[Menendez:] So, Director, this account strongly suggests that the president asked you and Director Coats to interfere with then, FBI Director Comey's, investigations into the Trump campaigns contacts with Russian. Did president what did President Trump say to you and Director Coats in that meeting?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I'm not going to talk about the conversations the president and I had. I think I think it's in this setting appropriate for a president to have an opportunity to talk with his senior leaders. I'll do that throughout the day but I will tell you think, the article's suggestion that he attend he asked me to do anything that was improper if false.
[Menendez:] Did he ask you to do anything as it related to that investigation?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I don't recall I don't recall what he asked me that day, precisely, but I have to tell you I'm with the president an awful lot, he has never asked me to do anything that I'd consider remotely improper.
[Menendez:] When you say you're not going to talk about that conversation, you're not asserting executive privilege, are you?
[Pompeo:] No, Senator. I believe and I think you will agree, we'll talk about foreign policy issues, we'll talk about...
[Menendez:] This has this has a connotation of foreign policy because this is about Russia. And so, at the end of the day, understanding how you responded, what you will do as we're looking at mandatory sanctions that the administration has yet to impose, looking at how we're going to deal with a Russia that not only sought to affect our last elections but is doing so even as we speak both at here, at home and across the world. Those are subsets of questions.
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator.
[Menendez:] And so, it's not for me just simply a question of interest, it's a question of understanding what you were asked, how you responded and what you did.
[Pompeo:] Senator, you talked about the important policy issues. I'm happy to talk about this administration's work on Russia. I'm happy to talk about our work on sanctions if that's what you'd...
[Menendez:] Let me ask you this.
[Pompeo:] ... if that's what's your question.
[Menendez:] Did President Trump ever discuss the FBI or Special Counsel Russia's investigation with you?
[Pompeo:] Senator, again, I'm not going to talk about private conversations I've had with the president.
[Menendez:] So, whenever you come, if you were to be confirmed in the future and we want to try to talk about foreign policy and we ask you where is the president at on this or that you're not going to discuss...
[Pompeo:] No, Senator, I'm...
[Menendez:] ... conversations.
[Pompeo:] Senator, I'm happy to answer questions about our administration's policies, the work that we're doing. You're asking about conversations. You should know, Senator, as well I have provided I spoke with Special Counsel Mueller who interviewed me, requested an interview. I cooperated. Your colleagues on the Senate Intelligence Committee have asked for information for me and from the Central Intelligence Agency as the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. I think the leaders of those two organizations in a bipartisan way that would say that I've been cooperative and in matters...
[Menendez:] Well, you have spoken to Special Counsel Mueller?
[Pompeo:] Yes, that's correct.
[Menendez:] And, what was the subject of the conversation?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I'm not going to speak to that.
[Menendez:] Did the Special Counsel tell you not to speak about these things?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I have cooperated with multiple investigations while the investigation continues. I think that's the appropriate way to approach it and you should know and no one here today should take away any because of the fact that I don't want to speak about it there should be no negative inferences with respect to anything or for that matter positive inferences about the fact that I think it's most appropriate that while these investigations continue I not speak to the conversations I've had with the various investigative bodies.
[Menendez:] I'm sure that if I asked Director Mueller I mean Special Counsel Mueller a simple question whether you were told you couldn't I don't think he would say you couldn't. So it's your choice that you're not seeking to do so. And for me, these questions being answered truthfully in a forthcoming way are critically important because it goes to the very essence of how you approach one of the most critical issues that we have. And your unwillingness to speak to it is troubling to me. Let me ask you this. President Trump has repeatedly said that, quote, "Getting along with Russia is a good thing," unquote. Yesterday he tweeted a quote, "Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it's ever been. There is no reason for this." And he indicated he would like to help Russia with its economy. What behavior, if any, has the Kremlin shown that indicates it wants to get along with the United States, or our allies?
[Pompeo:] Sir, this administration has taken a series of actions to push back against Vladimir Putin...
[Menendez:] That's not my question. Let's start with my question.
[Pompeo:] But, Senator, this this...
[Menendez:] My question is, what what behavior has the Kremlin shown, that it indicates it wants to get along with the United States? Is there any? If so, please share it with me.
