be focused on right now?
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, we are charged with ensuring that counterterrorism, of course, is No. 1, looking at ensuring weapons of mass destruction—there are so many different things that can threaten the American populace. We are trying to make sure we are in accordance with the rules and responsibilities aligned and prescribed in law.
Senator KELLY. Do you think those threats have changed over the last couple of weeks?
Mr. KOZMA. Yes, sir. There are always threats, they are ebbing and flowing. Vigilance is required to ensure that no matter what the threat is we are constantly looking at all dimensions. Given the background that I have both in defense and in the Intelligence Community perspective, it is imperative that we are constantly assessing and reassessing and executing the mission as best we possibly can.
Senator KELLY. In my remaining time, what role does your organization have with regards to the protests that take place in U.S. cities?
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, from an I&A perspective, we are not a law enforcement entity. We are an enabler for the partners and missions of DHS as well as the partners at the State and local level. Our focus is always—must always be to execute the President’s agenda, the Secretary’s priorities in protecting the American homeland and also our focus would be if there was ties to foreigners who are instigating, we would help facilitate that and in turn transition those activities over to the FBI or local law enforcement.
Senator KELLY. As you work with the FBI, TSA, ICE, CBP, can I just get your assurance that you will fully respect the privacy and constitutional rights of U.S. persons in doing your work?
Mr. KOZMA. Absolutely. Yes, sir.
Senator KELLY. All right. Thank you.
Chairman COTTON. Senator Ossoff.
Senator OSSOFF. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to our witnesses. Congratulations on your nominations. Thank you for your service to the country and your willingness to serve.
First, Mr. Chairman, I just want to note that following last weekend’s strikes on Iran, the administration has inexplicably postponed congressional briefings and is now reportedly seeking to prevent Intelligence Community leaders from attending them.
The overwhelming majority of Congress is united in our conviction that Iran must not build or acquire a nuclear weapon. An urgent unanswered question is whether the administration’s use of force meaningfully advanced that longstanding objective of U.S. foreign policy.
Were these strikes effective?
These strikes having been taken, I certainly hope so. We need to know.
What is the status of Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium?
If the strikes were not effective, what diplomatic or military options does the administration contemplate?
These are bare minimum questions to which Congress needs immediate answers because these decisions directly impact the safety of military servicemembers we represent and the national security of the United States.
I am now turning to the nominees.
Mr. Kozma, in 2020, the Office of Intelligence and Analysis compiled intelligence reports about American journalists covering protest activity.
Yes or no, please. Should DHS I & A be able to collect intelligence targeting journalists in the United States performing journalistic functions?
Mr. KOZMA. No, sir.
Senator OSSOFF. Yes or no, please. Should I&A be permitted to conduct intelligence interviews with incarcerated people who have not yet been in consultation with counsel or consented to an interview.
Mr. KOZMA. No, sir.
Senator OSSOFF. In your written testimony you said, quote.
‘‘I&A must be focused on detecting, preventing, preempting, and disrupting all sources of terrorism, foreign and domestic, against the United States of America by collecting, analyzing, and sharing
information related to homeland security threats.’’ How do you define terrorism?
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, the easiest way to define terrorism is the incitement of fear or the actual action that enables destruction.
Senator OSSOFF. Is there any basis in the U.S. Code for designating domestic terrorist organizations?
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, there are different elements to my understanding that help quantify how different threats can be construed as terrorist—acts of terrorism or focused on terrorism.
Senator OSSOFF. Under what circumstances under your leadership, Mr. Kozma, will I&A collect intelligence on or related to U.S. persons?
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, that is outside the purview of I&A.
Senator OSSOFF. Ever?
Mr. KOZMA. If there is an activity where they may be engaged with a foreign national and identified, it would be referred over to the FBI.
Senator OSSOFF. So your testimony is that there are no circumstances under which I&A can or will under your leadership collect intelligence targeting U.S. persons and that any case where there is foreign nexus will be referred to the FBI?
