companies that we deal with want to work with the department of defense. i think that's important. it happened. it would have happened to somebody else at some point but this idea of transparency and a willingness to talk about what each side is trying to achieve may be the biggest lessons of all that i took from it. >> it's a real strategy that we don't wear hats anymore because i could borrow three hats and figure out which hat i'm wearing. with my bib hat on i can tell you when i met general shanahan the real problem is we take these exquisitely trained people and put them in front of mind numming tasks. they watch screens all day. it's a terrible waste of the human asset that the military produces. there's a huge opportunity to try to get them to work at a higher level position. and that's why the dib recommended the maeven procedure and the joint center for ai which you both stood up and now head. let's talk another question for both of you which has to do with ethics. now in the middle of the kerfuffle that went on inside of google kent had the good

companies that we deal with want to work with department of defense. that is an important narrative. it would happen to somebody else at some point but the idea of transparency and what each side is trying to achieve is the biggest lessons of all. >> it's a tragedy we don't wear hats anymore with my big hat i can tell you with general shanahan with soldiers and airmen that we put them in front of the mindnumbing that they watch screens all day and it's a terrible waste of the human asset that the military produces it is a huge opportunity to get them to work at a higher level. and indeed that creation. so now talking about ethics and that kerfuffle inside of google with the ethics proposal and that produced a public document which is quite definitive and maybe you could talk about that and then the proposal to the military and you are the customer on military ai ethics for go i assume both of you are in favor as they have copied your approach in favor of this. does it really work. does google turn off or stop doing things? how does it actually work? pe

and those of the tech industry with the department of defense. and is far more than portrayed. we don't make it easy for them. so of those themes in the security commission's repor report, that is the idea of a shared sense of responsibility upon the ai future of the importance of trust and transparency. so the national security depends on that. for various reasons viewed with suspicion are reluctant to have that strategic competition with china and ai is a critical component of nation's prosperity and vitality and sufficiency. so no matter where you stand with respect to the government with ai technology i submit we can never attain a vision outline without industry and academia with equal partnership. there's too much at stake to do otherwise. we are in this together of the essence of the nation. but also across the united states government. we have to make this triangle back to what it used to be. >> thank you general i will ask a couple of questions to both of you. talk about similar. [laughter] >> and also an enterprise company and there are different protocols and ways of

companies that we deal with want to work with department of defense. that is an important narrative. it would happen to somebody else at some point but the idea of transparency and what each side is trying to achieve is the biggest lessons of all. >> it's a tragedy we don't wear hats anymore with my big hat i can tell you with general shanahan with soldiers and airmen that we put them in front of the mindnumbing that they watch screens all day and it's a terrible waste of the human asset that the military produces it is a huge opportunity to get them to work at a higher level. and indeed that creation. so now talking about ethics and that kerfuffle inside of google with the ethics proposal and that produced a public document which is quite definitive and maybe you could talk about that and then the proposal to the military and you are the customer on military ai ethics for go i assume both of you are in favor as they have copied your approach in favor of this. does it really work. does google turn off or stop doing things? how does it actually work? pe

right now it's with the department of defense. the department of defense has responsibility. i have had conversations with advocates like general petraeus about this. we don't experience what my father's generation experienced. that was the decades long wait after we knew people were exposed to agent orange. i'm waiting on dod and i think they will give it to me shortly. the results of all of their investigations into what went on in iraq and afghanistan. i would also note that what i have approved is separate and category. a burn pit if we have any veteran who has any of the medical issues that could come from burn pit exposure we see them on that basis. i think we have seen about 50,000. misdiagnoses are a huge factor in the number of veterans dying from cancer because the v.a. catches it too late. what additional expertise will the v.a. higher to approve its cancer care for veterans? improve its cancer care for veterans? sec. wilkie: we work collaboratively with the most important cancer research institutions in the country. we have partnerships with md anderson, with stan