[Pompeo:] Senator, I I take a back seat to no one with my views of the threat that are is presented to America from Russia. And if I am confirmed as the secretary of state, I can assure this administration will continue, as it has for the past 15 months, to take real actions to push back, to reset the deterrence relationship with respect to Russia.
[Menendez:] Well, let's talk about that. Because I I see that's in your written statement, and you suggest that there is a robust response to Russia. On February 27th, Admiral Mike Rogers, the head of the National Security Administration and U.S. Cyber Command, warned the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Trump administration has not done enough to stop the Russians. Quote, "I believe that President Putin has clearly come to the conclusion that there's little price to pay here and that, therefore, he can continue his activity." On April 3rd, the outgoing national security adviser, General H.R. McMaster, said, and I quote, "We have failed to impose sufficient costs on Russia and that the Kremlin's confidence is growing." And then, for your reference, here are a series of mandatory provisions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, part of which I helped write, which have not been implemented by the administration. Section 225, Mandatory sanctions related to special Russian crude oil products; Section 226, Mandatory sanctions with respect to Russia and other foreign financial institutions; Section 228, Mandatory sanctions with respect to certain transactions with foreign sanctions evaders and serious human rights abuses in the Russian Federation; Section 231, Mandatory sanctions with respect to persons engaging in transactions with the intelligence and defense sectors of the government of the Russian Federation so there are more. That's not a robust response to Russia.
[Corker:] Thank you. Before I turn to Senator Risch, I want to welcome Senator King to the I would like for the people of Maine to know he does is often. When things are serious, he comes and actually listens to the testimony. We thank you for doing so. Senator Risch?
[Risch:] Thank you very much. Mike, thank you for your service at Intel at the CIA. That that has been great. For those of you on the committee, Senator Rubio and I are the only two that have the cross-pollenization, I guess. We have the the great privilege of serving on the Intel Committee. And we hear from the heads of all of the 17 agencies that we have that engage in intelligence matters. And over the years, over the 10 years I've been on it, we've had numerous heads of agencies come in. And sometimes, frankly, we we feel we're getting stiff-armed. I can tell all of you on this committee that Mike Pompeo has been candid when he came in before the Intel Committee. He has been helpful, and he has always been straightforward with us. So thank you for your service, there. You've earned my respect in that regard and you'll certainly get my vote for confirmation on this job. I think that that service, as head of the CIA, is going to serve you very well. As you as you know, it's served me very well on on this committee, having the some of that in-depth knowledge that you don't necessarily get in the in the public media. Head of the being Secretary of State is is unique, I think, as far as the agency heads are concerned. You, first of all, have the public duties. And as been referenced here, it's a very high-profile job in that you go around the world, being the face face of America and doing the kinds of things that you do. And I and your predecessor was very good at that. I thought he he carried flag as well as anyone could carry it. The job that this job, however, as Secretary of State, has a couple other facets to it that you have to do the same time and it's hard to keep all the balls in the air. One of them, of course, is being part of the management team with the president, as far as managing, really, the United States. And and thirdly, and I think very importantly, is the actual management of the bureaucracy. And I and I don't use "bureaucracy" here in a pejorative way. What with the the thousands of men and women who are in foreign service, who are who are working with the State Department, make us proud every day. They are bipartisan. They do a great job. I think that there has been a fair amount of criticism. Everyone knows that that your predecessor did have was hampered a bit because he didn't have some of those jobs filled that are so important there. And we all know that in order to manage an agency like that, you got to have really good solid people around you to be able to make the bureaucracy work in the things that aren't the high-profile meetings and what have you around the world. Could you tell could you give us your thoughts? Give us all of us your thoughts on on how you're going to go about that. Because it it needs some work. There's no question about it. It's going to make your job better. It's going to make the State Department work better. So could you give us your thoughts on that?
