Read the conversation. chairman reed. i’d like to call this meeting to order. mr. hollembeak, your willingness to meet with us today speaks to your openness and integrity in this investigation. i am looking forward to an honest and candid discussion. members of the committee, remember that we will reconvene in a closed session at 2 p. m. today to take a vote. hold your comments and questions until each statement has been read. mrs. louis, begin. mrs. louis. you, mr. chairman. i begin by referring to my colleague’s november 22nd testimony that the files being discussed were not properly encrypted and that their security may have been compromised. were you aware of this at the time? mr. hollembeak. i was not aware. based on the findings of an internal review board that i established after my appointment in 2016, i concluded that my department’s security protocol was up to date. mrs. louis. i understand that you released a report of your findings on february 15th of last year. am i correct? mr. hollembeak. you are correct. chairman reed. do you have a copy of this report with you, mr. hollembeak? mr. hollembeak. i do. i have it here. chairman reed. submitted for the record, mr. hollembeak’s security report, dated february 15, 2016. what kind of moderator is chairman reed? effective. chairman reed is reminding participants of the rules for discussion, acknowledging mr. hollembeak’s point of view, and asking him to support his point of view with facts. effective. chairman reed is keeping the discussion on topic by preventing other board members from participating and by challenging mr. hollembeak’s claim by demanding proof. ineffective. chairman reed is not following the rules for discussion that he lays out in his opening statement, and he is not properly staying on topic. ineffective. chairman reed is not allowing the other board members to share their points of view, and he is not following the discussion rules.