of defense they see no compelling reason to work with the department of defense and even those who want to work with the dod which is far more than it is in that category we don't make it easy for them. so i would just reinforce the themes in the commissions report or interim report and that is the idea of a shared responsibility. it is the trust and transparen transparency. our national security depends on it. and even for those who for various reasons still view the dod for suspicion who are reluctant to accept we are in a strategic competition with china i hope would still agree that ai is a critical component of the nation's prosperity, vitality, and self-sufficiency. so in other words, no matter where you stand with respect to the government's future use of ththe aie enabling technologiesi submit that we can never obtain the vision outlined in the commission's interim report without industry and academia with us together in an equal partnership. we are in this together, public-private partnerships are the very essence of america's success as a nation not only that the defense of th

the department -- their defense in the industry of the department of defense was corruption passed, is that correct? >> sir, i think the wording was more along the lines of progress has been made or sufficient progress has been made. it did not reference any kind of anticorruption test per se. >> did this change or was there a reevaluation with a new president coming in? because president zelensky was inaugurated into office two days before that date, did that have an impact on how he was going to continue some of those pieces? was that taken into account in this review? >> not prior to may 23rd. no, sir. >> so, the review was basically done by the previous portion of the administration? >> yes, sir, but it is important to note that the review related most specifically to the ministry of defense. >> sure, but there were ultimately changes under the zelensky regime, is that correct? >> yes, sir, there is a new minister of defense. >> can you explain, i know foreign military financing for state department, can you explain the difference between fmf and uni funding and how the ukrainia

the department of defense. they're simply undermining a statute with internal executive memos. >> judicial discretion, you mentioned that, or was that you, miss pasquarella. did the 1986 act take away some judicial discretion? i know mr. metcalf had a different perspective on that. tell me. >> yes. that is one of the most troubling aspects of 1996 changeses made to the immigration law. it removed all forms of judicial discretion for any person who has an aggravated felony. again, expanded the definition of aggravated felony. so, you have more people who are subject to deportation, even for misdemeanors, for things we don't classify as actual -- as aggravated -- >> i'm out of time. i want to say in orange county we were one of the first pioneers on grading veterans courts. now these issues are very complex. so, look forward to working with you on this issue. now i'd like to recognize mr. biggs for five minutes of questions. >> thanks, mr. chairman. i think we all understand that many of our veterans have struggl

department of justice and the department of defense from 2002 to 2008. he's worked as a private practitioner. he is a lieutenant colonel in the army national guard and serves as command judge advocate for the 149th maneuver enhancement brigade in kentucky. like miss stock, mr. metcalf has previously testified before congress and is an expert on immigration law. including his testimony before this subcommittee and the 111th congress he received his b.a. and j.d. from the university of kentucky. we welcome him back to the subcommittee and look forward to your testimony, sir. >> we welcome all of our distinguished witnesses and thank you for your participation. now if you can please rise, i'm going to square you in. >> please raise your hand. do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief so help you god? thank you. let the record show that the witnesses answered in the affirmitive, and thank you and please be seated. please note that each of

of defense for russia ukraine and eurasia at the department of defense she is a career member of the senior executive service ms cooper previously served as a principal director in the office of the assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and global security affairs. prior to joining the department offense in 2001 ms cooper was a policy planning officer of the state department in the office of coordinator of counterterrorism 2 final points before witnesses are sworn 1st witness depositions as part of this inquiry were unclassified in nature and all open hearings will also be held at the unclassified level any information that may touch on classified information we dress separately and 2nd congress will not tolerate any reprisal threat of reprisal or attempt to retaliate against any u.s. government official for testifying before congress including you or any of your colleagues if you would both please rise and raise your right hand i'll begin by swearing you and you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the tru

ukraine aid for review of the department of defense industry and department of defense was passed corruption test is, that correct? >> sir, i think the wording was more on all along the lines of progress has been made at progress has been babe but it didn't reference any kind of test per se. >> did this change or was there a reevaluation of the president coming in? he was in office before that amazing day of how it's going to continue some of those pieces. was that taken into account in his review? >> not prior to may 20 stirred. >> the review was basically done by the previous administration? >> yes sir, although it's important to know that with the review related to more specifically to the ministry of defense. >> sure. but there were ultimately changes under the zelensky regime, that correct? >> yes sir. there is a new minister of the fence. >> can you explain -- i know fm f but can you explain the difference between fmf and usai funding and how the ukrainians get legal aid? >> could you repeat the last part of that how the ukrainians -- >> get legal legal aid. is it covered under one of