[Pompeo:] Senator, first, thank you for your kind words. I I did, as the CIA director, I have consistently tried to work closely with you and provide you with everything that you've asked for in a timely fashion. I think we've succeeded often, if not always, and we've worked diligently at it. I I promise to do that with this committee as well. With respect to building a team out of the State Department, this is something I've done multiple times in my life. I did it as a tank platoon leader, I did it as a cavalry troop. I did it for two small businesses in Kansas. And then I worked hard at it at the CIA. I'll leave to others to judge the success. But I did it because I knew it was imperative. At State Department, there are too many holes, too many vacancies, too many unfilled positions. When that happens, everyone's stretched thin in the subject matter expertise that is needed to deliver America's diplomacy around the world, to conduct its mission, its humanitarian missions, its development missions. Each of the missions to which are entrusted to the State Department require talented people on station doing their part, working alongside it. The way I'll think about it is the same way I did at the CIA. I'll start with those things that I think are the biggest gaps, and present the biggest risk to America's capacity to execute its diplomacy. We don't yet have an ambassador to South Korea. We need one. There are a handful of other places that have a requirement for immediate attention. With respect each of those positions, I I am a talent hawk. I will find what I believe to be the best fit to execute America's diplomatic mission around the world. And I will encourage, demand, cajole them to come join the team and be part of our organization in a way that can successfully deliver. Some of them will be fantastic civil servants and foreign service officers, others from the outside, but in each case trying to identify the right person to occupy the position at this challenging time in America's history.
[Risch:] Well, thank you very much. You've made reference to the fact that there are ambassadorships that are empty, I think there's 37 of them, and the good the good news is, that, you have a really deep bench at the state department and a good example is in South Korea. I had the good fortune of being there, as you know, recently, doing some things and the [inaudible] that it's that that's in charge there has done a fabulous job, as you know. And we do have that deep bench at the state department, but again, we do need the ambassadorships filled and we do need those, particularly, I think the top positions in the department field. And people with the authority to act and people with the authority to act and people with the authority to do the things that need to be done. So, thank you for that. I have every confidence you'll be able to do that. Your candor with the intelligence committee, I I I can tell you that if you can come in front of that committee and disgorge in a candid fashion, I have every confidence you're going to be able to do that here, so, thank you again for your service. Thank you, Mr. Pompeo
[Pompeo:] Thank you, Senator Cardin.
[Cardin:] Mr. Pompeo, first of all, thank you for your career of public service; I want to thank your family because this, clearly, is going to be a family sacrifice. Already has been, but even be more deeply felt by your family, so I very much...
[Pompeo:] Thank you
[Cardin:] ... Appreciate all that. I want to follow up on the chairman's opening comments about the need for the secretary of state to be a strong independent voice in the White House, particularly, in this White House, and with the president's announced policy of America First, which has been interpreted globally as America alone, which is your mission, if you're confirmed, to use diplomacy to engage the international community. So I want to ask you a couple questions and I would ask that you give your views, not the president's, I want to know your views. Secondly, I would hope that you would briefly answer the questions because I have a lot of questions I want answered, so, please please respect the time restrictions that we're operating under. And let me start first, if I might, with the Iran nuclear agreement that's been referred to. There's no question that Iran's the bad actor here and they continue to be a bad actor. In this congress, with your help that we passed very strong legislation to provide additional sanctions against Iran for its non-nuclear violations, including its ballistic missiles and we want strict enforcement of the nuclear agreement. But it is clear, from what the president has announced that he wants to see changes in the nuclear agreement. It's also been very clear that Europe has said, pretty directly, we cannot unilaterally, the west, modify the agreement, and that Iran's in compliance with the agreement. General Dunford has said, unless there is a material breach, we have an impact in others willingness to sign the agreement if sign other agreements if we pull out of this agreement, with reference to North Korea, the challenges of entering into diplomacy. So, my direct question, if the president determines that you cannot modify this agreement and Iran is in compliance, what is your view as to whether America should withdraw unilaterally from the Iran nuclear agreement?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I know, clearly, what my mission's going to be. And the president's made very clear what the secretary of state's mission has been and I expect no change to that.
[Cardin:] I didn't ask I asked what your views...
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator, I...
[Cardin:] ... I understand that. And we've had nominees come before this committee and express their views and are doing very well in this administration and who've disagreed with the president and the president gets the last word. I understand that.
[Pompeo:] Yes. I've done it many times and...
[Cardin:] I want to know your views.
[Pompeo:] I've done it many times, Senator. I can't answer that question. Here's why, but I'm going to tell how I approach. Let me tell you how I think about it. Here's the I'm going to if you will, if you'll let me tell you how I think about it then you can I want to fix this deal. That's the objective. I think that's in the best interest of the United States of America...