Mr. KOZMA. Yes, sir, in conjunction with, NCTC, if there is any activity that is focused on any Americans that would be construed to be involved in any acts of terrorism, they would be identified and relayed to the FBI.
Senator OSSOFF. Characterize your present understanding of I&A’s collection posture and techniques and how if at all you intend to change or evolve it?
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, thank you for the question.
Presently, I am not at DHS and I’m not in the seat. Should I be confirmed, I look forward to assessing that and consulting with you on the assessment. That is one of the first things I would like to do in the seat.
From a generic perspective, it is my understanding that there is always room for from improvement to ensure efficiency and effectiveness in any organization. I would anticipate that being one of the first things to accomplish, sir.
Senator OSSOFF. Will you promptly and reliably provide to this Committee information that we request?
Mr. KOZMA. Yes, sir.
Senator OSSOFF. There is substantial bipartisan concern about DHS I&A, particularly since unlike the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security has not evolved and developed over a long period of time protocols and practices intended to protect Americans’ civil liberties.
There is concern, and when there is Democratic administrations, Republicans express these concerns; when there is Republican administrations, Democratic Members of Congress express these concerns that DHS mission might creep into politicized domestic investigations, intelligence collection, or law enforcement. I would like to hear you rigorously and robustly state that you will not permit this Agency under your leadership to trend in that direction or to creep in that direction.
Mr. KOZMA. Yes, sir, that is my intent. I am an American and privacy is very important to me as well.
Senator OSSOFF. I would like you to say more.
Mr. KOZMA. Sir, with regards to the role and mission of I&A, it is not to target Americans. It is focused on combating terrorism and the impact to the American homeland. I&A has the unique opportunity as entrusted by law to help facilitate the intelligence sharing with State and local activities across and in conjunction with national security, defense, law enforcement, as well as the other elements in the IC.
It has the unique conduit and connecting tissue that is entrusted by you through law in order to help facilitate that. My intent is to help strengthen that to ensure trust and transparency, and to enable a much more robust, comprehensive, and collaborative capability to ensure that all intelligence information that is analyzed and assessed by I&A is appropriately shared. That is one of the biggest things that I saw before DHS was actually created. So, it is imperative that we are constantly looking at how we can assess and thwart terrorism in as many factions that we are constantly facing every day.
Senator OSSOFF. I will have additional questions on privacy and civil liberties for the record. Thank you for your answers today.
Vice Chairman WARNER. And no additional questions. I just want to make a point. We will be doing follow-up questions.
Mr. Dever, I am going to be anxious to see in the follow-up questions how you will defend the legal ability for the DNI to put someone that reports directly to her inside the Inspector General’s office. I am glad you at least reserved judgment on the appropriateness of that, but I will—you have got much more legal background than me. I was concerned about that answer but I will give you the benefit of the doubt until I see the answer.
Mr. Thomson and Mr. Fox, I think at this moment in time there may be stresses on the IGs that are going to be enormous. There may be in every administration. There may be more now.
I hope when in my follow-up questions for the record, I will also try to get as much clarity about the fact of how you maintain the independence of that Inspector General office and not allow the directors in each of your offices to unduly interfere with that. So I appreciate that.

Chairman COTTON. Gentlemen, thank you again for your testimony. More importantly, thank you for your service to our Nation and your willingness to continue to serve.
As I mentioned earlier, it is my intent to hold a committee vote on these nominations as soon as possible. Most likely during the week of July 7.
Therefore, for planning purposes, any Senator who wishes to submit questions for the record after today’s hearing please do so by noon on Friday. I know all of you want to have your nominations processed quickly, so I encourage each of you to respond as promptly as possible to those written questions for the record. Thank you. This hearing is adjourned.
(Whereupon, the proceedings adjourned at 4:28 p.m.)

Committee Leadership

Tom Cotton

Mark Warner

All Committee Members

Recent Legislation Activity

Hearings & Meetings

Reports & Publications

Committee Resources