concerning the department of defense as 2018 and 2019 audit. last year when he was serving as the dod comptroller secretary norquist completed the first dod audit ever. soon thereafter secretary norquist was nominated and then confirmed as eckert -- deputy secretary of defense with overwhelming senate support from both sides of the aisle. he is a wealth of knowledge on these issues and i thank him for being here today. to a a lot of people aside fromy good friend senator perdue who i'm hopeful we'll be here a little bit later, dod audit might not come across as the most interesting topic in the world. however ranking member kaine and i take our oversight responsibilities seriously and are happy to have this important and timely hearing. another responsibility we take seriously is one of providing the funding needed to rebuild our military with a specific focus on restoring readiness. conducting an audit of this magnitude is a massive undertaking as i'm sure we will hear. in fact when secretary norquist arrived it never happened. the pentagon ne

one at the department of state. and the other at the defense department. david hale is the under-secretary of state for political affairs. the third-most senior official in the department and the most senior foreign service officer. laura cooper serves as deputy assistant secretary of defense for russia, ukraine, eurasia, and is responsible for a broad range of countries in the former soviet union and the balkans. between them, they have several decades of national security experience serving both republican and democratic presidents. and as we have heard from other dedicated public servants like former ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch, george kent, ambassador taylor, lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, their only priority has been security of the united states. secretary hill was witness to the smear campaign against ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch and the efforts by some in the state department to help her. in late march, yovanovitch reached out to hale for assistance telling him in an e-mail that the tempo of social media and other crit

the department of defense and we believe the facts will show they have been a detailed. process in determining the need to the wolf item a best man by microsoft but while these companies fight it out for the pentagon's affections others have been more reticent last year outrage was sparked after it emerged google was cooperating with the department of defense on a project that helped the army identify drone targets over 3000 employees signed a petition calling for the trial of morality over money and ultimately resulting in the search engine not renewing the contract we believe that google should not be in the business of war building this technology to assist the u.s. government in military surveillance and potentially lethal outcomes is. not acceptable so while some battle with that conscience and mothers refuse to accept lost fortunes for microsoft it's been a golden with its war chest filled by a milestone contract shaz jumped 3 percent and to top it all off bill gates has recently returned to his favorite position the wilds of richest man rumor has it even helped je

defense of her from the state department. correct? >> correct. >> secretary pompeo was aware of her situation. >> yes. i briefed him the next day. >> he is the ultimate authority to ensure that - - issue that support. >> correct. >> but he never did. >> we did not issue a statement at that time. >> but in fact to testify around the same time that the secretary did not render assistance to the long serving and highly respected ambassador. he made two phone calls to rudy giuliani. >> correct i do see a record he made those phone call.l. >> one on march 28th and then 29th. >> i saw the record of that. >> we don't know what he said but we have a pretty good idea what giuliani said to him. get rid of ambassador yovanovitch when she was recalled and wanted to find out what happened, secretary pompeo would not meet with her. >> i was out of the country at the time i cannot comment. >> and those next in line did not meet with her. >> i don't know. >> and then it went to give her the new. >> a deputy secretary had the meeting i was ou

, the ukraine aid for the review of the department, further defense -- for their department of defense, they passed the corruption test, is that correct? i think the wording was more along the lines of progress has been made, sufficient progress has been made, it did not reference an anticorruption test. >> was there a reevaluation with the new president coming in, because the new president was inaugurated two days after that date, did that have an impact on how he was going to continue as that those -- wit taken into account in the review? >> not prior to may 23, no. >> the review was basically done on the previous, the efforts done by the previous administration? >> yes, although it is important to note the review related most specifically to the ministry of defense. >> but there were changes under the new regime, correct? >> yes, there is a new ministry of defense. >> can you explain, i know that the foreign military financing the fundingxplain and also how the ukrainians get aid? >> can you repeat the last part, how the ukrainians -- >> is aid covered under these buckets? >> there