[Cardin:] But if the agreement cannot be changed, my question is pretty simple, we're running very close to a deadline on certification. What is your view, is it better to pull out of an agreement the Iran is in compliance with if we can't fix it, or is it better to stay in the agreement? As the...
[Pompeo:] Senator...
[Cardin:] Yes or no?
[Pompeo:] ... it's not a yes or no question, because it's a hypothetical. We're not at that point. But let me tell you, I'll think about it.
[Cardin:] The president has to certify on May the 12th.
[Pompeo:] Yes, sir. That's that's yet almost a month away. It depends clearly if we're close, imagine for the just as a hypothetical matter, imagine we're close to achieving the fix that the president has asked the State Department to achieve. If we're close, if there is some opportunity...
[Cardin:] You pull out [inaudible]?
[Pompeo:] In the event in the event that it we conclude that we can't fix this deal, that these serious shortcomings that you, Senator Cardin yourself, have identified, then the president is going to be given best advice, including by me. And if there's no chance that we can fix it, I will recommend to the president that we do our level best to work with our allies to achieve a better outcome and a better deal.
[Cardin:] By...
[Pompeo:] Even after May 12th, Senator. Even after May 12th there is still much diplomatic work to be done.
[Cardin:] I think you've answered a question. Let me...
[Pompeo:] And, sir, just to be clear...
[Cardin:] You've been...
[Pompeo:] ... more than just Europe...
[Cardin:] You've been pretty clear about the outcome you would like to see in North Korea, which I believe if I'm misstating, please let me know, which is regime change. Is that...
[Pompeo:] Senator, you have misstated that.
[Cardin:] OK. Are you in favor regime change in North Korea?
[Pompeo:] Senator, my mission is and I've articulated my own personal views on this. We have a responsibility to achieve a condition where Kim Jong-un is unable to threaten the United States of America with a nuclear weapon.
[Cardin:] I understand that. Do you so are you saying now you don't favor regime change?
[Pompeo:] Senator, I have never advocated for regime change. I have all along...
[Cardin:] It's a simple question. You're not you don't believe...
[Pompeo:] I'm happy to answer today that I'm not advocating for regime change, yes, Senator.
[Cardin:] Thank you. Appreciate that. I want to get that clear. Let me go on to...
[Pompeo:] And, Senator, just to be clear, my role as a diplomat is to make sure that we never get to a place where have to confront the difficult situation in Korea that this country has been headed for now for a couple of decades.
[Cardin:] So let me get to the international climate talks and agreements that were entered into in Paris. The fact that every nation in the world has now joined in that, this is, as I explained to you as we talked in our office, you understand these are self-imposed goals and enforced only by ourselves. The president has indicated his intentions to withdraw from the international agreement. It takes a period of time before it becomes effective. But he has already initiated the process. If it, in fact, we would be the only country that is not part of the agreement. Do you support the United States withdrawing from the climate agreements?
[Pompeo:] I share the president's position precisely, which is that the Paris agreements put an undue burden on the United States of America and that we should work to find a place where that is not the case. And when that moment arrives we will be part of that discussion and reenter that agreement.
[Cardin:] So you stand by your...
[Pompeo:] That is both my view and I believe I'm speaking for the administration...
[Cardin:] So you believe self-imposed requirements working at the international community. I think I'm quoting you accurately, as "dangerously wrong," "bows down to radical environmentalists," and "the science is inconclusive." You stand by those statements today?
[Pompeo:] Senator, we need to work to arrange a situation that treats American citizens in the same way that others around the world so there is a shared burden to attack this challenge.
[Cardin:] Do you see the challenge that that's going to make your job, if confirmed, more challenging? Where you where your job is to work with the international community, our friends and foes alike, to try to get diplomacy to work? And yet the United States would be the only country saying, we don't want to talk to you about climate under the arrangements that every other country is dealing with? You don't see a conflict with that position and trying to be the top diplomat of America, the leader of the world?
[Pompeo:] Senator, there are many times that we work with our allies. And there are many other times when we just don't see it the same way. I gave you any indications many examples of where this administration has worked with those same allies. Just recently the work that we did against Russia in response to the attack that took place in Britain, we worked with our European allies. We did so very closely. This would be after the president's announcement that he intended to withdraw from Paris. So it can still work. I'll give you another example. The coalition that this administration has built to put pressure on Kim Jong-un is unique and historic and important. So there will be places that our allies come alongside us and others that they don't. And my task as the chief diplomat will be to get America's position well-known and to rally the world to the causes that benefit America. I look forward to doing that if I'm confirmed, as well, Senator.
[Cardin:] Thank you.
[Corker:] Before I turn to Senator Rubio, I'm going to use 30 seconds of my time. Just on the Iran issue, it's my sense in personal conversation with the president that if we if the international if the Europeans do not come along with a framework agreement by May 12th, it's likely that he will withdraw.
[Pompeo:] The president has made that very clear.
[Corker:] And so I don't think Senator Cardin fully I don't think he heard the same thing I heard. And your sense is that should that happen, then you would continue after that time to try to create a better agreement, if that's what your answer was.
[Pompeo:] Yes. Senator, the president has stated his objective. I've heard him say it to my predecessor or, excuse me, to Secretary Tillerson. I've heard him say it. His goal is to take the three shortcomings they've identified and fix them.
[Cardin:] Mr. Chairman, I need to correct the record. I understand the president's position. I was asking the nominee's position. I wasn't asking the president's position. I wanted to know your view on it, not the president's. I understand the president's view.
[Corker:] But I think again, I know this is going to be highly discussed publicly. I think what Director Pompeo is saying is that's also his opinion, and that should the agreement then be negated, he would work for a better agreement after that, should the framework agreement not come in place by May 12th. Is that correct?
[Pompeo:] Senator, that is correct.
[Corker:] Senator Rubio.
[Rubio:] Thank you. First just an editorial statement at the front end. One of the reasons why I've been apart from how well I know the nominee and the work he has done in intelligence is I think one of the critical components to be a successful secretary of state is that when secretary of state comes to town, leaders and diplomats need to know that this someone who is in the inner circle of the president, that has the president's trust and speaks for the administration. And I can just tell you from experience from the work that we've done with Director Pompeo that when if confirmed, when he comes to town, leaders around the world will know that someone who has not just access to the president but is part of the president's trusted inner circle and speaks for the president and for his policies is just critical for the success of a secretary of state. And I would imagine if you have spoken as you have all the living secretary of states, they would have told you that that component of that relationship is so important. And I would just say anything that would undermine that, obviously, is something that would undermine the ability to do the job in that way. I have a series of quick questions. And they are important because it gives people some context about your views on foreign policy and America's role in the world, which, by the way, predate your time at the Central Intelligence Agency. It includes your time in the House of Representatives and perhaps even before that. You still agree, do you not, on the matter of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, that the United States has an obligation to help Ukraine defend its sovereignty.
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator.
[Rubio:] And you still agree that far from being a great public service, WikiLeaks is more like a nonstate actor hostile to the interest the national interest and security of the United States.
[Pompeo:] Senator Rubio, I do believe that.
[Rubio:] And, I think you still agree that Vladimir Putin's government actively interfered in our presidential elections and elections at large in 2016 and they did so because it is part of a long-standing theory or belief that through disinformation and propaganda they can win what, quote unquote, "bloodless wars" against democracies in the West, including the United States.
[Pompeo:] Yes, Senator, that's correct.
[Rubio:] Of the five main threats facing the United States, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and radical jihadists, they all have one common thread, authoritarianism. Would you agree that today, the major fault line in global affairs repeatedly is the competition really a global competition between autocratic systems of governance and the democratic system that that in many ways is played out over and over again in foreign affairs of this country and in global issues?
[Pompeo:] Senator, that is with striking consistency the case that the countries that share our vision of the world and share our democratic values are not authoritarian and those that don't are not.
[Rubio:] And so in that vein, you would again agree that promoting democracy isn't just a nice thing to do or a good thing to do or promoting democracy is not us butting into other people's business or invading their sovereignty. So it's more than just a moral imperative, promoting democracy is, in the context of that competition as we've just discussed, promoting democracy is in the vital national interests of the United States.