of defense from the state department. she put out a full statement of defense and page and sadly to no avail. that silence continues to today. in late april we heard in riveting testimony last friday from ambassador yovanovitch. she was called to washington and informed she had lost the confidence of the president. he did not meet with her and his subordinates dealt with her, instead. with the departure of yovanovitch, heale watched thre, and they were led by energy secretary rick perry and it would be ambassador volker and sondland working with ambassador taylor who would be the ones doing the continual work here. in midsummer, trump ordered a suspension of military aid to ukraine. despite the fact that the aid had been authorized and appropriated by congress and that the defense department in consultation with the state department had had certified ukraine met all of the necessary requirements to receive the aid including anti-corruption reform. the aid was in the national interests of the united states and critical to

they were passing it on to the state department and the department of defense? >> sir, this is what they've reported to me. i have not seen the documents that have been collected. i only know those documents that i have produced or that my staff has brought to my attention that i have received. so no, i do not know what has happened with the documents that have been collected. >> same general question to you, sir? >> i requested and was granted access to documents that either originated or had been sent to me that were relevant to the pertinent matters of the investigation during a finite time period. i don't have really information about what else is going on in terms of other documents that i did not produce or i did not receive. >> there was a move to gather them and i understood that they have been gathered and the extent of my knowledge is not my area of responsibility.

working with the department of defense the national security administration. we continue to do that, we are committed to doing that and that worked builds on a long tradition of work throughout the valley on national security generally. it's important to remember that the history of the valley in large measure builds on government technology from radar to the internet to some of the work on autonomous vehicles and personal assistance that you are seeing now. justin last couple of weeks have an extraordinary accomplishment which moved forward the frontier science and technology. that is built on research scientist at nasa. and carried out in many ways. so those kinds of exchanges that technological innovation. we feel it's weird contributing to the national community a lot of that work we have lots of people who work at google we make sure they complete their medical service and we try to take steps to make sure that is transitioning so they can make best use of military skills in the private sector and as we do that we are fully engaged in a wide variety worki

world are complaining about it having to do with amazon and the department of defense and i will be asking them to look at it very closely to see what's going on because i have had very few things where it is really such complaining i mustn't think that there is evidence of one to influence something both microsoft and the pentagon deny the acquisition process was conducted in accordance with the political laws and regulations in law for his rich treated fairly and evaluated consistently with the solicitation stated evaluation criteria we have confidence in the qualified staff of the department of defense and we believe the facts will show they have been a details process in determining the need to the will fight to a best made by microsoft but while these companies fight it out for the pentagon's affections others have been more reticent last year outrage was sparked after it emerged google was cooperating with the department of defense on a project that helped the army identify drone targets over 3000 employees signed a petition calling for the trial of more ality over money and u

the department of defense into alignment for the challenge. we'll have directors that deal with other regions. we'll have somebody on the china desk that deals with africa, somebody who deals with middle east and europe and russia and actually will help our department work on those issues rather than having to integrate at a very senior level. we'll have people who deal strategy and plans. we'll have people who understand china and are involved in china policy informing that process in a better way. we'll have people who deal with ec and tech. everything from the 5g challenges, protection of the innovation base in the united states, understanding china's own efforts at acquiring technology and modernizing themselves better. that will all be under our china ship to we think put us in a better position to compete well and effectively and do so in a safe way. with that i may pause and see if that is enough to disperse some discussions, questions, comments, whatever may be on your mind. thank you, glen. >> thank you very much, randy. as i mentione

the department of state and the other at the defense department. david hale is the under secretary of state for political affairs, third most senior official in the department and most senior foreign service officer. laura cooper serves as deputy assistant secretary of cadefens for russia, ukraine, eurasia and responsible for broad range of countries and the former soviet union and the balkans. between them they have several decades of national security at experience serving both the public and and democratic presidents. as we heard from other dedicated public servants like former ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch, former deputy assistant secretary of state george kent, ambassador bill taylor, lieutenant colonel alexander brenneman, and jennifer williams, their only priority has been the security of the united states. secretary hill was witness to the smear campaign against ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch and the efforts by some of the state of burma to help her. in late march jovanovich Ãb unless there was a strong statement of defe