[Pompeo:] Yes, indeed, Senator, and our effectiveness at doing that is an important tool of American foreign policy.
[Rubio:] And there is this ridiculous argument out there when people talk about Russian interference and their efforts and so forth that that's no different than what America does when it promotes democracy. There are huge differences are there not? For example when they interfere in an election, they're trying to influence the outcome. When we promote democracy we're trying to improve the process not necessarily who they elect. Sometimes democracies elect leaders that are not as friendly towards the United States. When they interfered in elections they use they use government and their intelligence agencies and the like. When we promote democracy it's largely through the work of nongovernmental organizations who may receive assistance from our government. When they undermine democracy, they do it in secret. They hide it and they deny it. We do it openly. We brag about it. We're talking about it here today and when we promote democracy we do it at the invitation of someone in those countries, whether it's a political party, an organization. Oftentimes the government itself when they undermine democracy, they do so against the will of the people of that nation and other governments in place. There is no equivalence between the promotion of democracy and Russian and other attempts to interfere in democracy.
[Pompeo:] Senator, there is there is neither an operational equivalence as you've described it that is, the methodologies used are very different. Nor is there a moral equivalence between the two efforts. They are fundamentally different in every way and America's democracy promotion around the world is conducted in the way that America should be incredibly proud of.
[Rubio:] And one of the first things autocratic rulers do almost by definition, is they violate the human rights of their people. And of course have no problem violating the human rights of others and we've recently seen to war crimes and atrocities repeatedly committed by an autocratic government in Syria with the support of autocratic governments in Iran and Russia. Therefore, I believe you would agree that defending human rights isn't just a good thing to do it and again or just the right moral thing to do, which it most certainly is defending human rights is also in the national interest of the United States of America.
[Pompeo:] I do believe that, Senator.
[Rubio:] And it would be a priority...
[Pompeo:] It would.
[Rubio:] ... to the State Department.
[Pompeo:] And I not only do I believe it I think history would reflect that to be the case.
[Rubio:] Now, after the end of the Cold War, we had this belief that history had ended and everyone was going to be a democracy and everybody was going to embrace capitalism as we understand it was free economics and the like. That hasn't really worked out in the case of a lot of places, particularly China. They have most certainly not embrace democracy. They've actually gotten more autocratic and they have embraced the definition of the world economic order that basically means we will take all the benefits of global trade and global economics. But we do not intend to live by any of its obligations. And so I personally believe that it was a terrible mistake that leaders in both parties have made. And now as part of their strategy you see China doing things like trying to create strategic depth in Eurasia. Your efforts to establish all these different programs, the belt and road initiative, Silk Road Maritime, Silk Road, they're just efforts they're not just efforts to create new overland trade corridors, they're efforts to basically make these nations economically, politically and eventually militarily dependent on and vulnerable to China. And their maritime borders in the South and East China Sea you see that they feel vulnerable and insecure. They see American allies in Japan, South Korea, Australia, Taiwan, and so what they're working on now is fracturing our economic and defense alliances in the Indo- Pacific region. That's why they're investing billions of dollars in building up their Navy and their Air Force to be able to establish air and sea denial to the U.S. military and ultimately make the argument that don't count on America's defense andor economic partnership because it's just paper, they can't live up to it anymore. What is what are your recommendations for the president as far as how important that challenge is otherwise we're going to wake up one day and find that we've been driven from the Asia-Pacific region?
[Pompeo:] Senator, the as the CIA director I've often been asked what's the greatest threat to the United States. It is always hard to prioritize and rank. We have a handful. We've got lots of opportunities as well. China certainly presents a strategic challenge to the United States of America. You laid out the various tools and mechanisms that they are using, mostly economic. The United States need to be prepared to respond across each of those fronts so that we can find the right ground, the right place where we can cooperate with the Chinese, where it make sense for America and in those places where it does not, we can confront them and make sure that it is America's vision, a democratic vision that continues to provide strength and resources for the world.
[Corker:  Shaheen:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Pompeo, thank you for being willing to consider taking on this responsibility at such a challenging time for the United States and the world. This morning, President Trump tweeted that much of the bad blood with Russia is caused by the fake and corrupt Russian investigation. Do you agree with that?