it is very clear to us the department of defense in particular keys in on the challenges that we face in the arctic. . . . . they cover the regions of europe, asia-pacific, africa, near east asia and the northern hemisphere. at these centers they aim to support defense, strategy objectives and policy prioriti priorities. they are pretty unique academic forums as well aso to foster strong international networks of international but security leaders. this will give you a basic comparison of what we are talking about here specifics. the asia-pacific center for security studies is actually fully entitled the daniel k [inaudible] asia pacific academic study. it was established in hawaii in 1995 but it's a dod institution that provides a forum where current and future military and civilian leaders from the end of pacific gather to address regional and global security issues and enhance security cooperation through programs of executive education, professional exchange and building relationships ofdi trut and confidence. currently over 30 countries sent participants to engage and learn and b

[applause] not passing the department of defense appropriations act? madame speaker, i would ask my colleagues to say, please extend to me the same respect -- you direct your remarks to the chair. you are recognized. >> we have not passed the department of defense appropriations act. can you believe we are not -- we are that irresponsible? we are not doing that. and we are not doing bipartisan legislation to lower prescription drug prices and handle surprise billing and pre-existing conditions -- why are we not doing those things? they are the most important things to our citizens back home. [applause] i would ask that we look into what they are doing and if we are doing it strictly for political purposes and in a grab, that is not why the american people sent us here. that is not why the majority changed during the last election. now that people are seeing exactly what happened, when the majority switches over, people ask me, why aren't you doing something about what is happening in congress today? i said, that was america's choice. >> the gentle men'

defense of her from the debate state department. is that correct correct and this message and secretary pompei i was aware of her situation is that correct yes i briefed him the next day and he's the ultimate authority who could issue that strong statement of support correct correct . but he never ever did issue a statement right we did not issue a statement at the time but in fact you and cite you testified around the same time that the secretary did not render assistance to a long serving and highly respected him bassett or he made 2 phone calls to rudy giuliani is that right.

at the department of defense. she is a crewmember of the senior executive service. ms. cooper previously has served as a principal director in the office of the assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and global security affairs. prior to joining the department of defense in 2001, ms. cooper was a policy planning officer at the state department at the office of coordinator of counterterrorism. two final points. first, witness depositions as part of this inquiry for unclassified in nature and all open hearings will also be held at the unclassified level. any information that may touch on classified information will be addressed separately and second, congress will not tolerate any reprisal, threat of reprisal, or attempt to retaliate against any u.s. government official for testifying before congress, including you or any of your colleagues. if you would both please rise and raise your right hand, i will begin by swearing you in. do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the tru

you oversee the department of defense. as you've just heard the deputy assistant of defense testified that she learned in late august that money appropriated by congress would likely flow if -- if the ukrainians committed to investigations that president trump wanted, political investigations involving the bidens so how concerning is that? >> it is terribly concerning. the aid that we voted for on a bipartisan basis in the house and senate and signed by the president was designed to aid an ally in direct confrontation with russia and they invaded ukraine and they are fighting through proxies and trying to destabilize the ukraine government. this aid was essential and not just essential for the ukrainians, essential to maintain the integrity of our position in europe, along with our nato allies. so to use this as a -- attempt to extort or somehow shake down a foreign government is outrageous. if that is the case. we have to establish that. >> and she also testify that all of the national security leaders were on the exact s

department of defense? >> this is what they reported to me. i have not seen the documents that have been collected. i only know those documents that i have produced or that my staff at my staff has brought to my attention or that i have received. so no, i do not know what has happened with the documents that have been collected. >> same general question to you, sir. >> i requested it wants given access to documents that had originated or were sent to me for the pertinent matters of this investigation during a finite. back. i don't have information about what is going on in terms of other documents that i did not produce or do not receive. there was a move to gather them, and i understood generally and directly and informally that they had been gathered. that is the extent of my knowledge.

they were passing it on to the state department and the department of defense? >> sir, this is what they've reported to me. i have not seen the documents that have been collected. i only know those documents that i have produced or that my staff has brought to my attention that i have received. so no, i do not know what has happened with the documents that have been collected. >> same general question to you, sir? >> i requested and was granted access to documents that either originated or had been sent to me that were relevant to the pertinent matters of the investigation during a finite time period. i don't have really information about what else is going on in terms of other documents that i did not produce or i did not receive. >> there was a move to gather them and i understood that they have been gathered and the extent of my

one at the department of tate and the other at the defense department. david hale is the undersecretary of state for political affairs the third most senior official in the department and the most senior foreign service officer. laura cooper is deputy assistant secretary of defense for russia, ukraine, eur asia and responsible for the former soviet union and the balkens. they have served both republican and democratic presidents. and as we have heard from other dedicated public servants like former ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch, former deputy secretary bill kent and ambassador bill taylor and alexander vindman and jennifer williams and the only priority has been the security of the united states. undersecretary hale was witness to the smear campaign against marie yovanovitch and the efforts by some in the state department to help her. in late march yovanovitch reached out to hale for assistance telling him in an email that the tempo of social media and other criticisms of her were such that she felt she could no longer function unless there was

department of defense after rival microsoft beat the firm to clinch a very lucrative data contract the decision surprised analysts who indeed thought amazon had it in the bag but the rose more than just about money. has been finding out. amazon and white christmas oft 2 giants that have changed the way we experience the world. let. us warm and fuzzy ads to appeal to our pockets over the holiday season but it turns out the real money that both ofter is the pentagon's given us military spent over $600000000000.00 annually it's unsurprising there's a battle for the big contracts so head to head and microsoft have been vying for the pentagon prize of $10000000000.00 over the next 10 years the contract in question is for the jet die project and ambitious offended that would allow the pentagon to stall sensitive data on a single large cloud it would also allow the military to take full advantage of artificial intelligence tools tools which have drawn concern from ethical watch dogs for their lethal potential in guiding missiles and drones amazon thought it had its foot in the door not only i

steven preston, a former general counsel of the department of defense, wrote in the department of defense law of war manual in june of 2015, and i quote, law war is part of who we are. the laws of war shaped the united states armed forces as much as they have shaped any other armed force in the world. the law of war is part of our military heritage. owe -- obeying it is the right thing to do. self-control under stresses the combat is the same good order and discipline necessary to operate cohesively and victoriously in battle, end quote. the law of war manual goes on to outline the five interdependent principles that serve as the foundation of the law of war. one, military necessity. two, humanity. three, proportionality. four, distinction. and five, honor. these principles are pillars of american values, and the guideposts we expect american sons and daughters to operate within so they remain trusted and respected by all citizens of the world. president trump's ill-advised pardons have placed those pillars on shaky ground. he has blurred the lines of morality for our troops and has disre

that was in the letter that was sent by trump's department of defense in may. and yet the aid never showed up. twice during the summer, mitch mcconnell called up the trump administration and said where's the aid? mitch mcconnell couldn't get a good answer. and then on july 18 at the white house, the office of management and budget holds a meeting and mulvaney is there and said the reason that the aid hasn't been released is at the explicit direction of the president of the united states of america. on july 25, one week later, we understand why. his own words, do us a favor, though. pressuring a foreign government to target an american citizen for political gain and thereby solicit foreign interference in the 2020 election while withholding this aid by a -- from a vulnerable ukraine. mr. president, that is the substance of the matter and that's what we are going to focus on moving forward. thank you. nadler: let me add to that and say that -- mr. engel: let me add to that and say that foreign aid is a very important component of what we do around the world in or

interests of the department of defense and state department were consistently supportive of releasing those funds everyone was mystified as to why the phones had been withheld and everyone is running around trying to get an answer and you're getting kind of up to 6 responses saying it was the president because of corruption now what we see is that president selenski gets elected in april the expectation is that vice president pence is going to attend the inauguration in september and then the president pulls the carpet out from under him in terms of him going and then he proceeds in june or july to withhold the funds there is a concerted effort by the president the united states to to act in a manner that is not consistent with our interests in wanting to protect ukraine and help them deal with the russian aggression at its border would you agree with that. i have advocated for the security assistance and i have advocated for high level engagement with the government of ukraine because i think both are in the national security interest. back. the sister and chairman under secretary si